EPA-460/3-77-002
April 1977
CATALYTIC
CONTROL OF
NOX DEMONSTRATION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
-------
EPA-460/3-77-002
CATALYTIC CONTROL
OF NOX DEMONSTRATION
by
R. Richard Steiner
Gould, Inc.
New Business Division
540 East 105th Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44108
Contract No. 66-03-2161
EPA Project Officer: David L. Tripp
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
April 1977
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency
to report technical data of interest to a limited number of
readers. Copies are available free of charge to Federal
employees, current contractors and grantees, and nonprofit
organizations - in limited quantities - from the Library
Services Office (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; 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 Gould, Inc., New Business Division, 540 East
105th Street, Cleveland, Ohio, in fulfillment of Contract No.
66-03-2161. The contents of this report are reproduced
herein as received from Gould, Inc. 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-460/3-77-002
-------
ILLUSTRATIONS
FIGURES
TABLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOR
THE FINAL REPORT
OF
U. S. EPA CONTRACT 68-03-2161
SUMMARY
HISTORY
DISCUSSION
PHASE I
PHASE II
PHASE III
PHASE IV
PAGE NO.
1
3
7
12
17
38
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Gould Urban Driving Schedule
APPENDIX 2
Emissions & Fuel Consumption Tests - ETV 24
APPENDIX 3
Emissions & Fuel Consumption Tests
APPENDIX 4
Emissions & Fuel Consumption Tests
APPENDIX 5
Contract Scope of Work
ETV 25
ETV 26
-------
FIGURE NO. TITLE
I- 1 Gould Urban Driving Schedule
I- 2 Centrifugal Advance Curves
I- 3 Vacuum Advance Curves
II- 1 Port Air Injector Manifolds
. II- 2 Transmission Crossmember Comparison
II- 3 Transmission Control Rod Modification
II- 4 Exhaust Catalyst Assembly
II- 5 Inlet Cap Subassembly
II- 6 Oxygen Getter Subassembly
II- 7 Outer Shell
II- 8 Outer Cap Subassembly
II- 9 Oxidation Catalyst Air Distribution Tube
11-10 Catalyst Package - Assembled - Bled
11-11 Catalyst Package - Exploded
11-12 Four Inch Catalyst System - Installed
11-13. Four Inch Catalyst System - Close-up Installed
11-14 Backpressure Simulating Canisters - Installed
11-15 Backpressure Simulating Canisters
11-16 Air Line Schematic
11-17 Electric Circuit Schematic
11-18 Underhood Modifications
11-19 Underhood Modifications
III- 1 Carburetor Cross-sectional Views
III- 2 Carburetor Aneroid Comparison
III- 3 Air Fuel Ratio Comparison
III- 4 Backpressure EGR Valve Cross Section
III- 5 Backpressure EGR Valve - Assembled
III- 6 Backpressure EGR Valve - Exploded
III- 7 EGR and Spark Timing Effects on Engine Emissions
III- 8 Characteristic Behavior of GEM 68
III- 9 Effect of Inlet NOx on NOx Reduction and NH3
Formation
111-10 Effect of Space Velocity Changes on NOx Reduction
and NH3 Formation
III-ll Large Capacity Air Pumps
111-12 Cold start temperatures for 5"
catalyst system
111-13 Cold start temperatures for 4"
catalyst system
111-14 Fuel Consumption Trends - ETV 24
111-15 Gaseous Emissions Trends - ETV 24
111-16 Dual-Diaphragm EGR Valve - Cross Section
111-17 System Description - ETV 25
111-18 Relationship of NOx and CO on Net NOx Efficiency
111-19 Comparison of Heat-up Rates - Conventional versus
High Temperature
-------
TABLE NO. TITLE
I- 1 Vehicle Identification
I- 2 Vehicle Break-In Fuel Consumption
I- 3 Vehicle Baseline & Certification Data
I- 4 1975 FTP Baseline Tests
III- 1 Typical Modified Carburetor Specifications
III- 2 Effect of Outer EGR Control Spring on Emissions &
Fuel Consumption
III- 3 Effect of Ignition Systems on Emissions & Fuel
Consumption
III- 4 Effect of Spark Advance & EGR on Hot Transient
Emissions & Fuel Consumption
III- 5 Effect of Spark Advance & EGR on Cold Stabilized
Emissions & Fuel Consumption
III- 6 1975 FTP Results for 5" Catalyst System
III- 7 Effect of 26 CID Air Pump on Vehicle Emissions &
Fuel Consumption
III- 8 1975 FTP Results for 4" Catalyst System
III- 9 1975 FTP Results for ETV 24 Rebaseline
111-10 Comparison of Original & Repeat Baseline Tests
III-ll Effect of NOx Catalysts on Exhaust System
Backpressure
111-12 Effect of EGR Systems on FTP Emissions & Fuel
Consumption - ETV 24
111-13 Zero Mile Emissions & Fuel Consumption Results -
ETV 24
111-14 1975 FTP Calibration Tests - ETV 25
111-15 Comparison of Baseline & Dual-Bed FTP/Highway
Results - ETV 24 (BPEGR)
111-16 Congested Freeway Driving Schedule Sulfate
Test Results
III-17 Comparison of Baseline & Dual-Bed FTP/Highway
Results - ETV 24 (DDEGR)
111-18 Comparison of Baseline & Dual-Bed FTP/Highway
Results - ETV 25
111-19 1975 FTP Calibration Tests - ETV 26
111-20 Comparison of Feedgas & Tailpipe Emissions -
ETV 24
111-21 Comparison of Feedgas & Tailpipe Emissions -
ETV 25
111-22 Comparison of Feedgas & Tailpipe Emissions -
ETV 26
111-23 Effect of Various Heat Conservation Techniques
on Average FTP Inlet Temperatures
I11-24 Effect of Various Heat Conservation Techniques
on Catalyst Conversion Efficiency
III-25 1975 FTP Calibration Tests - ETV 24 with Port
Liners
II1-26 Effect of Various Heat Conservation Techniques
on FTP Conversion Efficiency
-------
SUMMARY
The contract had as its primary purpose the demonstration and evaluation
of a catalytic device to control NOx emissions. Additionally, it was expected
to generate data that would permit identification of areas needing further
development.
Vehicles were chosen that were considered typical of those that would be
prevalent in the short term future and were consistent with the requirements
specified in the contract scope of work. These vehicles, 1975 Chevrolet
were acquired and were fitted with a dual-bed catalyst system. This system
featured a catalyst known as GEM 68 that incorporated a unique means of oxygen
control known as an "oxygen getter". The majority of emphasis to the ensuing
program was directed at calibrating the system for minimum fuel consumption and
gaseous emission rates.
Aside from the normal changes of carburetion, advanced components were
examined in an effort to further benefit the catalyst system. These components
included backpressure exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valves, high capacity air
pumps, and exhaust port liners.
The primary effort of this contract was intended to be the durability
testing of the GEM 68 reduction catalyst, however, this durability demonstration
was not conducted due to the incompatibility of the GEM 68 catalyst with fuel
containing the national average level of sulfur (300 PPM). A new version of the
catalyst designed to be sulfur resistant has not been fully developed to date.
Due to the uncertainty of success of this development effort and the shortage of
manpower caused by the demands of the sulfur tolerant catalyst development effort
it was jointly decided to terminate the contract.
-------
- 2 -
In the event that low sulfur (less than 50 PPM) fuel had been nationally
available, the durability emission control system would probably have included
a modified Quadrajet dual-diaphragm EGR, timed air injection utilizing a
standard 19 CID air pump, the Gould GEM 68 reduction catalyst and Englehard
PTX-II-C oxidation catalysts. The backpressure EGR valves were precluded from
use on the vehicles due to their sensitivity to exhaust system backpressure.
The backpressure changes experienced were a result of catalyst degradation
caused by high fuel sulfur exposure and would not be typical of currently pro-
duced vehicles. The high capacity air pumps were not included in the final
system configuration as no benefit in emission control was experienced with
the dual-bed system. Careful evaluation of the port liners showed that, when
used in conjunction with exterior manifold insulation, advantages in catalytic
efficiencies may be expected if marginal operating temperatures were prevalent
before their application.
Final calibration resulted in initial system performance that was lower
than statutory HC and CO limits of 0.25 and 2.11 g/km CO.41 g/mile and 3.4 g/
mile) but exceeded the 0,25 g/km (.0,4 g/mile) NOx emission rate. This was a
result, in part, of the fuel sulfur exposure and low exhaust gas temperatures
exhibited by the vehicle. To comply with the statutory NOx emission rate
would result in an increase in fuel consumption using conventional technology.
Through the application of concepts such as port liners, preliminary investiga-
tions indicate that lower fuel consumption could potentially be achieved at
equivalent emission rates.
-------
- 3 -
HISTORY OF CONTRACT
At the time of the RFP for this contract in August, 1974, Gould prepared
a detailed proposal to demonstrate and evaluate an emission control system
employing a unique catalyst for NOx control. Due to the complex interaction
between emission control, fuel economy, and vehicle performance, it was recog-
nized that considerable expertise was required to successfully implement a
catalytic device on vehicles. Gould, through its ongoing programs in catalyst
research, dynamometer characterization studies, and vehicle test fleet, appeared
well qualified for the task.
In April, 1975, Gould was awarded the contract. As detailed in the pro-
posal, vehicles conforming to the specifications listed in the RFP were selected
and authorization to purchase them was received from the Project Officer. Prior
to vehicle delivery, an engineering plan was detailed to evaluate the variables
of carburetion, exhaust gas temperature, ignition spark timing, etc. to enable
the development of a complete system.
Shortly thereafter, filter analysis data were received from the EPA. This
data concerned the results of sulfate and particulate emission tests that were
performed on one of Gould's dual-bed vehicles in late 1974 at the EPA Motor
Vehicle Emission Laboratory.
At the time of the tests, a fuel containing a known quantity of sulfur,
0.03 wt %, was used to establish a sulfur to sulfate conversion level. To
accomplish this, particulate filters were positioned in the diluted exhaust gas
stream of the constant volume sample sulfate tunnel and an isokinetic sampling
of the exhaust gas was obtained.
-------
- 4 -
The sulfate analysis, performed in Ann Arbor, showed relatively low sul-
fate conversion levels; that is, on the order of 10% conversion. Further
analysis of the filters for remaining particulate analysis was scheduled to
take place at the EPA Research Triangle Park Facility in Durham, North Carolina.
These analyses, as complex as they are, required until February, 1975, to
complete. As data became known, metal emission rates were found to be consid-
erably higher than could be explained on the basis of Gould's in-house tests.
In subsequent attempts to determine the cause of the high emission rate,
controlled laboratory tests and metallurgical analyses indicated that the fuel
sulfur, oxidized in the combustion process to SO2, was attacking the grain
boundaries of the nickel based GEM 68 alloy. Ensuing deterioration in the grain
boundaries allowed the relatively large grains to become dislodged and removed
by the engine exhaust gas flow.
This phenomenon had not been recognized in previous testing at Gould due
to the fact that the gasoline supply used for vehicle testing was exclusively
supplied by the American Oil Company. The gasoline used, AMOCO "Super Premium",
was at that time the only commercial fuel in Cleveland available in an unleaded
version conforming to the 1975 lead and phosphorous requirements for certifica-
tion durability test fuel. By virtue of low sulfur feedstocks and the sophisti-
cated refining technique used to achieve its high octane, the sulfur level in the
"Super Premium" was typically less than 0.005 wt % (50 PPM).. Through dilution of
the internal combustion engine processes, SO2 concentration in the exhaust gas
was M PPM at a 14/1 air/fuel ratio. Comparatively, SO2 concentrations in the
exhaust gas of a vehicle using 0.03 wt % sulfur fuel is ^21 PPM at a 14/1 air/
fuel ratio.
-------
- 5 -
Internal test programs were established to fully characterize the effect
of SO2 concentration on GEM 68 durability and efficiency. In addition, a
massive internal effort aimed at corroborating the failure mechanism was
initiated with the intent to develop a sulfur resistant catalyst. This program
had as its targets a total metallic particulate rate of no more than 0.3 rag/km
(0.5 mg/mile) with a 1975 FTP conversion efficiency of at least 50%.* After
these programs were established, work was begun on baseline testing and initial
modification of the three contract vehicles which were delivered in June, 1975.
Since all calibration and emission testing was to be performed on fuel conform-
ing to the Federal Register specifications, the fuel sulfur effect was minimized
in that Indolene CLEAR has a fuel sulfur level of less than 100 PPM. This
results in less than 7 PPM SO2 in the exhaust gas at a 14/1 air/fuel ratio.
As the construction and calibration phases were continuing, discussions
with the EPA Project Officer established that a 0.03 wt % sulfur level was a
reasonable expectation of what the average fuel sulfur level is, and would con-
tinue to be in future unleaded gasoline pools.
Discussions with the Project Officer then centered on what fuel would be
used for the durability portion of the demonstration. Since, at that time, the
effect of fuel sulfur with regard to extended mileage was unknown, it was felt
that all vehicles should not use 0.03 wt % sulfur fuel. It was also considered
important that two vehicles accumulate mileage in near identical fashion to
provide for a back-up in the event of a vehicle mishap or system malfunction.
With this in mind, Gould agreed to durability test one vehicle with 0.03 wt %
sulfur fuel.
*These programs were financed entirely through Gould's own resources.
-------
- 6 -
Work was continued on the calibration and optimization phases of the
contract with GEM 68 knowing that any new sulfur resistant catalyst developed
from the internal effort would closely resemble the operating characteristics
of GEM 68. As work progressed on the sulfur resistant catalyst, a full
characterization of the effect of sulfur on GEM 68 was completed. The data
indicated that GEM 68 was not compatible with 0.03 wt % fuel sulfur levels
and the decision to test GEM 68 with this fuel was changed.
In a meeting with the EPft Project Officer in March, 1976, it was formally
agreed to suspend all contractual efforts on GEM 68. This decision was based
upon the promising initial performance of GEM 69 with respect to fuel sulfur
resistance. The suspension was enacted with the intent to redirect the contract
to the demonstration of GEM 69 after full internal development and evaluation.
This suspension also provided additional manpower for the sulfur resistant
development effort.
Vehicle evaluation continued on new versions of the catalyst until
September, 1976, when it became apparent that a fully developed sulfur resistant
catalyst would not be imminent. Furthermore, the need for an extended laboratory
research effort was recognized.
Since, at that time, Gould had no forthcoming candidate catalyst for the
durability phase of the contract and could not accurately forecast the avail-
ability of a sulfur resistant catalyst, it was recommended by Gould that the
contract be terminated.
Based on these factors, contract termination was sought and work began on
completion of the final report that was to include all data generated during the
period of performance.
-------
- 7 -
PHASE I - VEHICLE SELECTION, PROCUREMENT, AND INITIAL TESTING
Three nominally identical vehicles were selected for the purposes of mod-
ification and testing a dual-bed catalyst system. To comply with the scope of
work, the vehicle type was to be a five to six passenger domestic sedan in the
3,000 to 4,000 inertia weight range. In addition, it was felt that a V-8
engine was more desirable than a straight four or six cylinder engine in that
two catalysts could be tested on a vehicle. This effectively doubles the
durability data base and provides for additional chances of continued testing
in the event of an engine or system malfunction.
Further consideration was given to other factors such as:
1) fuel economy comparisons published by EPA
2) available space for catalyst placement
3) vehicle cost
4) quality of carburetor control
5) vehicle availability
After examining compact and intermediate sized vehicles, it was felt
that 1975 Chevrolet Novas equipped with 350 CID engines, California emission
controls, and automatic transmissions would fulfill the specifications.
Initially, the vehicles were ordered from the factory to assure their
similarity and ready availability. However, delays in the factory order
procedure and uncertainties regarding assembly date and delivery prompted
efforts to locate three similarly equipped Chevrolet Novas already on dealer
lots- Three vehicles were located at various dealerships in California and
transported to Cleveland via car carrier.
-------
- 8 -
The vehicles, differing slightly in cosmetic packages, each had an LM-1
350 CID V-8 engine and automatic transmission. The California emission control
system included a single-diaphragm EGR valve, an air pump with associated
check valves and plumbing, and a 260 cubic inch pelleted underfloor oxidation
catalyst. Additional changes to the vehicles since 1974 included recalibrated
carburetors, more advanced spark timing curves, and High Energy Ignition (HEI)
systems. Vehicle identification and in-house designations were established as
shown in TABLE 1-1.
The vehicles were inspected and all adjustments were set to factory
specifications. Primarily, this consisted of adjustments to the carburetor
idle mixture, idle speed, and initial spark timing. As suggested in the basic
proposal, the vehicles were then driven on a road course that closely
corresponded to the Federal Durability Driving Schedule without the idle stops
for ^2,600 miles to stabilize the engine and its emissions. Other than
stabilization, other benefits included a chance to find obvious problems with
the vehicles and more closely approximated the procedures called for in certi-
fication testing a 4,000 mile data car.
Reference to the schedule is found in Appendix IV, Durability Driving
Schedule, in the Federal Register, Thursday, June 28, 1973, Volume 38 -
Number 124, Part III, Page 24319. FIGURE 1-1 is a map of the actual road
course as established on public roads east of Cleveland. A detailed direc-
tional listing of the road course is provided as Appendix I.
The mileage accumulation proceeded without any complications and fuel
consumption during this time was found to be as shown in TABLE 1-2. Inspection
-------
- 9 -
of the vehicles showed no obvious problems and the vehicles were prepped for
baseline emissions and fuel consumption tests. Although vehicle 26 exhibited
a higher rate of fuel consumption, no single factor was identified as being
responsible. Centrifugal and vacuum advance curves of the three distributors
were checked and found to conform to specifications listed in the applicable
factory service manual. The centrifugal and vacuum advance curves can be
found in FIGURES 1-2 and 1-3, respectively. Testing of the EGR valves showed
their initial opening, full opening, and closing vacuum levels to be similar
and within the limits found in the service manual. The rear axle ratios of
the vehicles were all found to be 3.08/1 and transmission operation did not
indicate any problems, i.e., slippage. Thus, it was concluded that the vari-
ations in fuel consumption were caused by normal vehicle and driver variances.
Tests to establish baseline emissions and fuel consumption were then
performed. These tests consisted of three 1975 Federal Test Procedure -
Constant Volume Sample (CVS) tests and three Highway Fuel Economy tests All
tests were performed ;_n accordance with Federal Register rules and regulations
governing the test methods. In addition to the carbon balance method of
determining fuel consumption, a fuel flowmeter was utilized to determine actual
fuel usage by a volumetric method.
A summary of the test results on the three vehicles, along with the
published EPA certification data (4,000 mile data x deterioration factor) for
this engine/inertia weight/axle ratio combination, are shown in TABLE 1-3.
This table shows that the three test vehicles exhibited similar levels of fuel
consumption and gaseous emissions. A listing of each individual test is
provided in TABLE 1-4.
-------
- 10 -
Advanced Hardware
During this phase of the demonstration, attention was focused on
individual advanced components to determine if they could be successfully
incorporated into the dual-bed system. Such items as backpressure modulated
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valves, large capacity (22 CID) air pumps,
and advanced oxidation catalysts were examined.
In an effort to evaluate advanced oxidation catalysts with proven
50,000 mile durability and superior efficiency, major independent catalyst
suppliers were contacted and asked to recommend a catalyst that would be best
suited for this application.
Matthey Bishop suggested that their best catalyst for extended HC
control was a catalyst designated 20G. This catalyst incorporates a more
durable substrate, a better washcoat, and improved metallic particle disper-
sion. However, because 50,000 mile durability testing was just commencing
and no extended durability data was available, samples were sent for evalua-
tion. Due to the lengthy and costly nature of durability testing and the
fact that this catalyst had no proven 50,000 mile durability, it was decided
to forego this catalyst as a candidate for the dual-bed system and, therefore,
no evaluation was conducted.
Universal Oil Products recommended that two 1975 platinum/palladium
production catalysts be used per vehicle and this configuration had demonstrated
satisfactory hydrocarbon control over 50,000 miles. As related during phone
conversations, engine dynamometer data after 50,000 miles using one 1975 oval
oxidation catalyst per bank of a V-8 engine gave a range of 34 to 88% HC
-------
- 11 -
conversion (average 74%) and 35 to 82% CO conversion (average 64%) . These
data were the result of six tests and the reason for the large scatter in
efficiency was not made evident. Due to this scatter and the substantial
space requirements necessary to fit two of these large oval catalysts on the
vehicle, the catalyst was eliminated from consideration.
Englehard Industries recommended a catalyst designated PTX II-C as the
most likely to satisfy the requirements set forth. Details such as loading
factor, washcoat information, and durability data were not made available,
however, it was characterized as a platinum/palladium catalyst on an improved
Corning substrate. Ford catalyst fleet durability data (Fleet A and B) on
PTX II-C oxidation catalysts showed superior HC efficiency at 50,000 miles
when compared to the production PTX II-B. Therefore, with the Project Officer's
approval, it was decided to utilize the PTX II-C catalyst for the demonstration.
Other items that were procured for evaluation included adjustable
backpressure modulated EGR valves, large capacity 22 CID air pumps, and
exhaust port liners.
-------
- 12 -
PHASE II - VEHICLE MODIFICATION
Modification of the first vehicle, ETV 24, began with the removal of the
exhaust manifolds, exhaust system, oxidation catalyst, and air injection system.
The stock manifolds were replaced with 1973 production nodular iron manifolds,
part numbers 346222 and 364753, that had provisions in the castings for port air
injection. The fact that nodular iron has superior thermal shock and fatigue
characteristics was considered an additional benefit, although no problems had
been previously encountered when using cast iron manifolds. A photograph of a
manifold with installed air injectors can be seen in FIGURE II-l.
To aid in installation and prevent complex pipe fabrication, the trans-
mission crossmember was changed. A crossmember from a 1973 Chevrolet Impala
was installed in place of the standard unit, photographs of which are included
as FIGURE II-2. In addition, the transmission control rod was modified as
shown in FIGURE 11-3 to allow the catalyst assemblies to be closer to the
vehicle floor pan. This increased ground clearance to an acceptable level on
the driver side of the vehicle. Using the exhaust manifold flanges from the
standard head pipe, standardized NOx canisters, engineering drawings of
which are included as FIGURES II-4 through II-8, were attached in such a way
as to insure closeness to the exhaust manifold, avoid severe inlet angles to
the canister, and provide for adequate ground clearance.
The Englehard oxidation catalysts were then attached to the exit cones
of the NOx canisters. The oxidation catalysts were slightly modified in that
an air distribution tube, shown in FIGURE II-9, was installed in the inlet
bell. Aside from providing adequate air injection and mixing with the exhaust
-------
- 13 -
gas, this tube also provided for uniform flow distribution throughout the
oxidation catalyst. FIGURES 11-10 and 11-11 show a completed catalyst segment,
both in assembled and exploded fashion. Details such as thermocouple locations
and exhaust gas sampling taps are easily identifiable.
The remainder of the exhaust system consisted of a Y-pipe leading into
an OEM muffler. This rearmost portion of the exhaust system was not modified
except for the addition of flanges on the ends of the tailpipes to accommodate
the Constant Volume Sampler for emissions and fuel consumption testing.
In anticipation of testing different size NOx catalysts, the system was
fabricated to accommodate both four inch and five inch NOx canisters. Evalu-
ation of a larger catalyst was prompted by the realization that lower exhaust
gas termperatures and other contributory factors would decrease the expected
efficiency of a standard four inch catalyst; some of this decrease in
efficiency was expected to be recovered by taking advantage of catalyst sizing
characteristics. It was also recognized that a trade-off between catalyst
efficiency and optimum heat-up rate would become apparent and the fabrication
of the systems was planned to allow for ease of removal and installation during
comparative testing.
A photograph of a 4" diameter system installed on the vehicle is shown in
FIGURE 11-12. Marman type flanges and connectors were placed at locations to
provide convenient assembly and disassembly of the system. Exhaust gas sample
taps, thermocouple taps, and the air injection supply line can be seen in the
photograph. FIGURE 11-13 is a close-up view of the driver side installation.
-------
- 14 -
To accommodate feedgas level determination, a dummy system was fabricated
that could replace the reduction and oxidation catalysts. After fabrication,
the actual catalyst packages, as assembled in FIGURE 11-10, were flow tested at
100 SCFM on a flow bench to determine the pressure drop (Ap) . This AP was then
simulated in the dummy pipe with a perforated plate to provide for equivalent
backpressure in the exhaust system. This configuration, shown installed in
FIGURE 11-14, insured minimal carburetion calibration changes and near equivalent
backpressures on the engine while determining feedgas levels, A view of the
canisters off the vehicle can be seen in FIGURE 11-15.
Underhood modification began with the installation of air supply lines
from the air pump to the oxidation catalyst and to the port air distribution
tubes. Standard GM checkvalves were used in each line to protect the air pump.
The diverter valve assembly on the pump was removed and replaced with a "Tee"
fitting to allow routing of the one-half inch air lines to each side of the
engine.
As shown in FIGURE 11-16, in parallel with the air line to the oxidation
catalyst is a timer controlled solenoid which regulates the flow of air to the
exhaust ports. A temperature sensor was added to the control system to pre-
vent solenoid operation when engine coolant temperature is in excess of 160° F.
Although the timer is reset every time the vehicle started, continuity must
exist in the temperature sensor for the solenoids to activate. FIGURE 11-17 is
an electrical diagram of the circuits involved.
Provisions were also made on the vehicle for a time controlled ignition
retard. Primarily, this subsystem disallowed vacuum to the advance mechanism
-------
- 15 -
of the distributor, thereby effectively retarding the ignition timing.
Incorporated into the system at a later date was an override system which
consisted of a vacuum controlled switch. In the event that manifold vacuum
dropped below a predetermined level, this switch would allow vacuum to the
distributor advance mechanism. Experience gained during testing had shown
that this override enabled more consistent cold starts and lower engine
out emission during the critical periods of initial catalyst warm-up.
Replacement electric chokes, recently released by GM Delco Division,
were used on one of the vehicles. A discussion of the data takes place in
another section of the report. The standard oil pressure sending unit on
ETV 24 was replaced with a Cadillac unit, part number 646144, that also
prevented voltage to the choke when the engine was not running. This switch
provided a safeguard against premature choke operation in the event that the
ignition switch was left in the ON position when the engine was not running.
In addition to these changes, the Early Fuel Evaporation (EFE) system
on the vehicle was disabled during the course of the testing. This system
essentially restricted the flow of exhaust gas through the passenger side
exhaust pipe until engine temperature reaches 160° F forcing the exhaust gas
through the intake manifold crossover and providing for faster heating of the
carburetor and intake manifold. This reduces the time required to reach
operating temperature and thereby helps to stabilize emissions and improve cold
engine operation. However, the technique presently used to rapidly heat the NOx
catalyst system consists, in part, of utilizing the oxidizing characteristics
of the getter and NOx catalysts: By the oxidation of certain exhaust gas con-
stituents during choked operation, a significant amount of heat is evolved
-------
- 16 -
CV38° C/1% oxidized CO and 43° C/1000 PPM HC as Cl for this particular vehicle.
Since diverting the exhaust gas from one of the catalysts would significantly
lengthen the time required for that catalyst to reach operating temperature,
the valve was left in an opened position and the actuating diaphragm was
removed from the vehicle.
FIGURES 11-18 and 11-19 show the underhood compartment after modification.
In FIGURE 11-18, the manifold vacuum sensing device is indicated by letter "A"
along with the vacuum solenoid "B". The port air solenoid, letter "C", is
shown mounted on the inner fender panel with one-half inch line connections to
the port air injection manifold, letter "D".
A resistor which is to reduce choke voltage and vary choke time is
identified by letter "A" in FIGURE 11-19 along with the electric choke, letter
"B". The temperature sensor, referenced as letter "C", is shown in its holder.
-------
- 17 -
PHASE III - VEHICLE CALIBRATION/OPTIMIZATION
Carburetion - General
The initial objective of this Phase was to modify the carburetion on the
vehicle to provide for richer-than-stoichiometric operation under all operating
conditions. Previous experience with similar vehicles had shown that the most
difficult area of air/fuel control was transient operation, i.e., acceleration.
Second in difficulty was part-throttle operation. In dealing with the transient
response characteristics of the carburetor (FIGURE III-l), such things as
accelerator pumps, power valves (in the case of the GM Quadrajet, the power
valve is incorporated into the metering rod assembly), PCV bleeds, and evapor-
ative emission canister bleeds could be altered to minimize lean (greater than
14.7/1) transients. In richening the air/fuel mixture during part-throttle
operations, changes to air bleeds, metering rods, pick-up tubes, and channel
restrictors are necessary. Although previous experience dictated certain
changes, the final configuration must be arrived at through trial and error
procedures.
In general, the procedure used consists of adjusting the carburetor idle
mixture screws to obtain 1.5% CO. The vehicle is then driven at steady-state
speeds up to 60 MPH to obtain air/fuel ratios versus speed measurements.
Typically, the mixture needs to be richened at these speeds to achieve the
desired 1.5% CO, so an iterative process of enlarging the main circuit jets
and the part-throttle (off-idle) circuit metering orifices follows where the
respective orifices are gradually enlarged. Since the part-throttle circuit
affects the air/fuel ratio at higher speeds when the main circuit is dominant,
the effect must be considered when enlarging the main circuit jets.
-------
- 18 -
Ultimately, the air/fuel ratios at the various steady-state speeds fall
into the specified range of 1.25 to 1.75% CO. At that point, transient car-
buretor responses are monitored while operating the vehicle through various
test schedules on the chassis dynamometer. Changes to the accessory circuits
such as the power valve and acceleration pump provide for the elimination of
lean air/fuel ratio excursions and the minimization of extremely rich air/
fuel ratio excursions. These changes can consist of changing the accelerator
pump actuation, stroke, nozzle diameter, power valve orifice, and actuation
vacuum.
Cold Start Techniques - General
At the completion of warm operation calibration and after system vari-
ables such as timing, EGR rates, etc. have been established, calibration for
cold start operation is accomplished by monitoring engine out levels of CO
and O- at the oxygen getter inlet. Primarily, initial choke opening, cold
idle speed, and choke time are varied to yield a 4 to 5% CO concentration at
the getter inlet. As the choke releases over the next 120 seconds, the CO
concentration of the exhaust gas also decreases.
The rich exhaust gas is mixed with oxygen in the exhaust ports to allow
oxidation to occur. The heat evolved in the reaction serves to heat the
catalyst system.
Further augmenting the catalyst heat up rates, the remaining 4 to 5% CO
in the exhaust gas enters the oxygen getter with ^2.5% free oxygen remaining.
This allows further oxidation to take place in the oxygen getter and NOx
catalysts thus further decreasing the time required to reach operating
temperatures.
-------
- 19 -
Further, heat for catalyst warm-up is provided by a 45 second ignition
timing retard and a cold neutral idle speed of 1600 RPM. These figures,
established through previous experience, appeared to be reasonable with respect
to fuel consumption, driveability, engine stalling, and heat released and were
applied to the test vehicles.
Carburetion - Quadrajet
In the case of the Quadrajet carburetor, the first step in the modifi-
cation consisted of placing a 1.6 MM orifice in the Positive Crankcase
Ventilation (PCV) line to limit the volume of air flow and help reduce free
oxygen in the exhaust caused by mixture maldistribution in the intake mani-
fold during vehicle operation. After adjusting the idle CO to a nominal
1.5% CO, the main jets and/or metering rods were replaced with different
sizes to evaluate their effect on the air/fuel ratio at higher vehicle speeds.
One important change is that the new rods, manufactured in a machine shop,
were of constant diameter. This eliminated the drastic change in the diameter
of the original stepped rods which seemed to cause significant air/fuel ratio
changes. During the course of this evaluation, the channel restrictors
(FIGURE III-l, letter "A") were gradaully increased in size to effect a richer
part-throttle mixture (the channel restrictors function as metering orifices
for the off-idle system). As the mixture ratio approaches that of 14/1, final
adjustment is made through the use of the adjustable part-throttle aneroid
(FIGURE III-l, letter "B").
The aneroid in the California carburetor, part number 17052235, attempts
to compensate for changes in atomspheric pressure through the use of a sealed
bellows section in addition to serving as a limited part-throttle mixture
-------
- 20 -
adjustment. This section responds to pressure changes and then reacts to
withdraw (or insert) a metering rod from a fixed orifice. Extensive chassis
dynamometer testing showed that the bellows aneroid was extremely sensitive
to under hood temperatures. This sensitivity, exaggerated by dynamometer
testing, caused instability in air/fuel ratio control to the point where
constant control at steady-state speeds was unattainable. To relieve the
problem, attempts were made to fit a rod assembly, part number 17053049, from
a 49-state carburetor which does not use the pressure compensating bellows.
However, the assemblies were not interchangeable due to different rod sizes.
A photograph of both assemblies is shown in FIGURE III-2. Therefore, complete
49-state carburetors, part number 7045202, were fitted to the vehicles and
the calibration procedure was continued.
The final specifications for all three vehicles varied slightly due to
engine and components variability, A list of the final specifications is
provided in TABLE III-l.
The results of these changes can be seen in FIGURE III-3 which compares
the exhaust gas constituents from the unmodified carburetor to those obtained
from the carburetor after effecting the internal changes previously noted.
Although the air/fuel ratio is dependent on, among other things, ambient air
temperature, the OE air cleaner minimizes the temperature change by mixing
hot and cold air in the snorkel. This system was left intact so that carbure-
tor air inlet temperature fluctuations were reduced.
Backpressure EGR Valves
With carburetor calibration completed, optimization of the system to
maximize catalyst efficiency and reduce fuel consumption was started. The
-------
- 21 -
first step in the optimization phase was to characterize the effect of the
backpressure EGR valves on feedgas emission levels and fuel consumption. This
was accomplished by using canisters whose backpressures were equivalent to
those containing catalysts. The evaluation included various recycle rates,
control spring rates, and spark timing schedules. All tests were performed on
the same vehicle to eliminate vehicle-to-vehicle variability problems. In an
effort to develop the data base without a significant time delay, it was felt
that the hot transient bag (BAG 3) of a 1975 FTP test would clearly represent
the test trends and, therefore, be fully applicable to the standard test.
After conclusions were drawn from the data, full scale confirmatory testing
was planned.
Three prototype adjustable backpressure EGR valves were supplied by the
EPA. The first series of tests were performed to evaluate the differences
caused by varying outer control spring tension. This spring tension regulates
initial opening and closing of the orifice in addition to movement of the
valve during operation after the exhaust backpressure exceeds the inner control
spring tension. FIGURE III-4 is a cross-sectional view of the backpressure
valve while photographs of assembled and exploded valves are shown in FIGURES
III-5 and III-6, respectively.
TABLE III-2 illustrates the effect of three outer spring tensions with
constant orifice size. Comparing the data to hot transient (BAG 3) baseline
data indicates that slightly lower (2%) fuel consumption was possible with a
22% reduction in NOx emissions. Undoubtedly, some of the NOx reduction is due
to the richened air/fuel ratio; however, it is interesting to note that fuel
consumption was not adversely affected.
-------
- 22 -
Spark Advance
In an attempt to further lower fuel consumption, tests were performed
using a 1970 Chevrolet distributor, part number 1112042. Previous experience
with this breaker point distributor on other vehicles indicated that the
advance curve was well suited for lower emissions and fuel consumption. The
effect of the advance curve, in addition to that of the HEI ignition system,
is seen in TABLE III-3. The data clearly show that, although fuel consumption
and NOx emissions are lower with the 1970 distributor, hydrocarbon emissions
increased to a level where current catalyst technology could not enable the
vehicle to comply with a 0.25 g/km emission rate. Additional tests to verify
this conclusion were performed while varying EGR recycle rate (orifice size).
The results confirmed that greater recycle rates reduced NOx emissions but
increased hydrocarbon emissions to an unacceptable level when used with the
1970 distributor and ignition system.
Further characterization of the EGR valves with the HEI system was con-
tinued using supplied hardware and a table detailing the test results is pro-
vided as TABLE III-4. The data is classed according to relative degree of
spark advance for constant EGR orifice sizes. In some cases, third bag data
is taken from cold and hot start .1975 FTP tests. A graphic representation of
a portion of the data is shown in FIGURE III-7. As seen, NOx emissions
decreased with increasing orifice size while hydrocarbon emissions remained
relatively stable. Fuel consumption measurements indicated that certian con-
figurations provided for a decline in consumption. Examining the performance
of these configurations during the cold stabilized bag (BAG 2) of 1975 FTP
emission tests showed decreasing NOx emissions with increasing recycle rate.
-------
- 23 -
Hydrocarbon emissions did not increase significantly until recycle rate
reached excessive amounts. These data are shown in TABLE III-5.
In drawing conclusions from these tests, Gould felt that further spark
timing advance did not lower fuel consumption to the point where the con-
current increase in hydrocarbon emissions, both short and long term, could
be justified. Additionally, the degree of octane requirement increase (OKI)
exhibited by the engine during mileage accumulation could only be worsened by
further increases in spark advance. Therefore, these considerations led to
the conclusion that additional spark timing could not be implemented.
In the case of retarded timing which, in effect, was evaluated through
the use of ported vacuum advance, it was felt that any increase in fuel
consumption was not justifiable in terms of the extra temperature generated
in the exhaust gas. It was felt that the effect of the low exhaust temper-
ature could be adequately offset through selection of an optimum size
catalyst. For these reasons then, the timing was left at factory specifications.
Catalyst Sizing Experiments
Comparing the exhaust gas temperatures and the NOx emissions of these
engines to previously tested models showed that these parameters reached lower
levels than expected. In correlating this information with catalyst laboratory
data, it was indicated that the conversion efficiencies of a four inch catalyst
system might not be sufficient to comply with a 0.25 g/km NOx level without
seriously compromising fuel consumption.
As seen in FIGURE III-8, the gross NOx light-off temperature for the
given test conditions is near 400° C. This low temperature was occasionally
-------
- 24 -
encountered in the exhaust of the vehicle during idle periods and would not
enable efficient NOx conversion if the catalysts were allowed to reach these
temperatures. This is due to the fact that conversion efficiency is a function
of temperature. At this temperature, an increase in unreacted NOx and
excessive ammonia formation would result. This low temperature during idle was
the reason for testing with a ported vacuum advance in the characterization
tests as the effective retard is significant (15 to 20°).
Further complicating the selection is the fact that the GEM 68 catalyst
appears sensitive to inlet NOx levels. FIGURE III-9 illustrates the trend of
decreasing net NOx conversion with decreasing inlet NOx levels; all other con-
ditions remaining constant. At the temperature levels that the vehicles
operate, the efficiency is believed to decrease even more.
These particular characteristics can be offset, however, by increasing
the catalyst size which effectively decreases space and linear gas velocities.
FIGURE 111-10 illustrates the general effect of lowered space velocities on NH
formation and gross/net NOx conversion. As evidenced in the graph, some con-
version gains can be expected. However, due to the substantial increase (70%)
in catalyst mass, the heat-up rate was expected to be slower than a conventional
four inch system.
To determine the magnitude of the thermal mass effect and generate con-
version efficiency data for the five inch system, a five inch catalyst system
consisting of two five inch GEM 68 NOx reduction catalysts and two Englehard
PTX II-C oxidation catalysts were installed on the test vehicle. Initial tests
were performed to calibrate the choke and to evaluate different recycle rates
-------
- 25 -
on the EGR valve. Primarily, choke time and initial opening were varied to
arrive at an initial choked air/fuel ratio of 4 to 5% CO that gradually
decreased until the choke was completely open at ^120 seconds. The actual
settings can be found on the respective CVS data sheets in the Appendices.
The results of these tests are shown in TABLE III-6. During the course
of the tests, the Early Fuel Evaporation (EFE) valve was disconnected to
allow exhaust gas flow to the passenger side catalyst during the critical
warm-up time. It is during this time that the oxygen getter and NOx catalyst
are subjected to conditions that promote oxidation of exhaust gas constituents.
This oxidation releases heat which decreases the time the catalysts require
to reach operating temperature. Intuitively, blocking gas flow to one side of
the engine would result in longer heat-up rates. Although no changes in con-
version efficiencies were experienced when the EFE was disabled, it was
decided that the expected effect had been masked by the relatively new condi-
tion of the NOx catalysts or the extra mass of the large five inch catalysts.
For comparison testing, a four inch catalyst system, consisting of two
four inch oxygen getters, two four inch diameter GEM 68 reduction catalysts,
and the ; two PTX II-C oxidation catalysts, was installed on the vehicle. Minor
carburet ion changes were made to accommodate for the change in exhaust system
backpressure and CVS tests were begun. The test results are shown in TABLE
First, in comparing the four inch catalysts warm-up rates to those of the
five inch system with the same nominal inlet gas concentration, FIGURE 111-12
illustrates the additional time required to reach light off temperature for the
five inch system. The result of this extra mass of the larger oxygen getter can
-------
- 26 -
be seen in the temperature measurements taken at the reduction catalyst inlet.
The time required to reach 700° F is lengthened from *V27 seconds to 51 seconds.
The effect of the larger NOx catalyst with its 70% extra mass is even more
significant in FIGURE 111-13. The measurements taken at the exit of the NOx
catalyst show that the time for a five inch catalyst to reach 1,000° F
increases from 75 seconds for a four inch system to 168 seconds for a five
inch system. This time could be shortened; however, most conventional methods
would result in increased fuel consumption. Data analysis shows that the
majority of increased fuel consumption over baseline occurs during the cold
start due, to a large degree, to the rich choke and resultant richer air/fuel
ratio. It is doubtful that equivalent heat-up rates could be reached even
neglecting fuel consumption considerations. Therefore, it was felt that the
four inch system had greater potential for best performance and was designated
as the prime system for further optimization. This decision was further sub-
stantiated by the fact that neither system demonstrated superior NOx perfor-
mance with respect to each other.
High Volume Air Pump
During the course of testing the five inch system, comparison tests were
performed using the 22 CID air pump. These data are summarized in TABLE III-7.
Reviewing the data show that the air pump (.see FIGURE III-ll) had little effect
on emissions, but appeared to have an adverse effect on fuel consumption.
Disregarding the cold transient bag (BAG 1) due to its sensitivity to
other factors, the weighted fuel consumption during portions of a CVS test show
a 3 to 6% increase in fuel consumption. Although the large pump requires more
horesepower than a. standard air pump, it was felt that this factor alone could
-------
- 27 -
not be responsible for all of the increase. Subsequent conversations with the
manufacturer's engineers revealed that due to the inherent sensitivity of the
backpressure EGR valve, its operation was affected by the output of the pump.
Thus, in the interests of stability, coupled with the fact that the larger
pump did not lower tailpipe emissions and did raise fuel consumption, the
large air pump was removed in favor of the smaller standard version.
Effect of Sulfur on System Performance
Further data analysis of the optimization tests showed a marked tendency
of increasing fuel consumption with time. FIGURE III-14 indicates the trend
for all hot transient (BAG 3) and 1976 FTP tests. As seen in the illustration,
third bag characterization tests before installation of the catalysts show
fluctuating fuel consumption dependent on system/components calibration. However,
after catalyst installation, fuel consumption is seen increasing with time.
Major changes made to the vehicle during the test sequence are indicated. As
seen, the trend appears to be independent of system changes. Third bag tests
labelled A and A1 represent nominally identical configurations; that is, same
recycle rate, initial timing and spark advance curves. By comparison, it is
apparent that fuel consumption has increased by 20%. In addition, FIGURE 111-15
shows a gradual tendency of increasing hydrocarbon emissions accompanied by
slightly decreasing NOx emission rates.
To define the component/components responsible, a test series was
initiated which consisted of returning the vehicle to original condition in
stages. The results of these tests are shown in TABLE III-9. The data indicate
that as this system was returned to the original OEM configurations, fuel
consumption was reduced to the point where further tests were considered
-------
- 28 -
unnecessary. From these data, it is apparent that the vehicle itself was not
responsible for the deteriorating fuel consumption, but rather the system
calibration or components themselves were. A table comparing the original
and new baseline tests is provided in TABLE 111-10 and shows that fuel con-
sumption was near equal.
Additional tests performed on the vehicle showed that the backpressure
EGR valve was experiencing higher exhaust system backpressure with time.
These measurements were made near the base of the EGR valve by adding a
pressure tap to the EGR spacer block. The data shown in TABLE III-11 show
as high as an 18% gain in backpressure for these catalysts versus a fresh
set of catalysts. Since the catalysts originally in the vehicle were at
relatively low mileage, it was felt that the change in backpressure would
continue to increase resulting in even higher EGR recycle rates with time.
These data suggested that if adequate desensitization of the valves could not
be accomplished their use would have to be precluded on the vehicle.
The actual method by which the catalyst backpressure increases has
been under investigation (refer to "History of Contract"). Some increase is
expected due to active surface generation, however, accelerated rates of
generation have been recently seen in other in-house vehicle tests on GEM 68
with fuel sulfur levels at 0.03 wt %.
Attempts to desensitize the EGR valve consisted of smaller orifices
(lower recycle rate) and stronger outer control springs. The static open
point is preset and cannot be changed. Essentially, the desensitization con-
sisted of lower cycle rates which ultimately resulted in NOx emissions of
-------
- 29 -
0.5 g/km. The test results are shown in TABLE 111-12. This emission rate was
far above the target level to meet 0.25 g/km for 50,000 miles. Additionally,
it was felt that the valve would still be sensitive to backpressure changes as
the initial set point was unadjustable. Furthermore, it was largely unknown
to what degree sulfur exposure would effect the NOx reduction catalysts. There-
fore, in the interests of stability, testing began with California type dual-
diaphragm EGR valves.
Dual-Diaphragm EGR Valves
This valve is similar to the port vacuum operated valve found on most
vehicles except that a second vacuum chamber, connected to intake manifold
vacuum, is located beneath the diaphragm. A cross section of this valve is
provided in FIGURE 111-16. At a certain ported vacuum signal, the construction
of the valve allows relatively greater valve openings at low manifold vacuum
than at high manifold vacuum levels. The result is greater recycle rates on
accelerations when compared to a standard ported vacuum EGR valve. Additionally,
the lower vacuum chamber assures good idle quality by forcing the valve closed.
Initial tests utilizing this valve were performed on vehicle 24. TABLE
111-12 lists these tests along with a description of the system settings.
Hydrocarbon emission rates were MJ.25 g/km with NOx emission rates about 0.32
g/km. Calibration tests were concluded and three zero mile emissions and fuel
consumption tests were performed on the vehicles. These results are listed in
TABLE 111-13 and the specifications are shown in TABLE III-l.
While final calibration tests were being conducted on vehicle 24, cali-
bration of the second vehicle, ETV 25, was initiated and both the backpressure
-------
- 30 -
and dual-diaphragm valves were tested. Based on the data generated with the
first vehicle, optimization was centered on the use of the dual-diaphragm
valves. The calibration tests are listed in TABLE 111-14 and reflect minor
adjustments to the choke and carburetor along with the addition of a retard
override mechanism.
The addition of a cold start retard override was considered beneficial
in that it will help prevent stalling during cold starts. The system, which
senses manifold vacuum, allows vacuum to the advance mechanism of the disbrib-
utor in the event that manifold vacuum falls to 9" to 10" Hg.
The use of the 45 second cold start retard (in this case, a lack of
manifold vacuum to the advance mechanism) is justified by the understanding
that not only does it raise the exhaust gas temperature during the most critical
portion of the test, but also lowers the feedgas hydrocarbon and NOx emission
rates. Additionally, the retard shortens the length of time required for the
engine to reach operating temperature, which in turn benefits carburetor control
in that the air/fuel ratio is more stable and repeatable.
Confirmation Testing
During the course of this testing, vehicle 24 was taken to the Ann Arbor
Laboratory for confirmatory testing of the system as calibrated with the back-
pressure valve. The purpose of these tests was not only to establish the
integrity of the Gould emission measurements, but to allow a direct data com-
parison to the second vehicle with its different system calibration. The data
obtained from the EPA on the first vehicle is included as TABLE 111-15 along
-------
- 31 -
with original baseline and "zero mile" tests performed in Gould's laboratory.
Sulfate test results are shown in TABLE 111-16.
The data indicate reasonable correlation with the EPA's Motor Vehicle
Laboratory with hydrocarbon emissions less than those measured at the Gould
test facility. After sulfate testing, this vehicle was trailered back to
Gould's facility for further testing and system updating. Initial work
started with the preferred dual-diaphragm EGR valve. In addition, a retard
override system and an electric choke were evaluated during a series of tests,
the results of which are compared in TABLE 111-17. Replacement of the bi-
metallic choke spring with the electric choke was intended to provide for more
stable and reproducible operation during the course of the 50,000 mile durabil-
ity test. Some initial benefit in terms of reproducibility was expected due to
the nature of the mechanism.
The second vehicle, ETV 25, was taken to the EPA testing facility for
zero mile confirmation tests. The vehicle was equipped as described in
FIGURE 111-17 along with the dual-diaphragm EGR valve. Results of the tests
performed at Ann Arbor are compared to in-house measurements shown in TABLE
111-18. Sulfate tests results for this vehicle are also shown in TABLE 111-16.
Again, the measurements indicated reasonable correlation with the Gould data
with hydrocarbon emissions less than those measured at Gould.
Although earlier tests on the backpressure EGR valve indicated a slight
advantage (^2%) in fuel consumption over the ported type, this advantage was
not evidenced in the tests performed on ETV 24 and 25, The raised backpressure
of the catalysts and inherent vehicle variances that exist may have been
-------
- 32 -
enough to offset the anticipated results. As the catalyst tests were being
completed on both vehicles, calibration of the third vehicle was started.
The system was optimized essentially the same as those on the two previous
vehicles. Choke optimization tests, similar to the other vehicles, were
performed and the tests results generated during the test series set-up are
listed in TABLE 111-19. The actual choke settings can be found on the
respective CVS data sheets in the Appendices.
Catalyst System Efficiency
In determining catalyst efficiency, a system simulating the backpressure
of all the catalysts was installed on each vehicle. Normal 1975 FTP emission
tests were then performed to determine output emission rate from the engine.
Calculation of catalyst efficiencies during the FTP are shown in TABLE 111-20,
21, and 22 along with the actual emission measurements. NOx catalyst
efficiencies could be expected to improve with mileage accumulation as the
catalyst surface reaches a stable surface morphology. However, it is doubtful
that catalyst efficiency would increase to the point where the target 0.19 to
0.22 g/km NOx emission could be reached (equivalent to 60 to 70% efficiency)
while holding fuel consumption losses at the same level. Targeting the system
for a less stringent standard, however, would allow certain calibration changes
enabling some fuel consumption decreases.
After meetings with the Project Officer and thoroughly discussing the
fuel sulfur levels found in recent pool gasoline, the decision was made to
delay the start of mileage accumulation until a more sulfur resistant catalyst
could be developed by Gould and proven by in-house durability tests.
-------
- 33 -
Heat Conservation Techniques
In the interim, it was decided to evaluate various means of heat conser-
vation techniques consisting principally of exhaust port liners and insulated
exhaust manifolds. It had been intended to evaluate exhaust manifolds with low
thermal inertia characteristics, however, the availability and cost of casting
cores and patterns was such as to make this impractical for this contractual effort.
The objectives of these tests were to determine the exhaust gas tempera-
ture increase realized by these techniques and establish the effect on catalyst
activity during emission tests. Although the catalysts used during this test
sequence were of an alloy shown to be more sulfur tolerant than GEM 68, they
were not capable of performing at the required level of activity and extended
durability necessary to comply with the "scope of work", Appendix 5.
The various techniques were applied to ETV 24 in stages to characterize
the effect of each. The insulation used on the manifolds was 12.7 MM (0.5
inch) thick fiberglass mat covered with heavy gauge aluminum foil. The port
liners were made of stainless steel with an air spacing between them and the
cast iron exhaust ports. The complete head assemblies were provided by the EPA.
In the interests of time, the tests were started while the engine was
warm. The cold transient (BAG 1) phase of the test was not used in the
characterization analysis but was considered to be an adequate prep for the
cold stabilized phase (BAG 2) .
TABLE 111-23 is a summary of the average temperatures of the exhaust gas
as measured with chromel-alumel thermocouples near the inlet of the oxygen
getter catalyst. The cold stabilized (BAG 2) temperatures represent an average
-------
- 34 -
of the last 300 seconds of the phase, while the hot transient (_BAG 3) tempera-
tures are an average of 300 seconds starting with the idle period before the
55 mile per hour acceleration. Delays were experienced in generating test
data as one of the intake valve guides was oversize which allowed excessive
oil leakage into the combustion chamber. This necessitated removal of the
head for corrective machining.
In reviewing the data, it can be seen that the insulated manifolds, when
used in conjunction with the port lined heads, provided for the highest average
temperature increase. In the tests without EGR, second and third bag tempera-
tures were increased by 60° and 44° C, while the tests with EGR showed increases
of only 32° and 27° C, respectively, It can be seen by reviewing the NOx emis-
sion data in TABLE III--24 that the EGR rate is lower with the port liners. This
reduced EGR rate was found to be caused by an unusually small opening at the
port liner leading to the EGR passage. It is felt that with equal recycle rates,
the temperature increases obtained with the port lined heads would be equal to
those obtained with the port lined heads in tests without EGR. Therefore, it
must be kept in mind that the temperatures at equal recycle rates would be even
higher than indicated.
Further analysis of the data shows that the insulated manifolds effected
a larger temperature increase than port liners used by themselves. In some
instances, the tests were rerun to establish the integrity of the data.
By measuring tailpipe emission rates and then determining feedgas levels
in the same system configuration, data were gathered to compare the effect of the
increased temperature on catalyst efficiency. Summarized in TABLE III~24f the
-------
- 35 -
data indicate that generally, as the inlet temperature was raised, NOx
efficiency improved. Furthermore, the conversion efficiency of the NOx
catalysts does appear to be somewhat sensitive to inlet NOx levels as
anticipated based on the laboratory graphs of FIGURE 111-18. By virtue of
the dependence of conversion efficiency on inlet NOx levels, it appears
that the NOx level at which a drop in conversion efficiency could be ex-
pected for these temperatures is near the levels tested.
Steady-state conversion efficiencies were also measured at two different
vehicle speeds while the vehicle was in each configuration. The resultant
data agreed with that shown in FIGURE 111-18 which exhibits the expected
decreasing efficiency with decreasing temperature and/or inlet NOx level. The
changes in linear and space velocities (caused by different engine speeds) are
not reflected in the FIGURE.
Some cold start 1975 FTP emission tests were performed to determine
the effect of the port liners and insulated manifolds on gas temperature
heat-up rate. A list of calibration tests is shown in TABLE 111-25. Catalyst
bed temperature measurements were not taken as the flow disruption caused by
the presence of the thermocouple can be detrimental to catalyst performance.
A comparison of the heat-up rates is shown in FIGURE 111-19. The shaded
area indicates the temperature limits over three tests. The data show that
the port lined heads and insulated manifolds provide for a 65° to 95° C higher
temperature over the conventional heads except during the 20 second idle
prior to the 55 mile per hour acceleration. From a cold start, the ability of
the port liners to reduce the heat loss to the head is evident within 15
-------
- 36 -
seconds of engine start. No further optimization of the cold start system
was attempted, however, it is felt that the fuel consumption loss encountered
in the cold transient bag (BAG 1) could be reduced by utilization of this
technology.
Undoubtedlyf further application of these principles through better
interior exhaust manifold coatings, superior exterior insulation, and light-
weight (low thermal mass), metallic alloys could further decrease the heat
loss through the manifolds. The increase in temperature would not only pro-
vide for faster times to operating temperatures and better NOx efficiency,
but would most likely allow the removal of the retard and might allow for
somewhat leaner choke settings.
Examination of the gaseous emission data in TABLE 111-^26 shows that JL975
FTP NOx conversion efficiency was improved by 30%. A significant portion of the
increase occurred in the hot transient bag (BAG 3) with less of an improve-
ment in the cold stabilized bag (BAG 2). The cold transient bag (BAG 1)
efficiency remained nearly the same and may reflect the need for additional
cold start system development. It is felt that, in addition to removal of
the cold start retard, techniques such as compression and valve timing
changes could be applied to decrease fuel consumption until tailpipe NOx
emissions equalled those achieved without the port liners and insulated mani-
folds. This effort is made possible by the NOx catalyst characteristics of
increased efficiency with increased temperature due to lower ammonia forma-
tion. Thus, it is felt that heat conservation techniques could provide for
decreases in fuel consumption for equivalent tailpipe emission rates.
-------
- 37 -
Further analysis of the data in TABLE 111-26 show that the hydrocarbon
conversion efficiencies for the conventional and high temperature systems
are nearly equal (88 versus 84%). This indicates that the port liners and
insulated manifolds contribute little towards hydrocarbon oxidation when
used with this particular catalyst arrangement and system calibration.
Of concern, though, is the realization that feedgas hydrocarbon emission
for the high temperature system increased by 30% over the conventional dual-
bed system (1.65 k/gm versus 2.14 g/km).
In addition, instability in air/fuel ratio control and gaseous emission
rates had become evident. Although some of the variance in emissions shown
in TABLE 111-26 is due to slight calibration changes of the initial choke
opening, engine speed, etc., it is felt that the variance far exceeds the
expected as a result of these changes. The causes for these trends has not
been identified.
-------
- 38 -
PHASE IV - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE EFFORTS
In light of the fact that an alloy sufficiently tolerant to sulfur while
maintaining suitable activity to reach a 0.25 g/km NOx emission rate has not
been identified, the principal area of effort in future dual catalyst work
should be the development of a suitable alloy.
Once such an alloy is identified^ further efforts should include examin-
ation of improved heat conservation techniques, improved air/fuel metering
systems and electronically controlled EGR and spark timing systems to improve
the fuel consumption and emissions of vehicles utilizing dual-bed catalyst
systems.
-------
FIGURES
-------
-------
ETV24
ETV 25
ETV 26
o
0
1-
CD
o
Ul
O
Z
<
O
<
J
o
li.
E
i-
UJ
0
C.C.
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
" /
l_ 9
. y
/
[ /
/
- /
/I i i i
2000 4000
0 2000 4000 0
ENGINE RPM
FIGURE 1-2: CENTRIFUGAL ADVANCE CURVES
2000 4000
-------
ETV 24
ETV 25
ETV 26
20
18
u 16
o
1 K
uj 12
u
i .o
4
2
0
8 10 12
I
I
4 6 8 10 12
VACUUM (IN. H6)
4 6 8 10 12
FIGURE 1-3: VACUUM ADVANCE CURVES
-------
-------
-------
-------
M • V I • f O N •
.4-. 94-
:X-XX^SPV^T-X
T 'G WELD 360* -^
6As.TI.grtt
_LK/_LE.T EiJC) CAP 3
O. 8-70000Z.-4-
onr-Lcr r.Mc> CAP
C). B-7<-if.r.r.«. -
tVOX - C, : :'. :
1 I .' : f .
U'nil I •' •'
'-.;- 3:.,-;-xv..V.
(( ; f,t-\-\
DIMENSIONAL. TOtWANC
UNLfM OTMCftWlM •<
FRACTIONAL K ± 1/9*
XX - * .OtB
.XXX - * .00*
•OUAHCNnS A PAKAU
•CCtpIKO
ANOLU * W
•UAFACC MAX. '
.CUM* 4- ^ "
.rw GOULD
i *•! IA.V)'.J r CA( /v yi i j
I4AOB POM
c yoc o ••" 2.
|
V
-------
DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING
REVISION*
oucmrnoN
i*n I nmoiu.
/—TIG WELD
GAS TIGHT..
.25"
CAP
6-700002.-
/T^-AE-EOQA
HEAT TREAT
FUL u
DIMENSIONAL TOLERANCES
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED
FRACTIONAL = ± 1/<, 4 ANGLES ± 3O'
.XX - ± .01B •»/
;. T
.XXX — ± .008
SURFACE MAX.
CONCENTRICITY
DRAWN U. t'il r
D*Tt I ~L - I I -
- It '
DMION KNO.
„> GOULD
T CAP
MADE FOR
B
DRAWING NUMBER
7ooooa-4
-------
DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING
ft (VISION*
.RETA|NER_R.iNJG
128 MPP^
TIG ^ELD4PlAC!ES.6"'LotJ(=.
-GE.Trr.! P«T« .11 -1 T - 75-
GOULD
ox yg go - g ETr^e. Sufe-Ass'
DRAWING NUMBER
700001 -Z
-------
DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING
KCVKIONC
4J25" DIA.
062 WALL
MATERULr-ypp 3040R.3IO SS
HEAT TREAT
DIMENSIONAL TOLERANC
UNLESS OTHERWISE SP
.XX - ± .018
.XXX — * .COS
BCAl* FULU
E8
ECIP1ED
ANOLES ± SO-
•V
SURFACE MAX. V
SQUARENESS « PARALLELISM
IFLAT tunrACH)
CONCENTRICITY
t»AWN ^J . r.: c":': f. '.'- / o»« 2 - 7, • 7£
DUI4N RNO. DATE
fNO. DAT*
0. A. DAT!
•Ji GOULD
TITUI —.
Ql JTF 5? Sv4P i_l_
MADE FOR
•'.It
B
i
ORAWINa NUMICR . I«UK
7OOOO1 -12A
-------
DO NOT SOU! THIS DRAWING
AfcT
ftsra
-------
L DIA.TUBE
2
15- TYP.
TYPICAL
NOTES:
0.0. 2 l/2"
MAT'L: 304 ss TUBING
TUBE ENDS ARE CAPPED SHUT; PLUG ft WELD
DRILL 36 HOLES,
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
TO OXIDATION CATALYST
PORT AIR
SOLENOID
— TO PORT
AIR INJECTORS
AIR PUMP
FIGURE H-16: AIR LINE SCHEMATIC
-------
DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING
+ 12V DC
Fl
TSI-CONTROL PRODUCTS P72OI-12
r
•
TDf-l TSI
-^
OPENS
160'F
TD2-I
TIME U- L AY
D/ALCO
AS CO SOLENOID
I2VDC //'//
DIALCU
I2VDC 20 MA
ASCO SOLENC IU
I2VDC // W
TD2-4 OMNETICS
| TIME DELAY
JGNITION
' RETARD
MATERIAL
HEAT TREAT
DIMENOtONAL. TOLERANCES
UNLRfl* OTHERWISE SPECIFIED
FRACTIONAL = ± 1/64 ANOLE8 ± 3CX
.XX - ± .Of 8 "3V
:. V
.XXX — ± .009
SURFACE MAX.
SQUARENESS * PARALLELISM
(FLAT «UHrAd»)
CONCENTRICITY
PATE /- / GOULD
""TfMEP CIRCUIT FOR
EPA VEHICLES
MADE FOR
R. STh/NER 51261 u <. //rf
SIZE
DRAWING NUMBER
7G-/-/3-/
ISSUE
-------
-------
B
-------
•E 0 R (EXHAUST GAS
RECIRCgtATIONI
IDLE
MIXTURE
Idle System
ADJUSTABLE PART THROTTLE
(A PT.J
ADJUSTING SCR
METEfUM
ROD
FIXED METERING JET
NOTE: ANEROID REPLACED BV FILLER BLOCK ON SOM€ MODELS
MAIN
POWER PISTON
{DOWN!
Main Metering System
SECONDARY MAIN ELL * TUBE
WELL AIR BLEED
PRIMARY MAIN
METERING RODS (2 I
ACCELERATING WELL PORT
POWER
PISTON
(UP)
POWER PISTON
SPRING
MAIN
DISCHARGE
NOZZLE
Power System
-------
-------
UNMODIFIED QUADRAJET
MODIFIED QUADRAJET
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
NOTE: Different scales used on graphs
-------
FILTER
SPARK PORT SIGNAL
INTAKE VACUUM
EXHAUST GAS
FIGURE m-4: BACKPRESSURE EGR VALVE CROSSECTION
-------
-------
-------
ETV 24-VALVE 1220
INTERMEDIATE SPRING
V 6° BTDC., PORTED
~
Q.
^
CO
v^m
O
CO
CO
2
UJ
X
O
5
O.
O
CO
o
CO
CO
UJ
0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
\J\£~D\U^J rur\ i c.u
\ a 1 2° BTDC , MAN I FOLD
v °y^ (W/SPARK DELAY)
^L ^^^o
^V ^****»"— _
- V \o
V X vSw
— >. ^«w^
^v^ ^^^^^
^V,J °"N>^--~~^®
^*^^*»J^ ^O— ^
°_
2.0 S
^
*•*
1.5 Jo
4^L
0
(O
CO
.0 X
UJ
x
0
III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
.05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .11 .12 .13 .14 .15 .16
EGR ORIFICE (in2)
3.5-
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
-
- a
.8
Tl *» O
~* * o " 80 °-
o
—
-
—
2.05
*:
0
1.5 ~
to
z
o
CO
1.0 «2
UJ
o
.5*
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
.05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .11 .12 .13 .14 .15 .16
E6R ORIFICE (in2)
FIGURE m-7:EGR S SPARK TIMING EFFECTS ON ENGINE EMISSIONS.
(HOT 505 CYCLES)
-------
100
CATALYST TEMPERATURE (°C)
300 400 500 6OO 700
80
£ 60
40
o
cc
0
20
1 I
600 800 1000 1200 1400
CATALYST TEMPERATURE (°F)
FEEDSTREAM: NO(IOOO ppm), H2 (0.5%),
CO (2% in N2)
SPACE VELOCITY : I05 v/v/hr.
FIGURE m-8: CHARACTERISTIC TEMPERATURE BEHAVIOR
OF GEM 68.
-------
IUU
80
~ 60
O
<£
UJ
o^o-o-— ' "8" '° § * *
^ ^J N -^N2
o
:/
\
^^ ^
r*^ppnfi NH3
« •«
2 4^t" / _ " i i .^_
O Iv / ^^^ ° • *»
o
20
y • • • -
7\^ NO—NH3
ftf i i ^i^"""Y""~"Y— "7— 7 -v-
100 ^.
E
ex
80 *
2
60 0
1-
40 i
eyr
LL.
O
20 "•
ro
o z
1000 2000 3000 4000
INLET NO (ppm)
FEEDSTREAM: REGULAR EXHAUST GAS
CONTAINING NO OXYGEN
CONDITIONS: I200°F AND I05 v/v/hr
FIGURE HI-9: EFFECT OF INLET NO ON GEM 68 NO REDUCTION
AND NH3 FORMATION.
-------
SPACE VELOCITY (v/v/hr.)
~ 100
5.2xl04
10
20 30 40 50
RESIDENCE TIME (m sec.)
60 70
FEEDSTREAM: NO (1000 ppm), CO(2%), H2 (0.5%)
FIGURE HT-IO: RESIDENCE TIME EFFECTS ON GEM 68.
-------
-------
-i 700
I200r
1000
600
600
400-
2OO
CVS 655
• INLET
x GEM INLET
O AFTER NOX
I
20
40
60
80 100 120
TIMC lr;TO F ;P 'SEC.)
140
160
180
600
500
400
u
o
UJ
oc
Z)
UJ
a.
UJ
H-
300
200
100
0
200
FIGURE TH-12: TEMPE«"\TURES F .* 5" CATALYST SYSTEM.
-------
700
I200r
1000- ~
800-
600-
400-
200
CVS 662
• INLET
x GEM INLET
O AFTER NOX
I
600
500
400
300
UJ
o:
UJ
0.
Z
UJ
200
100
60
80 100 120
TIME INTO FTP (SEC.)
140
160
180
200
FIGURE IH-13: TEMPERATURES FOR 4" CATALYST SYSTEM.
-------
o cvs
• THIRD BAG
16
3 15
o_
*^
~ 14
>:
0 13
z
o
o 12
•
UJ II
^
u.
10
—
•
• • •
_ A
**. * • * *•* y*<
A V A X
-0 WV* LAIALTS)! bTil
C.M
•-0.422 EGR ORIFICE
•
• • £ J
~ « > J
-EFEOFF
•
»^
• •• .. A •••
-
-HIGH VOLUME AIR PUMP
. •
o° • J
r4"
NOK CATALYST
SYSTEM
•
i
o o *
_ OEM BASELINE FUEL CONSUMPTION O _° n
O o
CVS: 13.0 MPG (18.1 LITERS /IOO KM) u
THIRD BAG . 13.4 MPG ( 17. 6 LITERS/100 KM) O
—
-
rOEM EGR,
OEM ADVANCE
•
» • •
• *Sw
^^^^.^ f^^_ A '
A -
0 °0
O
14.7 2
15.7 0
i
16.8-
z
18.1 g
0.
«g
19.6 D
^
4fm
21.48
_i
23.5 ^
U.
CONSECUTIVE TESTS
FIGURE m-14: THIRD BAG a CVS FUEL ECONOMY TRENDS FOR ETV 24.
-------
QL
e>
***
z
o
UJ
X
o
z
OL
O
I/)
z
o
(/>
UJ
o
X
0.7r-
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
—
~ c
-5 NOX CATALYST SYSTEM
) O
o
<
-0.422 E6R ORIFICE
O
i- EFE OFF _Q 44
O
M
-
0
,o °°oo°°j \o
L4" NOX CATALYST SYSTEM -
•—HIGH VOLUME AIR PUMP
0.37
0.31
0.25
0.19
o o -i0.44
o
o
. 0 °
o o
- o o °
o oo 00
o
0.37
0.31
0.25
5
^
0
^•*
0)
z
o
(0
I
UJ
X
o
5
^
2
CO
z
g
CO
UJ
u
CONSECUTIVE CVS TESTS
FIGURE HI-15: CVS EMISSION TRENDS FOR ETV 24
-------
INTAKE VACUUM
CARB PORT SIGNAL
-» MANIFOLD VACUUM
DUAL DIAPHRAGM
SUB-ASSEMBLY
EXHAUST GAS
FIGURE m-16: DUAL DIAPHRAGM EGR VALVE (CROSSECTION)
-------
GOULD •>
ANTI-STALL SYSTEM
COLD START RETARD
MODIFIED RICH CARBURETION
CONTINUOUS SECONDARY AIR
OXIDATION CATALYST
(PTX-IT C)
NOX REDUCTION CATALYST
(GEM 68)
OXYGEN REMOVAL CATALYST
AIR PUMP
COLD START PORT AIR INJECTION
FIGURE 3H-17: SYSTEM DESCRIPTION -ETV 25
-------
en
o:
LU
o
o
UJ
O.I
0.08
0.06 0.04
% NO
0.02 0.01
FIGURE m-18 : RELATIONSHIP OF NO AND CO ON NET NOX EFFICIENCY
(TEMP. *590°C)
-------
I400i-
n800
-700
PORT-LINED HEADS AND
INSULATED MANIFOLDS
CONVENTIONAL HEADS
AND MANIFOLDS
-600
u
e
ct
<
400 £
Q.
UJ
-200
100
90 120 150 180
TIME INTO FTP (SECONDS)
210
240
270
FIGURE m-19: CATALYST INLET TEMPERATURE COMPARISON FOR VARIOUS HEAT
CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES.
-------
TABLES
-------
TABLE 1-1
VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION
VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION VIN COLOR WEIGHT
24 1X27L5L119711 Maroon 3500 Lbs
25 1X27L5L115781 Blue 3540 Lbs
26 1X27L5L115735 Yellow 3480 Lbs
-------
TABLE 1-2
VEHICLE BREAK IN FUEL CONSUMPTION
VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION
24
25
26
MILES
2800
2600
2800
FUEL CONSUMPTION
14.6 liters/100 km
14.7 liters/100 km
16.2 liters/100 km
-------
TABLE 1-3
VEHICLE BASELINE & CERTIFICATION DATA
FTP EMISSIONS FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
VEHICLE - G/KM - - L/100 KM - - L/100 KM -
IDENTIFICATION CO HC NOx CARBON VOLUME CARBON
CERTIFICATION 2.67 0.37 1.12 18.1 — 14.7
24 1.25 0.29 1.37 18.1 18.8 14.4
25 1.63 0.29 1.06 17.8 18.5 14.2
26 1.35 0.30 0.90 18.8 19.0 15.1
1975
CALIFORNIA 5.59 0.56 1.24
VOLUME
—
13.8
13.3
13.9
STANDARDS
-------
TABLE 1-4
1975 FTP BASELINE TESTS
VEHICLE
IDENTIFICATION
ETV 24
CVS 582
CVS 584
CVS 587
ETV 25
CVS 588
CVS 595
CVS 597
ETV 26
CVS 589
CVS 590
CVS 592
FTP EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
0.96
1.55
1.22
1.63
1.11
1.30
1.45
1.32
2.13
HC
0.30
0.32
0.24
0.28
0.34
0.28
0.84*
0.22
0.34
NOx
1.24
1.41
1.45
0.94
0.94
0.83
1.07
1.11
0.99
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
17.5
17.9
18.7
18.2
18.0
17.2
18.8
19.0
18.7
VOLUME
19.0
18.7
18.9
19.1
18.1
18.2
19.2
18.8
18.7
HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
14.5
14.7
14.1
15.2
13.6
14.1
15.5
14.8
15.0
VOLUME
13.9
13.9
13.7
13.5
13.1
13.4
14.4
13.7
13.6
*Not Included in Average
-------
TABLE III-l
TYPICAL MODIFIED CARBURETOR SPECIFICATIONS
ITEM
MAIN JET ORIFICE (MM)
METERING ROD DIAMETER (MM)
CHANNEL RESTRICTOR (MM)
IDLE TUBE OPENING (MM)
CHOKE BREAK;
FRONT (MM)
REAR (MM)
11
1.83
1.12
1.65
0.71
5.08
4.45
VEHICLE
li
1.83
1.01
1.63
0.66
5.97
4.83
26
1.78
0.97
1.55
0.71
5.72
4.83
-------
TABLE III-2
EFFECT OF OUTER EGR CONTROL SPRING ON EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION
HOT TRANSIENT BAG (BAG 3)
SPRING
DESCRIPTION
WEAK
INTERMEDIATE
STIFF
BASELINE
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO HC
26.5 1.52
28.1 1.55
28.1 1.43
— —
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
NOx
1.40
1.37
1.35
1.77
CARBON
17.2
17.2
17.6
17.6
VOLUME
17.7
18.1
17.8
— _
-------
TABLE III-3
EFFECT OF IGNITION SYSTEMS ON EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION
HOT TRANSIENT (BAG 3)
DESCRIPTION
TEST ID
TB 9
TB 12
TB 8A
TB 13
IGNITION VACUUM
SYSTEM ADVANCE
BREAKER PORTED
HEI PORTED
BREAKER MANIFOLD
W/SDV
HEI MANIFOLD
W/SDV
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO HC NOx
21.6 2.02 1.10
21.7 1.79 1.47
20.2 2.54 1.72
20.0 1.78 1.98
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON VOLUME
16.1 17.2
16.8 17.7
15.4 16.3
16.1 16.9
INITIAL TIMING = 12 BTDC
SDV = SPARK DELAY VALVE
-------
TABLE III-4
EFFECT OF SPARK ADVANCE & EGR ON HOT TRANSIENT EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION
DESCRIPTION
TEST ID
BASELINE
TB 3
TB 14
TB 15
TB 10
TB 12
TB 11
TB 13
TB 26
TB 20
TB 16
TB 28
CVS 636
TB 17
TB 18
TB 27
TB 19
TB 21
TB 25
TB 22
TB 23
TB 24
CVS EXP 2
CVS 737
CVS EXP 3
CVS 638
TB 29
CVS EXP
EGR INITIAL
ORIFICE TIMING
_ MM - -OBTDC-
6
6.35 6
7.67 6
12
6
12
6
12
8.33 6
6
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
8.84 6
6
12
12
12
10.31 12
12
12
10.72 12
11.51 12
12
VACUUM
ADVANCE
SCHEME
MANIFOLD
PORT
PORT*
PORT*
PORT
PORT
MANIFOLD*
MANIFOLD*
PORT
PORT
PORT*
PORT*
PORT*
PORT
PORT
PORT
MANIFOLD*
PORT
PORT
PORT
MANIFOLD*
MANIFOLD
PORT
PORT
PORT
PORT
PORT
PORT
HOT TRANSIENT (BAG 3)
EMISSIONS
CO
—
28.1
25.2
20.4
21.8
21.7
22.9
20.0
23.9
20.8
18.2
20.3
20.2
17.7
20.3
18.2
18.7
31.0
22.3
26.0
24.6
19.9
18.3
18.6
20.2
19.4
20.5
20.8
- G/KM
HC
—
1.55
1.57
1.60
1.51
1.79
1.68
1.78
1.58
1.65
1.30
1.60
1.43
1.35
1.45
1.49
1.60
1.58
1.67
1.73
1.83
1.77
1.44
1.50
1.60
1.46
1.57
1.63
-
NOx
1.83
1.37
0.93
1.05
1.29
1.47
1.52
1.98
0.70
0.89
0.98
1.21
1.33
1.04
1.04
1.26
1.78
0.75
0.77
1.05
1.70
1.77
0.91
0.94
0.96
0.77
0.64
0.73
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100
CARBON
17.6
17.2
18.8
17.4
18.0
16.8
16.8
16.1
16.9
19.0
17.8
17.0
16.8
18.7
18.7
16.7
16.9
19.0
17.7
18.1
16.8
16.2
17.2
16.8
16.7
17.0
17.2
16.9
KM -
VOLUME
—
18.1
18.7
18.0
18.1
17.7
17.3
16.9
19.0
19.1
18.2
17.2
17.0
18.4
18.7
17.2
17.0
19.3
19.0
18.7
17.0
16.8
17.4
17.0
17.2
17.7
18.1
17.7
•SPARK DELAY VALVE
-------
TABLE III-5
EFFECT OF SPARK ADVANCE & EGR ON COLD STABILIZED EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION
DESCRIPTION
EGR INITIAL VACUUM
ORIFICE TIMING ADVANCE
TEST ID - MM - -OBTDC- SCHEME
BASELINE 6 MANIFOLD
CVS 636 8.33 12 PORT*
CVS EXP 2 10.31 12 PORT
CVS 637 12 PORT
CVS 638 10.72 12 PORT
r-vc PYD 11 .SI 12 PORT
COLD STABILIZED (BAG 2)
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO HC NOX
0.96
28.3 1.81 0.87
29.0 1.84 0.64
27.0 1.77 0.72
28.7 1.81 0.57
31.2 2.06 0.55
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
18.8
19.8
19.4
20.1
19.8
19.6
VOLUME
—
20.5
20.5
20.6
20.6
20.8
*SPARK DELAY VALVE
-------
TABLE III-6
1975 FTP RESULTS FOR 5" CATALYST SYSTEM
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
TEST ID
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
640
641
642
643
646
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
CO
0.
3.
3.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
70
78
19
30
47
83
40
44
85
77
73
70
HC
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
27
30
31
27
27
24
26
27
43
39
32
29
NOx
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.30
.30
.29
.21
.23
.29
.24
.25
.22
.22
.24
.23
FUEL
CONSUMPTION
L/100 KM -
CARBON
19.
20.
19.
19.
20.
20.
20.
21.
20.
21.
21.
21.
1
5
9
8
5
1
1
2
1
6
0
8
VOLUME
19.
21.
20.
—
21.
— —
21.
21.
21.
22.
21.
22.
9
2
8
0
2
2
0
0
6
2
COMMENTS
SET-UP TESTS
EFE DISCONNECTED
26 CID AIR PUMP
-------
TABLE III-7
EFFECT
COLD
OF 22 CID AIR PUMP ON VEHICLE EMISSIONS
STABILIZED (BAG 2)
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
TEST ID
CO
HC
NOx
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
STANDARD
CVS 650
CVS 651
CVS 652
AVERAGE
CVS 653
CVS 654
CVS 655
AVERAGE
0.15
0.18
0.14
0.16
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.29
0.25
0.24
0.26
0.13
0.16
0.14
0.14
0.17
0.20
0.19
0.19
20.6
22.4
20.6
21.2
22 C
22.0
22.2
23.1
22.4
VOLUME
1 9
22.
22.
22.
I D
22.
22.
23.
23.
CID
4
2
3
AIR
8
8
8
1
& FUEL CONSUMPTION
HOT
TRANSIENT (BAG 3)
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
AIR
0.44
0.38
0.25
0.36
PUMP
0.46
0.14
0.35
0.32
HC
NOx
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
VOLUME
PUMP
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.37
0.24
0.26
0.29
0.27
0.29
0.26
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.22
0.24
18.5
18.8
18.7
18.7
19.3
19.1
19.9
19.4
19.1
18.8
18.9
19.3
19.3
19.8
19.5
-------
TABLE III-8
TEST ID CO HC NOx CARBON VOLUME COMMENTS
1975 FTP
RESULTS FOR 4"
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
0.
0.
2.
1.
1.
1.
83
59
44
82
49
49
HC
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
34
29
35
42
33
36
NOx
0
0
0
0
0
0
.24
.42
.28
.27
.22
.23
CATALYST SYSTEM
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
21.
22.
22.
23.
22.
22.
4
8
8
5
6
8
VOLUME
21.
22.
22.
22.
22.
23.
2
4
4
8
8
8
CVS 656 0.83 0.34 0.24 21.4 21.2 SET-UP
CVS 658
CVS 660
CVS 661
CVS 662
CVS 663
1978 STANDARDS 2.11 0.25 0.25
-------
TABLE III-9
1975 FTP RESULTS •
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
TEST ID
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
664
666
671
675
681
683
698
699
CO
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
3.
3.
47
45
98
35
86
29
67
46
HC
0.39
0.39
0.33
0.38
0.28
0.35
0.45
0.40
NOx
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
1.
32
33
54
45
45
57
25
28
- ETV 25 REBASELINE
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
24
24
22
22
18
21
19
19
.0
.5
.4
.0
.8
.4
.6
.8
VOLUME
23.
23.
22.
22.
20.
21.
19.
20.
8
3
6
4
6
2
8
3
DESCRIPTION
f RICH AFR; 12° BTDC;
} PVA ; BPEGR- 1 0 . 3 1MM ;
(,26 CID PUMP
BPEGR-7.67MM
1975 OE EGR
f 1975 OE INITIAL
S TIMING & VACUUM
^ ADVANCE
(1975 OE EXHAUST
SYSTEM; CARBURETOR;
1 AIR PUMP
-------
TABLE 111-10
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL & REPEAT BASELINE TESTS
DESCRIPTION
ETV 24
ORIGINAL BASELINE
REPEAT BASELINE
FTP EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
1.25 0.29 1.37
3.57 0.42 1.27
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM - -L/100 KM -
HC NOx CARBON
18.1
19.6
VOLUME CARBON
18.8
19.9
14.4
14.1
VOLUME
13.8
13.7
ETV 26
ORIGINAL BASELINE
REPEAT BASELINE
1.35 0.30 0.90
2.54 0.50 1.05
18.8
19.8
19.0
20.3
15.1
14.3
13.9
14.3
-------
TABLE III-ll
EFFECT OF NOx CATALYSTS ON EXHAUST SYSTEM BACKPRESSURE
EXHAUST BACKPRESSURE AT EGR VALVE
VEHICLE SPEED
- MPH -
0 (DRIVE IDLE)
10
20
30
40
50
60
FRESH CATALYSTS
0.0151
0.0165
0.0156
0.0245
0.0383
0.0636
0.1024
USED CATALYSTS
0.0151
0.0161
0.0169
0.0267
0.0441
0.0726
0.1211
% CHANGE
0
-2%
8%
9%
15%
14%
18%
-------
TABLE 111-12
EFFECTS OF EGR SYSTEMS ON 1975 FTP EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION - ETV 24
TEST ID
CVS 706
CVS 720
CVS 722
CVS 724
CVS 730
CVS 731
CVS 738
CVS 741
CVS 742
CVS 747
CVS 752
CVS 754
CVS 711
CVS 714
CVS 717
CVS 719
CVS 751
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
1.09
0.94
0.50
0.86
1.03
1.23
1.15
0.81
1.12
1.54
1.46
0.98
1.42
0.44
0.44
0.28
1.28
HC
0.31
0.72*
0.27
0.37
0.26
0.28
0.25
0.19
0.22
0.28
0.25
0.24
0.31
0.23
0.24
0.21
0.30
NOx
0.45
0.47
0.49
0.50
0.35
0.37
0.78
0.41
0.45
0.46
0.47
0.52
0.29
0.34
0.35
0.30
0.29
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
19.9
20.3
20.3
20.1
20.7
20.9
19.4
19.4
20.3
20.5
20.1
19.8
21.6
21.6
19.9
21.6
21.4
VOLUME
21.2
21. 0\
21.01
20. 8J
21.9
22.0
20.6")
21.01
21.01
21.01
20.6 \
20. 3 J
21.2")
21.2
21.4
21.8 \
21.8 j
SYSTEM COMMENTS
1975 OE EGR
BPEGR: 7.67MM ORIFICE
STRONG SPRING
BPEGR: 10.69MM ORIFICE
STRONG SPRING
BPEGR: 7.67MM ORIFICE
STRONG SPRING
DUAL DIAPHRAGM EGR
*STARTING PROBLEMS
-------
TABLE 111-13
TEST ID
755
756
760
AVERAGE
ZERO MILE EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION RESULTS - ETV 24
FTP EMISSIONS FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- G/KM - - L/100 KM - - L/100 KM -
CO HC NOx CARBON VOLUME CARBON
0.48 0.21 0.49 19.6 20.3 13.8
0.44 0.22 0.50 19.8 20.3 13.8
0.55 0.25 0.53 19.8 20.1 14.2
0.49 0.23 0.51 19.7 20.2 13.9
VOLUME
14.3
14.3
14.5
14.4
-------
TABLE 111-14
1975 FTP CALIBRATION TESTS - ETV 25
TEST ID
CVS 757
CVS 759
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
723
727
733
748
761
762
764
765
766
767
772
773
EMISSIONS
CO
0.51
0.38
0.94
0.43
0.62
0.47
0.52
0.58
0.57
0.55
0.43
0.68
0.47
0.22
- G/KM
HC
0.23
0.22
0.21
0.21
0.28
0.24
0.23
0.23
0.19
0.26
0.22
0.20
0.19
0.17
-
NOx
0.62
0.80
0.53
0.65
0.48
0.46
0.49
0.37
0.60
0.70
0.43
0.40
0.42
0.39
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100
CARBON
18.4
19.8
17.6
17.8
20.3
18.8
18.5
19.4
18.4
22.8
19.4
18.8
18.8
17.7
KM -
VOLUME
19.6
21.0
20.3
19.8
21.8
20.1
19.8
20.1
19.8
19.9
20.5
20.1
19.9
—
COMMENTS
BPEGR: 7.67MM ORIFICE
STRONG SPRING
DUAL DIAPHRAGM EGR
-------
TABLE II1-15
1975 BASELINE
AVERAGE
ZERO MILE
(BPEGR)
AVERAGE
EPA ZERO MILE
AVERAGE
+A/C
)F BASELINE &
DUAL BED FTP/HIGHWAY TEST RESULTS - ETV 24 (BPEGR)
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
0.96
1.56
1.22
1.25
0.48
0.44
0.55
0.49
0.57
0.43
HC
0.30
0.32
0.24
0.28
0.21
0.22
0.25
0.23
0.16
0.14
NOx
1.24
1.41
1.45
1.37
0.49
0.50
0.53
0.51
0.55
0.57
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
-. L/100 KM -
CARBON
18.1
18.0
18.7
18.1
19.6
19.8
19.8
19.8
19.3
19.1
WEIGHT
18.7
19.0
18.8
20.3
20.3
20.1
20.3
HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
14.5
14.7
14.2
14.4
13.8
13.8
14.2
13.9
13.8
14.2
WEIGHT
13.9
14.0
13.7
13.8
14.3
14.3
14.5
14.3
0.50 0.15
0.38
0.14
0.56
0.60
19.2
19.0
14.0
13.3
-------
TABLE 111-16
CONGESTED FREEWAY DRIVING SCHEDULE SULFATE TEST RESULTS
SULFATE RESULTS
VEHICLE - MG/KM -
- ETV - NO. OF TESTS AVERAGE S.D. MAXIMUM MINIMUM
24(1) 8 7.0 2.3 10.3 4.3
25 8 38.3 4.8 47.1 33.1
(1) 0.001 WT % sulfur fuel used for preconditioning
0.011 WT % sulfur fuel used for tests
REFERENCE: Somers, etal, "Automotive Sulfate Emissions — A
Baseline Study", SAE Paper No. 770166, February
28 - March 4, 1977, IAEC&E, Cobo Hall, Detroit
-------
TABLE III-17
1975 BASELINE
AVERAGE
ZERO MILE
(DDEGR)
AVERAGE
ZERO MILE
(BPEGR)
>F BASELINE &
DUAL BED FTP/HIGHWAY TEST RESULTS - ETV 24 (DDEGR)
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
0.96
1.56
1.22
1.25
0.78
0.58
0.75
0.70
0.48
0.44
0.55
HC
0.30
0.32
0.24
0.28
0.30
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.21
0.22
0.25
NOx
1.24
1.41
1.45
1.37
0.32
0.30
0.28
0.30
0.49
0.50
0.53
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
18.1
18.0
18.7
18.1
21.0
20.6
21.2
20.9
19.6
19.8
19.8
VOLUME
18.7
19.0
18.8
21.4
21.0
21.3
21.2
20.3
20.3
20.1
HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
14.5
14.7
14.2
14.4
13.8
13.8
14.2
VOLUME
13.9
14.0
13.7
13.8
14.3
14.3
14.5
AVERAGE
0.49
0.23 0.51
19.8
20.3
13.9
14.3
-------
TABLE 111-18
1975 BASELINE
AVERAGE
ZERO MILE
(DDEGR)
AVERAGE
EPA ZERO MILE
AVERAGE
+A/C
ION OF
BASELINE & DUAL BED FTP/HIGHWAY TEST RESULTS - ETV 25
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
1.45
1.32
2.13
1.63
0.62
1.14
0.76
0.84
0.63
0.43
HC
0.84*
0.22
0.34
0.28
0.20
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.17
0.17
NOx
1.08
1.11
0.99
1.05
0.43
0.42
0.42
0.43
0.37
0.35
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
18.2
18.1
17.2
17.8
19.1
18.8
19.4
19.1
18.7
18.4
VOLUME
19.1
18.1
18.2
18.5
20.3
20.5
20.6
20.5
HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
15.3
13.6
14.1
14.3
13.6
13.8
13.8
13.8
13.4
13.4
VOLUME
13.5
13.1
13.4
13.3
14.2
14.7
14.7
14.5
0.53 0.17
0.44
0.18
0.36
0.36
18.5
19.0
13.4
13.9
*NOT INCLUDED IN AVERAGE
-------
TABLE 111-19
1975 FTP CALIBRATION TESTS - ETV 26
EMISSIONS FUEL CONSUMPTION
- G/KM - - L/100 KM -
TEST ID CO HC NOx CARBON VOLUME
CVS 783 1.42 0.35 0.42 20.8 21.2
CVS 784 0.54 0.30 0.44 21.6 22.2
CVS 788 0.38 0.28 0.47 22.2 22.2
CVS 798 0.60 0.20 0.40 20.6 21.4
CVS 802 0.45 0.19 0.39 20.6 21.2
CVS 811 0.81 0.19 0.36 19.6 19.9
CVS 815 0.97 0.21 0.32 20.3 20.5
-------
TABLE 111-20
COMPARISON OF FEEDGAS & TAILPIPE EMISSIONS - ETV 24
FTP EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
EC
NOx
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
VOLUME
FEEDGAS
44.1 1.58 0.49
45.8 1.68 0.53
44.7 1.65 0.53
21.2
21.2
21.4
21.0
20.8
21.0
AVERAGE
44.8 1.64 0.52
21.2
21.0
TAILPIPE
0.66 0.20 0.30
0.70 0.21 0.29
20.6
20.8
21.4
21.2
AVERAGE
0.68 0.21 0.30
20.6
21.2
REDUCTION
99% 87%
42%
-------
TABLE 111-21
COMPARISON OF FEEDGAS & TAILPIPE EMISSIONS - ETV 25
FTP EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
HC
NOx
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
VOLUME
FEEDGAS
42.1 1.40 0.58
34.8 1.34 0.70
31.7 1.27 0.75
19.9
19.8
19.8
20.6
20.6
19.9
AVERAGE
36.2 1.34 0.68
19.8
20.3
TAILPIPE
0.62
1.14
0.76
0.20
0.24
0.26
0.43
0.42
0.42
19.1
18.8
19.4
20.3
20.5
20.6
AVERAGE
0.84 0.24 0.43
19.1
20.5
REDUCTION
98%
82%
37%
-------
TABLE 111-22
COMPARISON OF FEEDGAS & TAILPIPE EMISSIONS - ETV 26
FTP EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
CO
IIC
NOx
FTP FUEL CONSUMPTION
- L/100 KM -
CARBON
VOLUME
FEEDGAS
28.8 1.38 0.55
26.9 1.36 0.57
28.5 1.35 0.56
19.3
19.4
19.4
19.9
19.9
20.5
AVERAGE
28.1 1.37 0.56
19.4
20.1
TAILPIPE
0.45
0.81
0.97
0.19
0.19
0.21
0.39
0.36
0.32
20.6
19.6
20.3
21.4
19.9
20.5
AVERAGE
0.74 0.20 0.36
20.2
20.5
REDUCTION
97%
85%
36%
-------
TABLE 111-23
EFFECT OF VARIOUS HEAT CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES ON AVERAGE FTP INLET TEMPERATURES
COLD STABILIZED INLET TEMPERATURE
- °C -
HOT TRANSIENT INLET TEMPERATURE
- 0C _
WITHOUT EGR
Stock Manifolds
Stock Manifolds &
Port Liners
Insulated Manifolds
Insulated Manifolds
& Port Liners
WITH EGR
Stock Manifolds
Stock Manifolds &
Port Liners
Insulated Manifolds
Insulated Manifolds
& Port Liners
DRIVER
409
463
481*
560*
456
483*
527*
553*
PASSENGER
462
507
529*
588*
502
533*
572*
585*
DRIVER
488
512
534*
609*
524
567*
583*
606*
PASSENGER
528
541
573*
631*
553
614*
618*
626*
*Two Test Average
-------
TABLE 111-24
EFFECT OF VARIOUS HEAT CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES ON CATALYST CONVERSION EFFICIENCY
WITHOUT EGR
Stock Manifolds (832/835)
Stock Manifolds & Port
Liners (918/920)
Insulated Manifolds
(855/838 & 845)
Insulated Manifolds & Port
Liners (948/947 & 952)
COLD STABILIZED (BAG 2)
- G/KM -
FEEDGAS TAILPIPE EFF
1.08 0.57 47%
1.07 0.76 28%
1.22 0,53* 57%
1.12 0.48* 57%
HOT TRANSIENT (BAG 3)
_ - G/KM -
FlEDGASTAILPIPEEFF
2.06 1.31 36%
2.24 1.85 18%
2.32 1.36* 41%
2.42 0.71* 71%
WITH EGR
Stock Manifolds (831/834)
Stock Manifolds & Port
Liners (917/922 & 923)
Insulated Manifolds
(856/839 & 846)
Insulated Manifolds & Port
Liners (985/944 & 954)
0.31
0.47
0.34
0.46
0.21
0.26
0,24*
0.24*
34%
45%
29%
47%
0.53 0.33 38%
0.75 0.48 36%
0.62 0.25* 60%
0.75 0.33* 56%
*Two Test Average
(/) Denotes CVS Test ID (Feedgas/Tailpipe)
-------
TABLE 111-25
1975 FTP CALIBRATION TESTS
- ETV 24 WITH PORT LINERS
EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
TEST ID
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
cvs
CVS
CVS
CVS
CVS
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
CO
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
0.
0.
61
18
65
02
00
72
35
31
64
78
HC
0.39
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.42
.35
.27
.31
.37
.29
.37
,32
.37
^ NOx
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
37
30
25
24
24
21
28
26
32
33
FUEL CONSUMPTION
- - L/100 KM -
CARBON
20.
21.
22.
22.
22.
22.
22.
21.
20.
20.
7
0
9
1
1
3
1
3
5
8
VOLUME
21
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
21
.1
.8
.5
.8
.5
.8
.4
.4
.1
.2
-------
TABLE 111-26
TEST ID (817, 820 & 822/799 & 801)
BAG 1
BAG 2
BAG 3
COMPOSITE
TEST ID (985 S 986/981 S 982)
BAG 1
BAG 2
BAG 3
COMPOSITE
CATION TECHNIQUES ON FTP
CONVERSION EFFICIENCY
HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
- G/KM -
FEEDGAS
TAILPIPE
NOxEMISSIONS
- G/KM -
EFF FEEDGAS
TAILPIPE
EFF
ORIGINAL HEADS & MANIFOLDS
1
1
1
1
.57
..70
.42
.64
0.
0.
0.
0.
39
14
19
21
PORT LINERS
2
2
1
.09
.31
.79
0.
0.
0.
74
19
25
75%
92%
87%
88%
&
65%
92%
86%
0.
0.
0.
0.
INSULATED
0.
0.
0.
87
34
58
52
0.
0.
0.
0.
47
22
32
30
46%
35%
45%
43%
MANIFOLDS
93
43
70
0.
0.
47
24
50%
45%
2.14
0.34
84%
0.61
0.27
56%
(/) Denotes CVS Test ID (Feedgas/Tailpipe)
-------
APPENDIX 1
GOULD URBAN DRIVING SCHEDULE
-------
GOULD URBAN DRIVING SCHEDULE
Durability Driving Schedule
Distance: 44.1 miles Time: 1. 7 hours
Average Speed: 26 mph
Base Station: Corner of Girdled Road and Painesville Ravenna Road
(OldRt. 44).
INSTRUCTIONS
Start of Route
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec
Accel to stop sign
Stop
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle
Accel to
Stop Idle
Accel to
Decel to
Accel to
Decel to
Accel tc
Stop Idle
Accel to
i-15 sec
40 mph
-15 sec.
40 mph
20 mph
40 mph
20 mph
40 mph
-15 sec.
30 mph
POSITION
190 and Vrooman Rd.
Stop Ahead (sign)
Stop sign Vroornan Rd.
and Carter
6351 Vrooman Rd.
Cemetery on right side
Stop sign Vrooman Rd.
and Leroy Center
Stop sign Vrooman Rd.
and Rt. 86
Leroy Chapel
Callow Rd.
P. H. Mitrovich sign
Rt. 86
Curve Rt. 86
After turn on Erakeman
MILEAGE
0
.3
.5
.8
1 2
1.5
1.5
1.9
2.1
2.3
3.3
3.8
-------
-2-
INSTRUCTIONS
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph (WOT)
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
POSITION MILEAGE
The Wills Family 4.1
Red Fence
Wood on left 4.35
Yellow house on right
High tension wires 4. 8
over raod
Stop sign at turn into 5. 3
Radcliffe
Turn onto Erakeman 5.5
45 mph sign
Curve sign 6.1
Second curve 6.3
Jet. 166 and Rt. 6 7.9
Turn then stop onto 608 8.1
Church on right 8.3
Haznbden Auto wrecking 8.9
Vyarwood Kennels 9.2
Cm-re 9.4
ABC Ready Mix 10.1
Claridon-Troy 10.5
Sisson Rd. (cross roads)
-------
-3-
INSTRUCTIONS
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 40 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
POSITION MILEAGE
Paradise Beach on left 10.9
Chardon Windsor Rd. 11. 4
Past intersection
Bridge 11.7
11796 Old State Rd. 12. 2
Armstrong Farm
White guard rail 12. 5
Stop at Stillwell Rd. 12. 9
Stop ahead sign 13. 3
Stop sign Rt. 322 13.6
After drive-in mail box 13. 7
White Bridge 14. 2
(white school bus stop bldg.)
Stop by Ensign Rd. 14. 7
Large blue silo 15. 4
RR crossing 15. 7
Granview Restaurant 18. 0
Cuyahoga River 16. 2
-------
- 4-
INSTRUCTIONS
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 30 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 25 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 30 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
POSITION
Cramer mail box-13689
Turn onto" Burton-Windsor
Road
Sugar house on left
Top of hill
RR crossing
Narrow Bridge
School sign
Welcome to Burton sign
Turn left onto Peckham Rd.
MILEAGE
16.5
17.2
17.5
17.8
18.1
18.4
19.6
19.9
•"Continue on Burton- Windsor Rd. - -
First house on left 20. 0
Center St. Intersection
Stop
Top of hill
Stop sign Burton Square
Turning onto Rt. 87
First drive past Ashland
20.3
20.8
20.9
21.3 4-
21.5
* Dependent on Road Conditions
-------
- 5 -
INSTRUCTIONS
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 45 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph
POSITION MILEAGE
Highway dept. on left 22. 0
bottom of hill
Aquilla Road 22. 7
John Fink house signs 23. 2
both sides of road
Turn right on Rt. 44 23.6
(north)
Gray building on right 24. 3
Redling mailbox
Twin Maples Used Furniture 24. 7
Butternut Road crossroad 25. 0
Geauga County Hospital 25. 9
Orange driveway posts 26. 4
Signal ahead sign 27.1
Turn left Rt. 322 27. 3
Teem sign on right 27. 7
Kazsucks Service 27.9
Texaco Station 28. 3
Geauga Lake sign 28. 9
-------
-6-
DjSTRUCTIONS
Dccel to 20 mph
Accel to 45 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 45 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 45 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 45 mph (WOT)
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 45 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 35 mph
POSITION
Top of hill
Gray Horse Farm
Turn right Auburn Rd.
Second 45 mph sign
Sherman Road
First 45 mph sign
Wilson Mills Road
First 45 mph sign
Thwing Road
First 45 mph sign
Second 45 mph sign
Chardon Road (Rt. 6)
High tension wires
45 mph sign
Keep right sign
Mentor Road
MILEAGE
29.3
29.5
30.0
30.6
30.8
31.7
32.1
32.8
33.0
33.3
33.5
33.9
34.2
34.8
35.1
-------
- 7-
INSTRUCTIONS
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Decel to 20 mph
Accel to 35 mph
Stop Idle-15 sec.
'Accel to 55 mph (WOT)
Stop Idle-15 sec.
Accel to 55 mph (WOT)
Etecel to Idle
Accel to 55 mph (WOT)
Dec«l end of run
POSITION
Red mailbox on left
Turn right at Clark
Clark and Rt. 44
Turn left onto Rt. 44
Entrance to 190
*I90 and Rt. 44
Rt. 86 overpass
Vrooman Exit
MILEAGE
35.3
35.6
35.9
39.9
44.1
Repeat Run
* Dependent on Itoad Conditions
-------
APPENDIX 2
EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION TESTS - ETV 24
-------
»r fc* [ JJM \J i [
I J si * **
it- .-3* DA'lr.::
v1- '-? I CL ~t
S:
MAhhL I J E
iKSI rv
\JA
.nY
P790
Si Ahi- i KOURLF vil.14 hLF,Ci'hIC FOr.L
KiFl) FIJEL 6« 030-;<. S 1 S 1 «. :< "JM H (.-;
*•<••* TF.SI DATA <"•*:
i'KMF: 7H
FhF.S: 7 51. 1 M "3 XX H G (' *'i i,J )
:J.fi. P.71 X!M Hi-. ( v"i- ):•.)
10U K <
hH: 6? /?
I^hinilA vtf'i.: 4000 LBS
Filr.L: HO III
CAC1):
CJ
HI:
C)
0
:
1
s
1
0
LBS
925.2*<-»
BA (-, 1
A I:-, KX
49 >• bS
773U
.00 441.00
.52 166.56
.09 75. 1 7
• 03 P. 20
I ;
BLOWfcK i
Ch/hhV:
BLJin'fch J
JJAf,
Alh
X'-6.
1 3 a
1.00
14.9*
1. 61
. 0.03
».V5 I >J. HP'.) (
jPhED: 3
. P9 19
iPM (CAD: 930.
P i-JAC,
f.\ Alh
• 6 S 1 1
r/ v". i
P. oo i.on
3P« 76 1/.J. 60
26. 59 1.07
1.59 O.U4
H.\
00
77.
1
HAG 3
V '< 1
1)1-
UOh
.g.JK
HC
CO
CO P.
MAS
VOX
HC
CO
CO P
'wEI
N/U
HC
CO
CO 2
X CCF) 1966. 23
5.93467
nKCTED CON CE.M I HAT 1 0:xJ
(PPM) 74. P 6
CPHM C) 153. 66
C jJP.X ) 4 1 1 . c- P
(.7.) p. id
S E3»i ISSUES (OKAYS/
9 : . 2 5
4 . -.» 3
26. 7O
2230.28
nHI'KO MASS KM I SS IONS
1.09
O.49
1. 55
671. 79
3410. P5
g. 409 34
3
25. 17
19. 1*
1* 03
1. 56
BAO,)
5. 44
"1.0^
0. IP
2780. 7P
CttKAMS/MILE)
19i3K. x
5.9986
76.53
24. 3 S
1 . O'i
P . pi)
>.6S
0. 79
0.07
2278.37
HIKL r.
(MIL)r..S/(-;AL)
-------
*** 1 DM 1 I HCA1I ) j k**
fr.hl J-/A1K: {-./X^/T^ ivJAD IrSl: \i A
V/H.HICLK: ^iU H^J uld vt.i,: LAUn'f
XAlhnlAL: -.•.;•?,' At-"..))
*n f (Dn'i) '^6«??71 .viW Hii (vAi-)J-)
100 h (vil.<) c>6-07i> I ?. 19.77S lv. ri;;o CJUlL".i)
HEKIIA *!•: 4000 LBS LUKL: HJ III Cr/hhv: .y?19
BL'J V»Kri UPX ( AC T): 9 26 .134 HL.) w, i-,J<
BAii 1 F'Ai-. 2 MAli .<
>1 13^33 7*/j.<
C'J (FHV. > 1.00 71>.O'.»
MOA (PlJ11) 1.04 r<3.60 1.34 3^.17 1.17 H'>.5H
CO« (5f) 0.03 M.3'J O.04 1.5H O.03 i*. H3
**fc UMLuOLAi *•;).' 1:;-..SHLTS ***
vv'IK CCr) ly»*.*.^/i :^i)7.3S 1'>•<*./iv
Of S.S^H61 r«. 46301 5. V V< 1 S
COKhECfED CO>JCK^InAl IU\JS
MO A
KC CPPX C)
CO
rf* /. ^^
16. 0^
1. 03
1. S'J
HI. f-1
ii3. 6v>
l.OS
H. ^1
M-M
HC
CO
CO «
kKI GHitD MASS
iNJOX
riC
C)
lO.Hil 6.^7
6. C.'iT 0.90
43« V 1 0. 1M
•* ISSUES (GhAMS/KILfc)
0. hH
',-». hO
677. 19
•', ILFS/t'AL)
1 :i. 1-J
JO. f^<
0. 77
0.07
-------
*** I DKJI I F1CAIIO ***
l^Si LA IE: 7/1/75 rOAD 1 KS 1 : MA
VEHICLE: F.fV 24 UKI V/F.h: YME :<
MAiKhlAL: fiK'«'. B A S fr.L I \i >. I'KSl YILES: 2'<5*VX
'Jl'S: FACiihY SPECS 3nD HAbKLl^K CVS
WEIGHTED FUEL 6220-3715 10./JMPH
**•* IESf DAiA ***
74 F (i."El> HHKS: 751. 99 S MM riCi
H^ F CUHif) ?'--7.e!c> liUS. n:)
RLO*Ki-v nKVS 7«/*^ 13/4^8 '/><:•> 3
CJ CPH'O 1:-?.. 00 S3S.OO 13-00 1^.(JO 13-00 ^0-00
HC CPPM C) 18.96 131- 20 .1/4.32 37-00 1^. '+i\ '•(S-l-!
^JK CPP«) 0-B7 9«-60 1-HO 29-14 l.'J^ ^O-OO
COP (7) 0-OS y.60 0-07 1.60 0-07 2. 3>>
*** CALCULAIKJJ hK.Sl.lLTS ***
PAi-. 1 bAi-i ^ BAin 3
\/''UX (CF) 1999-11 3483.1 a 199V4. 27
DJ- 5.03239 8-3-1201 5-7',^
91.9 0
1 16.01
486.90
2. "56
97. 56
14.39
5.86
1-54
7K . 7*
23- 35
8-16
a. «6
12. *H
3. 79
32.09
6* • H 3
6O I-/
• ct?
0.80
0.66
2746. 25
10- 4f>
0. V'i
0- 5/i
2352- f-6
\J.)X
HC (PPM C)
CO C PPM )
CO a C%)
MASS EMISSIONS < UtlAMS/PAG)
HC
CO
WF.IGHJED MASS EMISSIONS < (iHAMS/M ILE)
f •
;gox 2.33
HC 0.36
C J 1-^7
CO 2 697.98
FUEL EO-HOMi' CM ILF.S/(iAL)
KPAXPG 12.57
-------
^ *
1Kb I DA IE: e/6/75
VEHICLE: F'i'V 04
M A i KhI AL: GE'-i i>Uv M I r..i
1KS1: \IA
.n: LArtiVi'
I RSI -«HLES: 0
COMMENTS:
5.980-3. 5tfO=240O=lP. 95
FIRST CVS ivl IH CATALYSTS OOOD KIN
TEST DATA
TFMJ-: 6* F CV/'vT)
7S F (Di'lf)
96 F CMiA)
RH! 70 7
I >» FH TI A W I . : 4000 L RS
FUKL: HO III
RLO WF.H RPM ( A C f ) : 9 Kb . 4 7 7
HA '
AI
J CIXJLFI)
19.1635 IM. HHO CO(llLKl)
BLOfe'FH SPEED: 3
CF/HFV: .3008
K hPM (CAL): 983. S3/4
AI
f3 3
AI K .-. \
TME (SECM
50.
*.« ^7
'.4
sos
. 6
PL')'*' Eh rFVS 7H01 13-iPP 7*96
CO CPPM)
HC CPP*! C)
>JJ< (PPM)
CJc! (?)
1.
9.
o.
o.
*
00
44
H2
04
** i
PS. 00 . 1.00
50.00 R. 76
41-00' 1-32
P. 05 0.03
; A L l ; "L A 1 Ei J h F S OL
"a.
2y.
19.
1.
IS *
00
60
40
29
**
1.
9.
1.
o.
00 .
P.4
14
03
2. 00
p ; . -, .j
^7. (iy
1.8K
13 A G 3
CCH)
DF
COnKECTED CONCfeN
^O X. ( PPM )
HC CPHM C)
CO ( ypM )
00 >. ( -)
MASS EMISSIONS
MOX
HC
CO
CO* rf
VElliHi-KU MASS K>j
HC
CO
C02
6- 513P.5
T«ATIO^S
40. 3 1
4P. 01
PP.. 6P
P.. ();->
C(-;iiAV:.s/ M<
4.6f
1.40
1. 53
1 5P.57
I SSI J\S
o.as
0. 1 1
!k?3.67
10.367
14. 68
1 . OP
1. 86
>M
3. 7)
0.84
0. IP.
?.319.91
CGHAi4S/MILE>
7. 1157
46. OP
P1. 76
1 • 04
s. s;
0. 73
O.O7
1986.03
fUKL F
EPA-MHli
JMY
15-ay
-------
I -i k *• « I i / , .-M- k • f ' »
I0\i
1 i >A it: 8- 9- 7 S r..)'"> D J • .S I : •) '\
i 1 CL. r : u""lv ^-4 unlVf-.a: '- IO. '-'
t.r. I'AL: nK" 6^ JijAJF 1KS1 :" IL>..S: ..il;J.)
IS: . FIHSI iv.M OF MKSK CATAL^Si
54.K/4K. )»8S.'>/7(). « CJNJU. HF.FJKK i.-..si UUS
kt^k i K.S'l |)AIA *=»:)«
66 F (wMi) Fh^S: 7bO« ^P-b WVi Hb Ct'-AhO)
7r< F (Lmi) ?./).(> 17 MX ;-i(- (WiHMO
*3 H ('41 A) ^S. 375 I.xl. H^J (I>]LKi)
F4: 56 2 ly./iHb I\). .4^0 OHULr.l)
IMRnllA 1-. U: 4000 LHh FiLOWEh SPEED: J
FUFL: HO III Ch/hKV/: .3010
BLOlvKK nPM ( AU i) : 9Hfct.H:.W DL1)1/.'?:^ hF'/j (GAL):
1 I < F ( S i-.i; S )
hL. ).vF.h iiKVS
CJ (Pi-0)
HC CPPM C)
l\
1.
7.
0.
o.
"HA in 1
It- KX
Si >3
00 33^-00
R4 57. ^ a
49 6^.96
04 .«. 50
A
1.
S.
o.
0.
HA(i
Ih
P. ^J .
Of)
HO
70
06
•j
K.\
f,
i - »
17
HO.
P.S.
1.
00
H4
SI
41
A
1.
7.
0.
o.
•nAfi 3
I ;•
ir-,o->. /j
00 '^.00
3n 31-0'<
57 (/i.Mf-
06 a. 00
C02 (7)
•!«** CALC'JLA 1 !v!> h^SULTS ***
BAB 1
VMI< (CF) 8070.63
DF 5. JHiO/i
CO HK KG JED CO \J C£ •JIB AT I DM S
HC (PPM C)
CO ( PKM >
CO ^ ( 5J >
MASS Fi-ilSSI'JM.S ( GHAT'S/ BAG)
6^. 56
51. 3 7
3 IS. 76
'->. -47
£4.8«
15- 65
1 . 03
1. 36
63. 7*
'->4. 8 '->
1 . 0 S
1 . •) S
HC
CO
CO 9
y. 04
1. 74
! 1 . 5 *
.4. 56
4.97
0.91
O. 1 y
«5?.9. 59
7 « 3 f--
0 » ^ 4
0.07
^ioy. i y
MASS EMISSIONS (GHAMS/M1LE)
>IOA 1.6K
HG O.a9
CO .1.36
CO a 649.^1
-------
fc * V It i- »• I >/ S f- 1 ** t '
k* t "Kvi i I H ICA1 10 >)
it-si OAIF: 9-^-75
v/V-il CL-.: c:iJ ->£
(vj A j H.,; i ^L ; G h;"i 6^-0.'V' J K
• KJAf; ir.Si: MA
I'al y}-:j-: L^iii-.f
1 KM •»' ILKS: 400
2 >J'I>J. POP. I Afh BAtj 1 <>• S Mt.V
HAfi 3 ^J.S :^KC. PORTED AIR 'r>. S v.
;Ai;.y. H.-'xJ t-,1 :-i j '
iHM ij ) i
K (. > F.D
f ( ')i-f)
!• CMIX)
1 M hu i I A •. i . : 4000 LBS
FUFJ-: HO III
HLOlnEK
(AC1>: 9^
S8 V^i?. ^ 3 S Mix! H i - ( • > A
I si
( I N»|- - i
HXU
BLO.-.F.H SPEKU: 3
*H1 (CAL):
A 1 X K \
I h
7V' >
'('•'. I
C.J (
H'; (
M l\ (
- 00
J3.UU
o
0 • W
0.0/4
0 • /J 4
O.O4
(CM
COHKKCI KD CO >J CK:>J 1 KA I ION S
3. 1?
*** tX'L.CULAi FU KFSUL1S
BAG 1 HAG 3
18
0 • !S 3
0.04
BAG 3
\j J v
HC
CO
U ) '
\AS
M )'
HJ
UU
0^
VEI
>JOX
rlC
CO
covj
CPP-:. > ,->-'!.
(i PM G) 113-
(r< -•"> n.'j.
(-•> v
S '-^H .-» S I 0 \J o Ci'-it-.O
>>.
0«
HO.
.J.J.3IS.
GrllFJJ MASS KM I SSI
o.
o.
1 .
7.-< 7.
S3
i 7
•! 1
1 ; )
^,/^
«J»*
71
.-1
'**
OMS
'-)->
^
3S
^1
6.
14.
7.
1.
.,0)
1 .
O.
0-
3 OHO.
03
7*
3S
6':
0'
<('•>
*7
1 ^
1 6. 4>i
y i . 3 7
7. 7 '
•-». 3-1
l.V-
0. 73
U- S3
"MriiHVJ. f 1
(Gi
11
-------
i •• '.•> i i.>A i'h: 9- V- 7\
viKHICL^: Klv ^.j/H"
KAI - M ";L: (.i"'-- '-r.-.J: / .) '
i -.JMi If I r'VI I 3 . *« 1 : vA
i > • f \ / ">• • • • I f\ '•- '-t f
' f * - 1 v . . . . • ij * * , . i \ J
i;-.:>i '.i (,-.->: ''i-J-i
T r ( ••-.! )
V) 1- C/)i-,O
.IK ? (VI \)
4(.i 7-
lA WT. : /JOOO L3.S
H'F.L: HO III
BL'J WEK uP/i (ACT): 9 ?P
CM
HO
\JOX
CO 2
C)
4. 56
0.37
0.04
«.:\
1 ?• 76 S ' i'-
'-'S. .1 IN). H :•' » C i -,'L i '>
•'^.O. .* [ \). :-
Ot 3
CH/i-.Ev: . 30PS
RF^J ,•' V:K hf'vi ( GAL ) : 9 «.^ . ."i/t
Alh
/<.oo
4.. 76
(CM
'-i.9y 0.04
*** GALGtJLAl'El) Kf..v
bAG 1 'M*Mi v»
•^1^3. ,1><
4. S 1 ^ 7 9
CO^.KKG 1 F.iJ GO MGE>) 1 KA'l I O M S
30.
-------
tr V »• k fc tf j , \J S '• '.-M ) k k * * '
*• K
j ",.s i lAl'F.t J-lu-VS r.J^-L- ] r- > 1 : \i;>
v/"HI CL"-': -"IV VJ !>i.Iv;:i: L-'.-ri
V -u .-.r.l.'iL: <>
C JV'F.J i's: 3'.>4-/-j CG 1*7*'. 3 ^CA: H-J DKbnji.r u
* ' '• 1 KS J '-'Ai A «• * *
•M h (M1 X) '•"> S. *J I -J. n;'O < I . <\'\{- 3
Al h u A ?M J- b'X AI i-. '-. %
jjw fm.,;s> S'O- ' .-'-f'i.-i su'v
C'J (i-r>') Ifi.UO •'VSu.uu 13. OO v>1.0CI Ib.O'l
ffG CHH-< C) r>. 3^ .SS^'.'JO 5. Hit l^.l;> s. S'J
•n JA (i-iv>1) 0.3b ^'-'.OO 0.36 l3.7L-> 0.^7
C)^ ( ?^ O.H/J •s.tift ().;).-'( l.ft'-i 0. U4
(c * * ij-'Li ML •> i i- u i-M. S'.'L j s "= **
V-^'IX CCP) V>'J7/».^«3
Dt- .4*5 ,-«.1
(JOhr.EUi F.D COWC-'A1 IhAliO^.1,
H C ( r-r-v. C ) S/i ^ . 7 •) \ 4 . h 6
C-J ( r r"', > P.S7 9 . S3 .-• . •< 4
C J .SIO MS ( l-h A-v- S/ ;-3 u.«s
CO 176. /i 7 1.IJ4
U'Jrf *64^.H-> a9C3.6:d
W r I bri 1 ED N! ASS r-M 1 SS I OM S ( 6HAM S/M IL fc >
>K)X 0. f 0 £jCdfc-
HC 1 . ^s
co iu.^< fK-OMT
C0i> 733.63 ./^ C
3S. 31
PS. jn
1 *i. 30
0« ^H
0. J'<
a4
-------
> •< * k >• >• i ; v :-. * • X ;i * * k * *
* I-* I r -"M i I h t CAi ! ) ) k ki
iKSi DAiT::- 9-11-7S hjao i KM : .': Kiv/ ;->.<'j "ulv*; ; LA.-i.i
;«3AiF.hIAL: GF.-/; 6*-OD/Jr" i r.S i -XIL,*-,.,: D
! 37t«« CC 1^-78. 1 SKC. 3P I>Kfin£F. C HJi-1-i.t
30 SRC. ;i i i i>. S i"I>). x) ) I/AC. Ai Sl'Ai-I '.I h M'-> 1
Vk'- iP.Sl l)Ai'\ kk*
l^MP: 70 1- C'.K'l) i-M-RSt" 7^M-=)^!S .M1-! :f C'-Ai.))
j< /j j. (i;i;-'i'> '?. ) • ?• ' I 'X.V'J MK C vA 1-iJ nl
9; h CKI/-.) ^r«P IJ. H.«) (i^LF. 1)
hrf: /I9 % 19.4<>5 ' l.'J* H«U (JlJlLKl)
IMF.hTIA Wl.J '4OOfJ LH.S HLJivKri bPhEOt 3
i-UFl.: H'J HI Ch/t.r.w: .:U)ls
bLOWEh KPM' C\C15: y^d.S'S'J J^L-J ••.'-.« KH^ (GAL): 9P,8.^'?9
!\iri c' v '-Ti- K:-; A
il'X'f. (brlJS) .S()S..'J '< e- / . M
HLJ*K« nH.vS 7'>--).l l.i/i,.-i'-i /f
C) ((-!-*•/•) 10. UO :-''H7.OO ' 1-M')iJ 1^-00 13.UO
HC ( PI-''! C) . '/.OS llf-.-'iJ 7. •>10X ( hi-'M) 3 1 • SfS
HC • ( i-V*) C> 111* ci9
C.) CPK'l) 184. 3W
COW (?) H. J«
14.69
1 S. 38
7.^0
1.7P.
1H. (J'-i
;?s. i A
1 S. 77
«. 37
MA S3 FMISSIO\IS
\J()X
HC
CO
CJ3
WFI bHi
MOX
HC
CO
QJP
3.
3.
1 '--I .
310>%
r.D MASS KM I SSI
0.
o.
•I).
7^'-.
7U
70
3y
^5
.J:MS
77
39
-Jl
.•u'l
:P . 9 6
1). (i'<
0.9U
3189. 17
(GhAMS/MILE)
'?. • \r'.
0 • * /t
1 • O <-
:•> s 1 6 • 3 6
ll.'-ll
-------
****** CVS 636 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 9-23-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM NONE
ROAD TESTI NA
DRIVER* MIKE E
TEST MILES* 3139
COMMENTS*
18 BTDC .328 ORFICE PORTED VAC* VITH SPARK DELAY VALVE
GOOD START -HIGH IDLE SPEED TOO LOW 27 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA *+*
TEMPS 61 F CVET)
76 F (DRY)
95 F
504.3
7802
15. 50 1954*00
8*96 340*84
0.65 69*43
0.04 2*36
BAG 2
AIR EX
867*2
13419
23*20 1600*00
9. 60 2O4. 68
1*01 31*85
0.04 1.43
BAG
AIR
EX
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2064*42
5* 19779
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
63*91
333.60
1827*00
2*33
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)'
NOX
HC
CO
002
7*05
11.25
124*35
2505*99
\
BAG 2
3550*69
8*3544
30*96
196*23
1514*61
1*39
5*45
11*38
177*31
2582* 70
511
7906
17.50 1803*00
9*32 249*96
0.87 75*13
0*05 1*95
BAG 3
2091.94
6*24377
74*40
242. 13
1696*94
1*91
7*72
8.27
117.04
2061*53
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1. 72
2.79
39. 67
646. 23
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/G/V.)
EPAMPG 12.43
-------
****** cv/S 637 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-25-75
VEHICLE: ETv/ 24
MATERIAL: GEw NONE
ROAD lESTl NA
DRIVER: LARRY
tEST MILES: 31/'3
COMMENTS:
.408 ORIFICE
PORTED VAC.
12 BTDC
29 DEGREE
C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 63 F
79 F
93 F
RH: 40 X
INERTIA WT«:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRif)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REv/S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NO-< (PPM)
C02 (%)
928.408
BAG 1
AIR E;
504.4
7606
43.00 2347
7.24 422
0.74 45
0.04 2
PRES: 746-935 MM riG O.3ARO)
25.509 MM rtG (VAPOR)
25.725 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN* H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3021
BLOWER RPM (CALX 928*428
00
00
00
34
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.4
13451
65.00 1572.00
9.56 200.80
0.83 26.10
0.04 1.47
39
10
1
0
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
7dl3
•00 1712.
•16 267.
.48 53.
.04 1.
00
20
60
98
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2051.82
5. 14732
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
KG (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
44.40
416.17
2176.76
2.31
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
4.61
13.94
147.25
2469.37
BAG 2
3535.62
8.16674
25*37
192.41
1450.90
1.43
4.54
11.11
169.13
2645.70
BAG 3
2053.66
6.17744
52.36
258.68
1592-36
1.95
5-
8-
107.
2084.
45
68
82
65
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.28
2.94
39. 19
652.77
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.35
-------
CVS
*-<****
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-26-75
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS:
.422 ORIFICE
PORTED VAC.
ROAD TEST: ivJA
DRIVER: LARR*
TEST MILES: 3216
12 BTDC
27 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 64 F
79 F
98 F
RH: 43 Z
INERTIA WT. :
FUELJ HO III
BLOWER RPM (
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER HEVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
(WET)
( DRtf )
(MIX)
4000
ACT):
LBS
928.
BAG
AIR
506
352
I
EX
.2
7634
12
7
0
0
.00 1
.92
• 33
• 04
868.
375.
44.
2.
00
60
20
56
PrtES: 747.135 MM KG (BAUO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
25-55 IN. H20 (IMLED
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3018
BLOWER RPM (GAL): 928-446
BAG 2
AIR EX
13434
31.00 1639.00
11. 66 207.20
1.00 20.40
0*04 1*44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
(CF)
BAG 1
2058-96
DF
CORRECTED COMCEMTHATIQMS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
( PPM)
(X)
43-54
369.32
1740.62
2.53
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
i\»OX
HC
CO
CO 2
4.63
12.42
1 IB. 16
2714.75
BAG 2
3530.d
6.28285
19.52
196.93
1543-92
1*40
3.56
11.35
179.73
2586.73
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.7
7 80'3
21.00 1771-00
9.48 260-150
0.80 42.70
0-04 2.00
BAG 3
2052-14
6.10784
42.03
252.87
1660.90
1.97
4.46
8-47
1 12.38
2104.59
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS CGRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.08
2-87
39.28
660.49
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
12.08
-------
****** CVS 640 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEI 9-26-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-OD/OE
ROAD TEST! NA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILES* 100
COMMENTS!
.406 ORIFICE PORTED VAC.
INTER. SPRING HOT START
12 BTDC
28 DEGREE
TEMPt
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
64
80
98
RHS 41 X
INERTIA WT* !
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) I
*** TEST DATA ***
PRESS
4000 LBS
983*666
747.635 MM HG (BARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.55 IN. H20 < INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3016
BLOWER RPM (CAL)l 928*464
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO8 (X)
BAG 1
AIR EX
504.9
7813
26*00 253*00
7*36 78*80
0*80 24.90
0*04 2*48
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.9
13446
19.00 26*00
7* 24 29* 48
0*72 7.97
O*04 1*64
BAG 3
AIR EX
504. 7
7816
12.00 42.00
7.04 55*20
0*62 19.30
0*04 2*24
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2053. 18
5*33517
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
24.25
72.82
216*72
2.45
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.56
2.44
14.67
2620*68
BAG 2
3533.48
8*14376
7.34
23. 13
8.39
1.60
1.33
1.33
0*98
2957*39
BAG 3
2053*97
5*95692
18*78
49.34
29.78
2*21
1*98
1.65
2*02
2363.71
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.43
0.44
1. 12
724*21
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.33
-------
****** CVS 641 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEI 9-29-75
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68 OO/OE
ROAD TESTS MA
DRIVERS LARRY
TEST MILESS 115
COMMENTS!
N OF
VEHICLE NOT RUN FOR 2 FULL DAYS. NO VAC* ADV. FIRST 2 MI
FIRST BAG* TOO MUSCH CHOKE BAG ONE 3802CC 11.1MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS 61 F CWET)
79 F (DRY)
90 F (MIX)
RHs 34 X
INERTIA VT«S 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM S 928*517
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 751*385 MM HG CBARO)
25*509 MM HG C VAPOR)
25*725 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3017
BLOWER RPM
-------
****** CVS 643 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-1-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-0 D/OE
ROAD TEST I MA
DRIVERS LARRY
TEST MILESS 175
COMMENT Si
TEMPI
.422 ORIFICE .225 DEPTH
PORTED VAC* 27 DEGREE C
12 BTEDC
*** TEST DATA ***
F (WET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
62
75
98
RHS 47 X
INERTIA WT. t
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I 928*333
4000 LBS
PRESS 745*585 MM HG (BARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*725 IN. H20 (INLET)
19*6 IN* H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3022
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928-428
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X>
BAG 1
AIR EX
504. 6
7809
10.00 71.00
6*36 94.40
0*47 17.70
0. 04 2. 69
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.5
13435
10.00
6.72
0.68
0.04
18.00
28.56
5.64
1*65
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2049.37
4.95184
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
17.32
89.32
58.39
2.66
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.81
2.99
3.95
2840.81
BAG 2
3525.84
8.09877
5.04
22.67
8*52
1.61
0.91
1*31
0.99
2969.43
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.2
7802
9.60 34.00
6*16 44.00
0.55 15.30
0.04 2.32
BAG 3
2047.53
5.75701
14*85
38.91
24.15
2*29
1.55
1*30
1.63
2441.98
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*34
0.44
0.48
744.39
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11*90
-------
****** CVS 646 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-2-75
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-0D/OE
ROAD TESTl MA
DRIVERS MIKE E
TEST MILES! 190
COMMENTS!
.422 ORIFICE .175 DEPHT 12 BTDC PORTED VAC.
FRONT VAC* BREAK CLOSED *0i4
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS
59 F (WET)
77 F (DRY)
98 F (MIX)
RHS 32 X
INERTIA WT.S 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOVER RPM
DF
2059. 26
4*81138
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
22.38
92*39
145*68
2*73
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2*18
3*11
9*89
2929*95
3526*81
7. 59408
5.06
22*65
6*80
1*73
0*85
1.30
O.79
3173*17
510.8
7905
13.00 27.00
6.84 38.72
0.63 18.30
0*04 2*30
BAG 3
2085.38
5.30986
17*78
33*06
14*87
2.27
1*76
1*13
1*02
2465* 30
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*37
0.44
O. 75
778*44
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.45
-------
****** CVS 649 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-3-75
VEHICLE! ETV 04
MATERIALS GEM 68-0D/OE
ROAD TESTl MA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILESt 205
COMMENTS!
OF TEST
TEMP* 47 F
78 F
99 F
RHS 24 X
INERTIA WT.I
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
• 422 ORIFICE • 175 DEPTH REAR VAC* BRK. .182 12 BTDC
PORTED VAC. ADV. EFE VALVE IS ON. 3 MIN. 15 SEC. AT START
*** TEST DATA ***
HC CPPM C>
NOX CPPM)
CO2 (X>
928.612
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.4
7823
8.40 310*00
6.76 76.00
0.68 28.10
0.05 2.70
PRESS 756.935 MM H6 CBARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928.499
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.6
13427
10.00 18.00
7.04 26.76
0.63 8.51
0.05 1.70
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2072.97
4.89632
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
27.56
70.62
284.85
2.66
MASS EMISSIONS (GRM4S/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.60
2*39
19.47
2875.84
BAG 2
3557.95
7.86199
7.96
20*62
8.61
1*66
1*29
1*20
1*01
3073.32
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
7814
9.00 23.00
6.84 36*36
0*48 20.40
0*05 2.28
BAG 3
2070. 59
5*86224
20.00
30.69
14.41
2*24
1.88
1.04
0.98
2417.19
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.46
0.38
1.33
758.36
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG U«71
-------
CVS 650 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-4-75
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-0D/OE
COMMENTS!
NO EFE VALVE
.422 ORIFICE
ROAD TESTt NA
DRIVERS LARRY
TEST MILES! 220
12 BTDC
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS 58 F (WET)
78 F (DRY)
98 F (MIX)
RHS 27 X
INERTIA WT.S 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)s 928*292
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 754.635 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*375 IN. H2O (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928*464
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM >
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
506.3
7834
11.00 97.00
8.84 74.40
0*41 26*50
0*04 2.68
BAG 2
AIR EX
668*5
13436
14.00 21*00
9.84 32.04
0. 64 5. 59
0*05 1*68
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2076*3
4.9693
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
26.17
67.34
62.44
2.65
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.51
2-28
5«64
2867*28
BAG 2
3561*04
7.95149
5*03
23.44
8*01
1*64
0*83
1.36
0.94
3038.72
BAG 3
AIR EX
520* 1
8047
12*00 49.00
9*48 46.80
0*52 17.30
0*04 2.28
BAG 3
2132.75
5*85326
16-87
36*94
36*56
2.25
1*66
1.36
2.57
2499*00
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*36
0.42
0*64
759*48
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG
11.68
-------
****** CVS 651 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE! 10-6-75
ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 680D/OE
TEST
VEHICLE!
ROAD TEST! NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILESt 231
COMMENTS!
TEMP'
RHt
96
F {«R
F (MIX)
3S If?I m AT"
*** TEST DATA ***
PRES:
mm
'INERTIA WT.! 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)l 928.574
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEED!
CF/REVI .3013
BLOWER RPM (CAL)! 928.481
IN.
IN.
3
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
BAG 1
AIR EX
504.85
7812
9.40 117.00
6*68 79*68
0*06 26.05
0*04 2.80
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.65
13428
10.50 19.70
7*48 30.00
0.17 5.44
0*05 1.83
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG i BAG 2
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2060.33
4. 75367
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
26*00
74.41
101-75
2.77
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
COS
2.74
2.50
6.91
2974.55
3541.49
7.30296
5.29
23.54
9.80
1.79
0.96
1.36
1.14
3300.10
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
8:
0.71
804.98
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.11
BAG 3
AIR EX
504. 7
7812
10*50 43*20
6.80 45.80
0*20 16*26
0.06 2.43
BAG 3
2060.33
5.49487
16. 10
40.24
32. 11
2*38
1.70
1.35
2.
2558.
18
21
-------
****** CVS 652 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEt 10-7-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-0D/OE
ROAD TEST! MA
ORIVERt LARRY
TEST MILESS 241
COMMENTS!
• 422 ORIFICE 12 BTDC PORTED VAC. HC NUMBERS ?
REAR VAC* BRK. .175 11*19 MPG 28 DEGREE C 3755 CC
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
CMIX)
60
78
99
RHS 33 *
INERTIA WT.S
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S
4000 LBS
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
928.623
BAG 1
AIR EX
504
7809
20*00
18. 12
0.61
0.04
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
PRESS 752*435 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*55 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .3012
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928*464
BAG 3
AIR EX
i. 5
19
328.00
127.60
23*10
2.65
868.3
13439
20.00 26.00
28*16 67.60
0.75 5.90
0*05 1*68
505.4
7821
17*00 37.00
32.32 82.40
0.65 15*90
0*05 2*40
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2059-94
4.97487
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
COS (f)
22.61
113*12
291.96
2* 62
MASS EMISSIONS (GROSS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
002
2.23
3.81
19.83
2812.45
BAG 2
3545-07
7*93252
5*24
42.99
7.59
1*64
0.89
2*49
0*89
3025* 13
BAG 3
2063* 1
5*55618
15.37
55.90
21. 10
2*36
1.52
1.88
1.44
2538*06
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.36
0.69
1.36
757.49
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CPAMPG 11*68
-------
****** CVS 653 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-8-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OD/OE
COMMENTS:
.422 ORIFICE 12
RESAR BRK. .175
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 261
BTDC PORTED VAC. 28 DEGREE C
HIGH VOL. AIR PUMP <26 CFM) 10.71 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 58
75
99
RH: 34 X
INERTIA WT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
928.479
BAG 1
AIR EX
507.8
7858
29.00 274.00
19.20 126.00
1*06 19.00
PRESt 749*135 MM HG (BARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.375 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3014
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.464
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.2
13433
31.00 36.00
20.12 48.80
1.14 7.52
BAG
AIR
EX
505.4
7823
34.00 71.00
18.20 78.40
1.24 16.30
0.05
2.92
0*05
1.80 0.05
2.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2065.71
4. 52984
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
18.
111.
233.
17
04
2.88
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.78
3. 75
15-89
3103*65
BAG 2
3531.27
7.41021
6.53
31*40
7.84
1*76
1.09
1.81
0.91
3235.15
BAG 3
2056. 51
5.37177
15.29
63.59
39.46
2.44
1.49
2. 14
2.68
2616.08
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
cog
0.36
0.62
U24
808*12
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
10.93
-------
****** CVS 654 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10l9t75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68 OD/OE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES! 280
COMMENTS I
L
TEMPI
.422 - 12 DEGREE BTDC - PORTED VAC. ADV. - NO EFE
HI VOL. AIR PUMP - 3855 CC » 10.90 MPG AT 28 DEGREE C FUE
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
64
77
95
RHt 48 t
INERTIA WT.S
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
*** TEST DATA ***
PRESS
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER KEVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
002 (X>
928.508
BAG 1
AIR EX
504. 35
7804
11.90 279.00
11.08 110.00
0.28 19.29
0.05 2.78
747*185 MM HG (BARO)
23.756 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*375 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVt .3016
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928*464
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
868.15
1 3433
13.00 20.40
11.56
0.37
0.06
36.88
6.95
1.81
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2061-61
4.7 5688
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (Z>
19.07
101*25
250.49
2. 74
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2*06
3.41
17. 03
2946.40
BAG 2
3548*64
7*38038
6*63
26*89
8.31
1.76
1.23
1.56
0.97
3253.62
504.9
7816
14*10 24.60
10.72 50*20
0.40 13*94
0.04 2.43
BAG 3
2064.78
5*49783
13*61
41*43
11.71
2.40
1.47
1.40
0.80
2581.34
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.39
0.51
1- 17
798.92
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.15
-------
****** CVS 655 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-10-75
VEHICLEt ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-0D/OE
ROAD TESTS MA
DRIVERt LARRY
TEST MILESt 300
COMMENTS!
.422-12 BTDC- .175 - PORTEP VAC. - DUP. OF 654
HIGH VOL. AIR PUMP 3973 CC « 10.57 MPG AT 28 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 63 F
78 F
99 F
RHS 43 X
INERTIA WT.S
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)*
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
926.562
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 748.235 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.375 IN. H2O
19.425 IN. H20
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVs .3013
BLOWER RPM (CAL)I 928*481
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
BAG 2 BAG
AIR EX AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
505
7815
10.00 241.00
84*40
20.00
8*52
0*24
0*04
2.80
867.7
13430
11.00 19.00
8*36 33.20
0*32 6*86
0.04 1.88
505.3
7819
11.00 41.00
8.00 51.60
0.32 12.50
0.04 2.56
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2050- 78
4.73347
CORRECTED COM CENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
19.81
77*68
216*89
2*77
BAG 2
3524.24
7.10828
6.59
26*02
8.73
1*85
BAG 3
2051.83
5.21604
12.24
45. 13
29.64
2.53
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.08
2.60
14.66
2960*80
1. 19
1.50
1.01
3392.06
1.28
1.51
a. 01
2704.67
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.37
0.46
1. 13
827.58
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
10.32
-------
****** CVS 656 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 10-14-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL* GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TESTS MA
DRIVER* LARRY
TEST MILES* 770
COMMENTS*
• 422 ORIFICE .175 REAR BRK. PORTED VAC. 12 BTDC
4 INCH SYSTEM 3802 CC = 11.05 MP6 29 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP* 62 F
75 F (DRY>
99 F (MIX)
RHl 47 Z
INERTIA WT.S 4000 LBS
FUEL* HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)t 926*339
PRES*
746.285
22.243
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEEDS
CF/REV* .3014
BLOWER RPM (CAL)* 928.481
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (Z)
505.2
7815
24.00 228*00
8*32 132.00
0.28 19.70
0.04 2.89
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.8
13426
57.00 56.00
11*76 32.80
0.56 6*80
0*04 1.80
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF>
DF
2046.11
4*58216
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO CPPM)
CO2 (Z)
19.48
125*50
193. 58
2.86
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2*03
4. 19
13.05
3050.40
3515.7
7* 40904
6*32
22*63
4. 65
1.77
1.13
1*30
0.54
3236* 75
BAG 3
AIR EX
505
7814
37.00 138*00
1O.88 57*20
0*36 15.20
O. 04 2. 52
BAG 3
2045.85
5*27841
14.91
48*38
99.68
2.49
1.56
1*62
6.72
2654.02
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.39
0.54
1*33
808.16
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10*95
-------
***><** cvs 658 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-16-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST! NA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILESt 790
COMMENTS*
.422 ORIFICE -175 DEPTH .044 RODS PORTED VAC. 27 DEGREE C
REAR VAC. BRK. .154 IDLE SPEED (COLD) + 10.45 MPG
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
TEMPI 67
73
98
RH! 73 X
INERTIA WT.t
FUELS HO 11 I
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
*** TEST DATA ***
PRES:
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO 2 (X)
928.366
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.4
7819
12*00 2£5.00
8*92 97*20
0.40 42-90
0.04 3.20
746.085
20.815
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3014
BLOWER RPM (CAL)I 928.481
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.4
13452
15.00 21.00
8*12 31.52
0.65 6.63
0.04 1.93
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2050. 35
4. 14822
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(Z)
42.60
90.43
196.94
3. 17
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
5. 10
3.03
13.31
3389.16
3527.47
6.92462
6.07
24.57
7.19
1.90
1*25
1.42
0.84
3487.42
'WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.67
0.46
0.95
861.58
ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7824
12.00 27.00
7-28 44.80
0.55 24.00
0.04 2*52
BAG 3
2051*66
5.30276
23.55
38.89
15.55
2.49
2.62
1.30
1.05
2661.52
10.28
-------
****** CVS 660 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEi 10-17-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TESTt NA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILESt 825
COMMENTS!
FRONT
CON V.
BRK.
AFTER
.190
CVS
PORTED VAC. 12 BTDC
DRIVER 97/86 PASS. 97/88
10*54 MOG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 60 F (WET)
80 F (DRY)
98 F (MIX)
RHI 29 X
INERTIA WT«! 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
928*492
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESl 747*385 MM HG (BARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.375 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED! 3
CF/REVI .3013
BLOWER RPM (CAL)l 928.481
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
505.1
7817
26.00 1058.00
9.44
0.45
0*04
137.60
24.00
3.06
868
13432
26*00
10.32
0.61
0*04
28.00
35.04
8*06
1.96
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2052.94
4.22402
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
23.66
130-39
966*11
3.03
MASS EMISSIONS (GRflMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.30
4.37
65*39
3243* 37
BAG 2
3527*58
6*81527
7*54
26*23
4*70
1*93
1.26
1.51
0.55
3542.89
505*3
7819
13*00 34*00
9*36 49.20
0.39 20-50
0*04 2*54
BAG 3
2053.47
5.25878
20* 18
41.62
21.59
2.51
1-97
1.40
1.46
2685*35
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*45
0*56
3*93
862.43
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
10*26
-------
****** CVS 661 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 10-18-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 850
COMMENTS:
RODS .072 JETS .200 FRONT BRK.
NO HOT START P* A. 10.31 MPG* 27 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F
F
F
(VET)
(DRY)
CMIX)
60
78
97
RH» 33 *
INERTIA WT.I
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
926.237
BAG 1
AIR EX
504.8
7810
9.40 758.00
6*48 180*40
0.34 16.60
PRES: 740.185 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3012
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.534
BAG 2
AIR EX
868*3
13432
13*00 19.00
7.92 33.76
0*62 10*00
0*04
3.24 0*04
2*00
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2033.85
4.02607
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
16*34
175.53
695- 65
3*21
MASS EMISSIONS (GRA4S/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.60
5.33
46* 65
3404. 62
BAG 2
3497.91
6. 68268
9.47
27.03
7.13
1.97
1.59
1.54
0.82
3586*27
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.3
7818
7.40 36.00
6*84 61.20
0.54 17*20
0.04 2.64
BAG 3
2035.93
5.05756
16.77
55-71
27*91
2*61
1*64
1.85
1*87
2768*92
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*43
0*68
2.93
883*81
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 9.98
-------
****** CVS 662 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 10-20-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TESTI NA
DRIVERS LARRY
TEST MILESI 870
COMMENTS:
.044 RODS .072 JETS .200 FRONT BRK.
NO HOT START P* A. 10.29 MPG 25 DEGREE C
TEMPS
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
CMIX)
57
74
97
RH: 33 *
INERTIA WT.S
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S
*** TEST DATA ***
PRESS
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO C PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
928.475
BAG I
AIR EX
505
7814
8.20 625.00
6.40 119.60
0*31 16.30
0.04 3*08
743.185
21.453
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEEDS
CF/REVS .3017
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.481
MM HG CBARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG
AIR
EX
668.2
13435
14.00
7*28
0-49
0.08
19.00
31.92
6.63
1.92
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2045. 75
4.25385
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
16.06
114.70
575.08
3.05
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1*54
3*83
38.79
3253* 28
BAG 2
3517.36
6.96103
6*21
25.69
6-23
1.85
1.02
1.48
0-72
3396.20
505.3
7820
9.90 22.00
6.56 48.40
0.41 18.00
0.04 2*64
BAG 3
2047*32
5*06252
17.67
43- 14
12.79
2*61
1.70
1.44
0*86
2784.40
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.35
0.53
2.39
850.96
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
10.35
-------
****** CVS 663 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 10-31-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST! NA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILES! 900
COMMENTS!
CAR WAS SITTING FOR TWO WEEKS WE DID PREP. IT
LAST NIGHT SAME AS RUN 662 a
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP! 52
74
98
RH! 17 %
INERTIA WT.!
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES!
926. 19
755.535
21.453
25.725
20. 125
BLOWER SPEED!
CF/REV! .3020
BLOWER RPM (CAL)! 928*375
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.6
7821
17. 00 590.00
5*24 139.20
0.81 15.00
0*04 2.90
BAG 2
AIR EX
868. 1
13431
13*00 20.00
8*64 32.56
0.79 9.64
0*04 1.96
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.6
7805
13.00 40.00
7.32 53.60
0.90 16.70
0*04 2*60
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2080.84
4. 51284
CORRECTED CON CENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 («>
14.37
135. 12
540. 6 6
2.87
MASS EMISSIO NS (GRO4S/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.29
4. 59
37.09
3113. 17
BAG 2
3573.42
6.81875
8.97
25. 19
8. 10
1.93
1.38
1.47
0*95
3588.93
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.37
0. 58
2.40
868.35
(MILES/6 AL)
10.29
BAG 3
2076.58
5.1358
15.98
47. 71
27.37
2.57
1.43
1.62
1.87
2780.75
-------
****** CVS 664 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATES 11-3-7 5
VEHICLE* ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILESt 925
COMMENTS!
• 406 ORIFICE CAR HAS MOT BEEN RUN FOR TWO DAYS
12 BTDC PORTED VAC. 9.94 MP6.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 63 F (W ET)
78 F (DRY)
90 F (MIX>
RH: 43 Z
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) I
928.456
BAG I
AIR EX
PRESt 749.435 MM H6 (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H20 CINLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVt .3011
BLOWER RPM (CALM 928.481
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM>
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
COS (X)
505. 6
7884
10.00 582.00
6.48 150.80
0*26 18.50
0.04 3.08
870.3
13467
7.40 18.00
6-16 33.04
0.49 10.70
0*04 2.00
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2090. 45
4.25529
BAG 2
3598. 17
6.68326
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
7813
7.60 26*00
6.12 49.20
0.60 20.20
0*04 2.72
BAG 3
2087.51
4.9132
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
18. 30
145.84
531.87
3.05
10.28
27*80
10.85
1.97
19.72
44.33
18.31
2.69
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.96
4.98
36*66
3324.36
1.89
1*63
1.29
3689*06
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.52
0. 62
2.37
904. 88
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GA.)
2* 10
1.51
1.26
2926.41
EPAMPG
9.82
-------
******
666 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 11-5-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TESTt NA
DRIVERS LARRY
TEST MILES! 950
COMMENTS!
.406 ORIFICE ANEROID LEAND OUT A LITTLE
12 BTDC PORTED VAC. 10. I MP6-
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMPI 63
75
90
RHl 51 X
INERTIA WT.!
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)!
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES!
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
COS (X)
926*532
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.3
7821
6.90 575.00
6.32
747.135
22.243
25.025
19.425
BLOWER SPEED!
CF/REVI .3009
BLOWER RPM (CAL)l 928.516
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
EX
868.7
1 3442
0.49
0.04
145*20
19.00
3.24
9.50
6*24
0.49
0*04
17.00
34.04
10.30
2.08
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2081.83
4.05141
CORRECTED CON CENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
18.63
140.44
524. 55
3. 21
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.02
4. 7 7
36.00
3484.88
BAG 2
3578.06
6.42663
9.89
28.77
8.15
2.05
1.85
1.68
0.96
3818.17
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.53
0.63
2.34
930.98
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 9. 55
BAG
AIR
EX
506
7831
7.90 37.00
6.32 58.00
0*49 20.40
0.04 2.72
BAG 3
2084. 5
4.90978
20*01
52.97
28.27
2.69
2. 18
1.80
1.94
2922. 19
-------
****** CVS 671
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEt 11-7-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
COMMENTS!
.302 ORIFICE 12
CARB. UN CHANGE
ROAD TEST! MA
DRIVER! MIKE K
TEST MILES! 970
BTDC PORTED VAC-
••» 10.43 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP! 64 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 54 %
INERTIA WT. I 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)! 926*466
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES! 743.185 MM HG (BARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED! 3
CF/REV! .2998
BLOWER RPM (CAL)! 928.622
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
.2
13
409.00
128.00
41.70
3*08
870.7
13472
15.00 19.00
10*20 33*00
0.82 12*50
0*04 1*68
506.4
7838
12-00 25.00
8.96 52-00
0.52 39.00
0.04 2.58
506
7833
12.00
10*04
0.48
0.04
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2O3U 73
4. 28038
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
41.33
120.31
368.58
3*05
MASS EMISSIONS < G RAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
4*47
3.99
24. 69
3230*93
BAG 2
3494*38
7*10838
11.80
24.23
5.32
1.85
2.20
1.38
0.61
3363.33
BAG 3
2033*03
5« 17868
38*58
44.77
13.81
2.55
4. 18
1.49
6.93
2701*16
WEIGHTED MASS HUSSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.87
0.53
1.57
838.97
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10* 53
-------
****** CVS 675 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 11-8-75
VEHICLE* ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TESTt NA
DRIVER! MIKE K
TEST MILES! 980
COMMENTS!
STOCK EGR 12
4021 CC 10.45
BTDC
MPG.
P. V. HIGH VOL. AIR PUMP
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP! 66 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
105 F CMIX)
RH! 50 *
INERTIA WT- ! 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)! 928.511
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES! 741.585 MM HG (BARO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN. H20 (INLET)
18*9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED! 3
CF/REV! .2999
BLOWER RPM (CAL)I 928*622
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO 2 (*)
506
7335
11.00
11.52
1.02
0.04
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3
62.00
39.60
26.30
3. 16
869.4
13455
15*00 19.00
10.96 38.00
0.90 12.00
0*04 1.88
1 1
10
0
0
505.7
7825
00 43.00
44 70-00
81 32.40
04 2.48
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2010.49
4. 15396
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (SO
27.53
130.85
510.52
3. 13
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3*01
4.30
33.84
3281 • 32
BAG 2
3452.6
7. 10649
11.23
28*58
5.32
1.85
2.11
1*61
0.61
3323*11
BAG 3
2007.92
5.37931
31.74
61.50
31.44
2.45
3.47
2.02
2.08
2562*78
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 7 2
0. 61
2. 18
825*98
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10. 65
-------
****** CVS 681 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 11-12-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68 OB/OF
ROAD TEST* NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1000
COMMENTS:
STOCK EGR - STOCK TIMING - STOCK MAN. VAC. ADV.
3696 CC = 11-37 MPG GARB HAS LEA* HOLES - NOT ADJUSTED
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
62 F CWET)
79 F CDRY>
101 F (MIX)
RH: 37 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM : 928.38
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 738.285 MM HG (BAHO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.85 IN. H20 (I>JLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3015
BLOWER RPM (CAL)X 928*516
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC CPPM C)
MOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505.4
7820
869.2
1 3449
BAG ;
AIR
507
7845
EX
10. 60
9.08
0.77
0.04
345.00
73.44
37.22
2.43
11.90
9.92
0.74
0.06
17.40
35.32
10*41
1.61
11.20
8*96
0.59
0.06
85.60
56.68
37. 12
2.39
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2020.43
5-4255
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
MOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
36. 59
66*03
316.20
2.40
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3.68
2. 18
21.06
2526*00
BAG 2
3474.78
8*2962
9.76
26*60
6.31
1*56
1*69
1.51
0.72
2821.85
BAG 3
2026*89
5* 5878
36*64
49.32
15*03
2.34
3.70
1.63
1*00
2474.21
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*72
0*45
1.38
7 09. 11
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
12. 51
-------
****** CVS 683 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 11-13-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1015
COMMENTS:
STOCK TIMMING-EGR-MAN. VAC. ADV.
11. 1SMPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 53 F (WET)
71 F CDRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 27 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.562
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 738.985 MM HG CBARO)
19.468 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.605
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
iMOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
507.9
7661
8.10 532.00
6.72 148.40
0.76 62.40
0.04 2.90
868.3
13437
1 1.00
7.40
0.87
0.04
17.00
29.68
1 1.30
1.76
507. I
7848
10.00 25.00
56.80
55.40
9.40
0.78
0.04
2.67
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2030.45
4.51999
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
61.61
143.17
49 1. 41
2.87
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
5. 64
4. 75
32. SO
3037. 76
BAG 2
3470.69
7.59381
10.54
23.25
6*61
1.73
1.64
1.38
0.78
3122.68
BAG 3
2027.09
5.00368
54.78
49.28
15- 57
2.64
4.99
1.63
1.04
2788.69
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS C GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.92
0.57
2.07
802.46
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10.91
-------
CVS 698 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 11-18-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL I GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER* LARRY
TEST MILESl 5347
COMMENTS!
STOCK EX.
3524 CC =
SYSTEM CARB.
11.92 MPG.
AIR PUMP TIMMIMG MAN. VAC. ADV.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 61 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 34 X
INERTIA WT.» 4000 LBS
FUELl HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928*374
BAG 1
AIH EJ
PRESl 753.435 MM HG (BARO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z>
9
10.20
0.96
0*04
504.4
7804
00 1562.
216.
95.
2.
00
48
10
67
2.5.025
19.425
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REVt .3004
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928*516
BAG 2
AIR EX
868. 1
13432
12*90 17.70
10.00 33.76
1.12 33.00
0.04 1.56
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.3
7819
38*20 67*90
10.72 56.64
1.14 98*51
0*06 2.31
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2047. 89
4* 7 2113
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
COS (*)
94*34
210*44
1457.55
2.64
MASS EMISSIONS (GR4MS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
9*39
7.04
98.41
2817*63
BAG 2
3524.77
8*5619
32.01
24.93
5.71
1.52
5.48
1*43
0*66
2802* 60
BAG 3
2051.83
5* 77069
97* 57
47*78
32.90
2.26
9.73
1.60
2.23
2418*69
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2*01
0. 72
5.90
719*06
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11*97
-------
****** CVS 699 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 11-19-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILES* 5379
COMMENTS*
2ND BASELINE IN STOCK CONDITION 3629
NO CHANRGES FROM 1ST TEST 11.57 MPG«
*** TEST DATA ***
CC
TEMPI 58 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 34 %
INERTIA WT.» 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO HI
BLOWER RPM (ACT)t 928.277
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
PRES: 753.015 MM HG (BARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN.
IN.
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
25.025
19.425
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3004
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.516
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
506.1
7830
19.
9.
o.
o.
00
24
73
04
1480
181
98
2
• 00
• 60
• 40
• 60
16*
9.
1.
o.
867.2
13417
00
76
07
04
22.
32.
34.
1.
00
72
50
56
15.
11.
1.
o.
505. 6
7822
00
04
29
04
38
55
105
2
• 00
• 20
• 00
• 42
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2053.72
4.86013
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO ( PPM)
C02 (%)
97.82
174.26
1374. 75
2.57
MASS EMISSIONS (GR/WS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
9.50
5«84
93.09
2750.61
BAG 2
3519. 12
8.56081
33.55
24.10
7. 12
1*52
5.58
1.38
0.83
2798. 11
BAG 3
2051.62
5*51644
103.94
46* 16
23.67
2.39
10.09
1.55
1.60
2554.17
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.06
0. 64
5.57
724.90
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11•89
-------
****** CVS 706 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1 1-25- 75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL* GEM 68-OB/O F
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1929
COMMENTS:
PPROX.
STOCK TIMMI.NG-MAN. VAC. ADV. - STOCK EGR GARB. SETTIMGS A
2C CATALYST ON 4 INCH 1ST TEST 3796 CC = 11.06 MPG«
*** TEST DATA *** '
F
F
F
TEMP: 54
73
99
RH: 25 %
INERTIA WT.I
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER hEVS
CO (PPM )
HC CPPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928*442
BAG 1
AIR EX
505- 7
7826
7 .90 433.00
10.76 123-60
0.95 46.70
0. 04 2. 72
PRES: 743.985 MM HG (BARO)
20.815 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.375 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3018
BLOWER RPM (GAL): 928.464
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
868. 1 5
13433
8.30 15.00
8.36 29.44
0.72 11.40
0*04 1.64
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2044. 95
4.83324
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
45.95
115.07
400.62
2. 69
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
3.84
27-01
2866.39
HC
CO
CO 2
BAG 2
3510.07
8.14895
10.77
22. 1 1
7. 1.8
1.60
1.69
1.27
0.83
2937. 79
505. 75
7826
6.20 24.00
7..56 48.40
0.59 37.40
0.04 2.36
BAG 3
2044.95
5» 66091
36.91
42* 18
17.65
2.33
3.38
1.41
I. 19
248 1 • 68
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 72
0. 50
1.75
7 44. 68
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG
11. 79
-------
MB
'.
N
r8
Jjj
'
31
_
-------
****** CVS 7l4 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 13-2-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST* NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILESt. 1973
COMMENTS:
COLD IDLE SPEED 1600 IN NETURAL
CHOKE LEANED OUT «030 FRONT A REAR
*** TEST DATA ***
11.07 MPG.
TEMP:
52 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH: 19 X .
INERTIA WT-: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM'(ACT): 928'. 453
PRESJ 744.685 MM HG CBARO)
20.815 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20
IN.
(INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
24. 7-625
19.425
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3007
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.543
BAG
AIR
1
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO . ( PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
506.3
7635
5. 70 165.00
20
7.
0. 54
0. 04
75.20
42.40
2.95
867
13416
20.00 22.00
27.96
-9.83
7.88
0.81
0.04
1.84
11
7
0
0
505.05
7815
00 24.
48 38-
.57 23.
04 2>
00
76
90
56
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF -
BAG 1
2023.33
4. 50726
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC: (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
41.98
69. 60
150.21
2.92
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02 '
3. 70
2. 30
10.02
3079.91
BAG 2
3464.59
7i26325
9. 13
21. 16
3.95
1.81
1.38
1.20
0.45
3262.16
BAG 3
2018.17
5.22184
23
32
13
2.
44
71
83
53
2.06
1.08
0-92
2660*30
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
'HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0. 55
0-37
0. 70
813.72
(MILES/GAL)
10.90
-------
"is
*li
-J8
• •
W
J8
'fi
a*
i
1!
«i
^
4)
1
S-
91
u§9
TIE
"•«••
J W
11 a
X
o
£
^^
11
11
****** CVS
*** IDENTIFI
TEST DATE! 12-3-75
VEHICLE: ETV
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS:
24
68- OB/OF
71 7 ******
CATION ***
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 1984
CHOKE PULLED OFF i 120 SEC. INTO TEST
NOTHING ELSE CHANGE FROM TEST
TEMPI 57 F (
78 F (
102 F
RH: 24 X
*** TEST
WET)
DRY)
(MIX)
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) 1 926.505
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
BAG 1
AIR EX
513.4
7945
4. 70 165.00
6.32 75.20
0.53 42.80
0. 04 2. 72
DATA ***
PRES: 752.485
714 10«99 MPG
MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.9 IN.
18.9 IN.
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL
BAG 2
AIR EX
864.4
13376
12.00 15.00
7. 52 28. 36
0.83 9.80
0.04 1.64
H20 (ItfLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
3
): 928.481
BAG 3
AIR EX
504
7800
5.90 17.00
6.96 35.64
0.57 21.20
0.04 2.36
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
CORRECTED CON
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
MASS EMISSION
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
WEI GHTED MASS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
BAG 1
2081. 67
4.88511
CENTRAT10NS
42. 38
70. 17
151. 37
2. 69
S (GRAMS/ BAG)
4.01
2. 39
10.39
2918. 27
BAG 2
3504.64
8. 14948
9.07
21. 76
3.96
1.60
1.45
1.25
0.46
2933.25
BAG 3
2043- 68
5.66555
20. 73
29.91
11.27
2.33
1.93
1.00
0. 76
2480. 13
EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
0. 57
0.38
0. 71
746.90
(MILES/G/^)
11. 78
-------
* * k fc* k (J 75 / 1 ^ * / k* * |c
*** IDENl IrlC-'UIOM ***
ih5F DATE: 12-5-V5 l?OAD iibi: MA
vJE-IICLE: EIV 2/t U'-ilv/E"!: LA-i-U
.'JAFERIAL: GE/1 >3J-OM/Or itbl' i-llLES: 2
S* 0-.\)L/ CHANGE KHO.-l PrtEv/IOUS TKii' IS NO v/AC- A)>v/ . KlH-l > if
N.
ccoog^. ro PORT AIR r !%•»£«•) 10.^4 !«IPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 60 F C.VE1) PRE5: 74rf./3b Xa-i 4'j U3AnO>
<50 F CDRf) 26-271 AA HU (v/APOHJ
10a F (rtl.O 24.8375 IM. H^O (I.vJLF.T)
H-is 2'^ * i«-J Ii». ri20 CO'JILED
INERTIA WF-: 4000 LbS BLOWER SPEED: 3
FUEL: HO III CF/RK7: .2^90
DLOWEa HPrf (ACT): y»2d.464 ilLOWER RP"i (CAD: 9-28 .64*
DAu 1 J3AG 2 BA(3 3
AIR E< AIrt E-< AIR E<
TI.«1E (SECS) 507.4 «6V ,
BLOWER rfEVS 7B52 13446 7^14
CO (PPi«l) 3.30 125.00 67-00 57.00 17-00 29*00
HC (PPM C) 3.72 53.20 12-96 31-96 9-44 39-59
NO* (PP.1) 0-61 25-50 0-92 9-54 0-42 21-30
C02 ( *) 0.04 3.06 0.04 l«7d 0*04 2.50
•*** CALCULATED REbULfS * *
BAG I BAU 2 DAG 3
V.-JK (CF) 2041-51 3495.95 2031-63
DF 4.35494 7-49169 5-34571
CORRECTED CO^CE^T RATIONS
(PP.1)
HC (PP--1 O
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
MASS Ei«SI5SIO»MS (GRAi'iS/OAG)
25-Oi
46- 46
110. 13
3.0J
*• /4
20. 7 J
-3.0O
1 .75
20-96
.11 .^5
1 3.64
'2.4V
v'JOK
riC
CO
CO2
2.42
1-55
7-41
3225.02
1.45
1.1 'j
-0.35
31-41.99
«.O'^
1 .06
0.91
2614.29
WEIGHTED .1ASS E.lISSlONS ( GRAilS/MILE)
0-49
HC 0.33
CO O-45
COS
FUEL ECOi\iO«/
-------
CVS 730 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 18-8-75
VEHICLE: ETV «4
MATEKlAL: GEM 68-OB/OK
ROAD TEST: MA
DHIVEfi: LARKY
TEST MILES: 2050
COMMENTS!
HARD STARTING 1ST AND 2>JD BAGS 11.22MPG-
GM EXP. EGR .302 ORFICE STIFf SPRING
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
77 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH: 23 %
INERTIA WT. : 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER KPM (ACT)J 928.567
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (*)
PRES: 748.835 MM HG (BARO)
23. 756 MM HG (VAPOR>
24.325 IN.
19.075 IN.
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV» .2993
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
H20
H20
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
BAG
AIR
EX
505. 4
7821
12. 00
6.92
0. 19
0.04
325.00
175.20
37.40
2.94
876.8
13570
15.00
8.36
0.73
0.04
23.00
29. 16
14.20
1. 60
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2024. 76
4.4847
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
.NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
37*25
169.82
294.94
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3. 40
5. 6 2
19. 69
307 1. 56
BAG 2
3513. 1
8.34824
13. 56
21.80
9.02
1.56
2. 15
1.25
1.04
2866-83
928.622
BAG 3
AIR Ei
506
7831
12.00 61.00
7.64 272.40
0.52 40.30
0.04 2.40
BAG 3
2087.35
5.50757
39.87
266. 15
47.98
2.37
3.64
8.81
3.21
2502.81
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 76
1. 16
1. 51
7 48.56
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11.55
-------
CVS 722 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION! ***
TEST DATE: 12-9-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
COMMENTS:
AS
11
OF 12-9-75
22 MPG.
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: LARRY-
TEST MILES: 1222
CORRECT CATALYST MILEAGE OM ETV 2/1 IS 1222
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 59 F (WET)
77 F (DKY)
102 F (MIX)
RHt 32 %
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.472
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESt 739.385 MM HG (BARO)
23.758 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.975 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.8125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
FLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2992
BLOWER RPM (CAL)» 928.684
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
tsJOX C PPM )
C02 (X)
505
7815
14.00 200.00
9.24 105.20
0. 42 34. 70
0.04 2.96
868.5
13440
16-00
10. 12
0. 55
0.04
19.00
30.20
14.50
1.66
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
POO 7.92
4. 48284
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(Z)
34.
98-
175.
2.
37
02
77
93
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO2
3.28
3.21
11. 64
3066.96
BAG 2
3453. 16
8*04882
14.02
21.34
4.33
1.62
2.30
1.20
0.49
2926*28
505.2
7817
9.70 22.00
9.28 43.60
0.41 40. 50
0.04 2*40
BAG 3
2008.43
5.5684
40- 16
35.99
12.88
2.37
3-83
1. 18
0.85
2479.38
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 79
0*43
0.80
754-44
FUEL ECOMOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11.57
-------
CVS 724 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1 a-10-75
VEHICLE: FTV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
KOAD TEST: MA
UHIVEH: LARRV
TEST MILES: 1229
COMMENTS:
1 STALL 1ST BAG
REPEAT OF TESTM
722
1 1.26 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 58 F (WET)
78 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 27 f
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.511
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
PRES: 741.885
24.61 7
24.4125
19.1625
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3001
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.605
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
506
7830
6. 70
6* 76
0*28
0*04
347.00
181.20
39*40
2*90
868.2
13436
15.00
9.92
0. 37
0.04
20.00
31. 12
14*40
1*62
BAG 3
AIR EX
506. 1
7832
16.00 28.00
9.96 45.20
0.36 40.60
0.04 2.40
**+ CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2022. 52
4. 54148
BAG 2
3470.58
8.24599
BAG 3
2023.04
5. 56671
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
39. 18
175.93
319*42
2.87
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3. 68
5.81
21.30
3025.86
14.07
22.40
6. 14
1-58
2.27
1.27
0.70
2866*43
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.80
0. 60
1.38
745. 74
40.30
37.03
13.45
2. 37
3. 78
1.22
0.90
2497.42
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/OAL)
EPAMPG 11.65
-------
****** CVS 786 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 12-1 1- 75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/GF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 1840
COMMENTS:
TING
5 MPG.
CHOKE HICHEK BY .085 CFRONT VAC. BRAKE) 3RD BAG HARH SfAK
MO OTHER CHANGES EGR ON IN 1 MIN. 85 SEC. COLD STAKf 109
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
74 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
hH: 33 %
IMERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
PRES: 748.885 MM HG ( BARO )
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928-504
BAG 1
AIR E)
503.8
7796
19.00 853.00
8.24 90.00
21.453 MM
24.675 IN.
19.25 IN.
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3000
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
BAG 2
AIR FX
HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H80 (OUTLET)
928. 569
BAG 3
AIR h.X
0. 55
0.04
22.20
3.04
869.4
13455
24.00 26.00
9.40 30.84
0.50 14.40
0.04 1.64
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2039.37
4. 28334
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
21.78
83. 63
779. 5«
3.01
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.03
2. 7 9
52. 42
3200. 53
BAG 2
3519.73
8.14305
13.96
22. 59
4.07
1.60
2-30
1.30
0.47
2945*88
504.4
7805
29.00 92.00
10.24 680.80
0.71 36.90
0.08 2.36
BAG 3
2041.73
5. 499 1
36.32
672.4P
63.37
2.29
3-47
22.42
4.27
2443*15
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
.NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
FPAMPG
0.69
2.04
3.39
76U96
(MILES/GAL)
11.24
-------
CVS 730 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 12-is-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 680B/OF
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 1251
COMMENTS:
REPEAT TEST - EGR VALVE 1220-STIFF SPRING
VERY GOOD COLD & HOT START 3918CC=10-72
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 59 F (WET)
76 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 34 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 927.827
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES:
752.385
22.922
24.9375
19.425
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.525
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC .(PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
INI. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG 3
AIR EX
503.9
7797
10. 70 440.00
9.16 87.56
0.56 25.80
0.03 2.88
868.5
13437
16.70 19.10
9.88 30.92
0.61 10.96
0«06 1.71
506. 7
7824
10.70 22.40
8.80 42.32
0.44 25.81
0.03 2.37
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2050. 51
4.57364
BAG 2
3533.76
7.81378
BAG 3
2057.61
5.63891
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
25. 36
80.40
402.51
2.86
10.43
22.30
3.86
1*66
25.45
35-08
12.43
2-35
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.47
2. 69
27.21
3054.64
1.75
. 1.29
0.45
3054.87
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.56
0.42
1. 68
773.71
2.49
1. 18
0.84
2516. 64
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
******
731 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DA IE: 12-15-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OB/OF
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: LAHRY
TEST MILES: 1264
COMMENTS:
REPEAT OF LAST TEST - MO CHANGES
NOT RUM FOR 2 DAYS BEFORE THIS TEST
J928 CC = 10-6?
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 64 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 43 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.472
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (SO
504. 9
7813
9.70 508.00
8-56 105.20
0.86 24.30
0.04 2.94
PRES: 741.885
25.509
24. 675
19.1625
BLOWER SPEED:
Cr/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.578
MM HG CBARO)
MM HG C VAPOR)
IN. H2O CIxLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
1 1
9
0
0
AIR
8
1
.00
. 12
• 13
• 04
6H. 6
3441
1
EX
7.
29.
1
o.
1.
40
60
60
72
BAG
AIR
EX
505-2
7818
19.80 38.20
8.88 43.80
0.26 25.20
0.04 2.46
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
CCF)
BAG 1
2019.2
4.47003
BAG 2
3473- 71
7. 76984
BAG 3
2020.49
5.42847
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO ( PPM )
C02 C%)
23. 63
98- 55
464. 77
2.91
10.49
21.65
7. 13
1.69
24.99
41. 56
19.93
2.43
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/RAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.47
3.25
30.94
3063.16
1.B9
1.23
0.82
3052.71
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
2* 61
1.37
1.33
2557.69
MOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 59
0.45
1.98
777-03
FUFL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
****** CV/S 73d ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 12-16-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/CF
ROAD TEST: MA
DKIVRK: LARRY
TEST MILES: 1275
COMMENTS:
.302 ORIFICE VALVE * 1220 (B)
NO OTHER CHANGES 11.37 MPG.
+** fEST DATA ***
TEMP: 59 F (WET)
80 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 26 %
INERTIA WT«: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.471
PRES:
MM HG (BAR3)
746.785
26.271
24.675
19.425
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3004
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.552
MM
IN
IN
3
HG (VAPOR)
. H20 (INLET)
. H20 (OUTLET)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
506.5
7838
13.20 4
8.00
0.41
0.04
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
5
195.00
88.00
41. 70
2- 72
868. 1
13433
20.80 20.20
8.68 30.52
0.66 25.00
0.06 1 • 60
BAG 3
AIR EX
505. 2
7818
10.60 23.80
7-60 39.04
Q.41 68.40
0.04 2.28
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2046.84
4.82832
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM )
C02 (X)
41. 37
81. 66
454.55
2. 69
MASS EMISSIONS (G RAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3.94
2. 7 3
30. 67
2869. 55
BAG 2
3507.94
8.34895
24.42
22.88
1.25
1.55
3.99
1.31
0. 14
2830.41
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.25
0.41
1.85
7 23.72
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.07
BAG 3
2041.62
5.86136
68.06
32. 74
13.84
2.25
6-47
1.09
0.93
2392.21
-------
******
741 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 12/17/75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68 0 B/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DHIVhR: LARRY
TEST MILES: 1290
COMMENTS:
REPEAT OF PREVIOUS TEST
WEIGHTED FUEL-3744CC 1L2MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 56 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F CMIX)
RH: 27 %
INERTIA WT.t 400O LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.385
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME CSECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
504. 7
7810
13.00 333.00
6>16 44.13
0.53 22.50
0.06 2.51
PRES: 746.685
22.243
24.5875
19.3375
BLOWER SPEED:
CI-XREV: .3002
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.569
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
I*J. H20 (INJLET)
I.N. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.9
13429
17.00 20.00
8.88 29.60
0.47 13.60
0.07 1.68
BAG
AIR
EX
SOS. S
7821
10-00 24.00
6-20 29.00
0.43 37.52
0.05 2.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2039 • 19
5.26355
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 CX>
22.07
39- 13
303. 57
2.46
BAG 2
3504.59
7.9531
13- 19
21.84
4.45
1.62
BAG 3
2041.06
5» 52539
37. 17
23.92
14. 55
2- 38
MASS EMISSIOMS (GRAXS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.05
1.30
2O. 40
2616.26
2. 1 1
1.25
0. 51
2958.60
3.46
0-80
0.98
2532.29
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIOMS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 66
0.30
1.31
736.93
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GPL")
EPAMPG
12.06
-------
****** CVS 742 **k***
*** IDEMTIMCATIJM ***
TKS1 DATE: 18/18/75
VEHICLE: F.TV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OB/OF
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVRK: LARRY
TEST MILES: 131 1
COMMENTS:
NO CHANGES
WEIGHTED FUEL-3737CC 11.2MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
54 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 25 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO I I I
BLOWER RPM (ACT)J 928.416
PRES: 748.485 MM HG CBARO)
20.81 5 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H80 (INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: . 3010
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.499
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (*)
BAG 1
AIR B:X
506.3
7834
26.00 486.00
9.28 64.00
0.7 3 29.40
0.06 2. 78
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.6
13440
28.00 30.00
13.20 32.24
0.85 14.10
0.06 L69
BAG
AIR
EX
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2051.99
4. 7 3163
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM )
C02 (%)
28.82
56-68
435. 73
2. 73
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2. 65
1.90
29. 48
2924.27
BAG 2
3520.39
7.90047
13.36
20. 71
4. 52
1.64
2. 11
1.19
0. 53
3006.43
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 7 2
0.36
1.80
759.39
505.4
7821
52.00 53.00
16.96 50.80
0.45 41.80
0.06 S.40
BAG 3
2048.58
5. 55995
41.43
36-89
7.82
2.35
3.80
1.23
0. 53
2511.44
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG
11.58
-------
****** CVS 747 ******
*** IDENIIMCATIO-N ***
TEST DATE: 1-6-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: 'MA
DRIVER: LARR*
TEST MILES: 1356
COMMENTS:
1 ST TEST AFTER 18
SAME AS TEST 742
DAYS OF SETTIMG
11.20 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 53 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 18 T
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
PUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 929.032
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 749.335
22.243
25.2875
20.0375
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REVt .3018
BLOWER KPM (CAL): 928.428
MM HG CRARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG 3
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
coa (jo
506.5
7839
11.00 655.00
8.56 104.80
0. 7 4 35.30
0.04 2.76
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
867. 1
13429
9.80 11.00
8.32 30.00
0.62 14.30
0.04 1.68
505
7820
3.30 19.00
7.80 38.72
0.68 41.40
0.05 2.38
VMIX
OF
(CF)
BAG 1
206O.85
4. 73144
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
34. 72
98.05
607-77
2. 73
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3. 18
3.30
41*30
2932.37
BAG 2
3530.45
7.95697
13. 76
22.73
2.06
1.65
2. 12
1.31
0.24
3028.71
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.74
0.45
2.48
762.53
BAG 3
2055.86
5. 61686
40.84
32.31
15-32
2.34
3.66
1.08
1.04
2507.61
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.52
-------
ft V •: •€ I:
**
I La I DATE:
i u* j r c* i L«" •
V E« i 1 W —• *• *
.•iAIE.U A'-:
CO.11E.vlTS:
1 - 7 - / o
M:JAL UI
MO OliiE
) , / •) I r r * i
IKIOAl 10 J **
'»;[ •.'}•.••: -11 \K !•;
IK-3 f '. i L;.-;.-> : 1 3'3'i
'•,(•;•; '-ii-.'^:
= 1 0 . / •./
i'.i (
I..M
-A '•))
i../'
CO'
A .vi.: /iOJO
40 III
ULOii/Kri HPM (ACT):
.3007
AI ri
E
TI'-'iE (SECi)
tK rfE
(PPM)
CO
KG
N0<
coa (%)
C)
5 Ob
741/4
1.00 542-00
d.24 97-20
0.75 23.00
0.04 3.01
1343b
1.00 9.00
tJ.tid 31«b6
0.04 l-7d
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1
BAG 2
MAG
AIrt
1 • 00
d • 3 2
0-64
0.04
BAG 3
5
60
00
^0
V/..4IX (CF)
DF
CO art EC FED
M< (PP.1)
HC ( PP"i
CO (PPrt)
C02 (Z)
MASS ErtIS
;>JO<
rfC
CO
CO 2
WEIGrtfED
M<
rtC
CO
C02
FUEL ECOiNl
EPAMPG
2020-69
'4» 364b3
COiMC E:\If RATIONS
22.42
C) 90.85
504.06
2.93
SIOiMS (GRArtS/BA
2. 12
3.00
33.b4
3139.42
MASS EMISSIONS
0.47
0.49
2.06
796.2b
\QAi (>iILES/GAL)
1 1.02
3474 « 2-4
7 - b 1 1 1 b
tf . 7 b
23.^6
7 . 7 4
1-75
G)
1.42
1.35
0 • rf 9
3162.24
(GRAinS/rtiLE)
2023-02
b- 4 326 9
21 « 5 i
54.01
3-90
2.43
2.04
1 . / d
0.26
2b60.'4d
-------
****** CVS 758 ******
*** I DEMTIF1 CATION ***
FLST DATE: 1-8-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 680B/QF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 1379
COMMENTS:
STOCK AIR PUMP - EXP EGR
SPRING - 302 ORIFICE
VALVE - STIFF-
3676CC = 11.43 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 54 F CWET>
76 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH« 19 *
IMERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.
1
PRES: 748.385
22.922
24.85 IN.
19.775 IN.
BLOfcKH SPEED! 3
CF/REV: .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAD:
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
MOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
BAG 1
AIR EX
505
7822
1.00
8.60
0.64
0.05
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
9P8.499
BAG 3
AIR KX
5
I
.39.00
00.60
36.25
2.85
868. 1
13432
6.00 7.00
9.84 28.48
0.70 13.86
0.06 1.65
504.9
7813
11.00 12.00
9.28 37.08
Q.66 4S.42
0.07 2.37
VM1X (CM
DF
BAG 1
2042.87
4. 58894
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
.NOX
HC
CO
CO 8
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
35.
93.
599.
2.
75
87
24
81
BAG 2
3508.03
8.10392
13.25
19.85
1. 51
1.60
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
coa
3.
3.
40.
2994.
21
13
36
61
2.
1.
0.
2922.
04
14
17
35
BAG 3
2040. 52
5.64247
44.88
29.44
2. 38
2. 31
4. OP
0.98
0. 16
2460.70
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
0. 76
0-41
2.3S
748.35
HC
CO
COS
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
****** CVS 754 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-9-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 680B/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 1391
COMMENTS:
LEANED OUT CHOKE .030
STOCK AIR PUMP 3577CC - 11.74 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 53 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 18 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
923.444
BAG i
AIR EX
PRES: 751.335
22.243
24.7625
19.775
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3006
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.503
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (J)
503.8
7796
18.90
8.28
0.82
0.05
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
8
i
,39.00
86.40
43.90
2.72
868.7
13444
13.90 14.90
7.96 27.28
0.55 14.90
0.04 1.58
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2042.72
4.83757
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(Z)
43-
79.
398.
2.
25
S3
56
68
MASS EMISSIONS (G RAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3-85
2.66
26*84
2855.31
BAG 2
3522.62
8.45872
14.42
20.26
2. 17
1.54
2.21
1.17
0.25
2837.74
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
781 1
9.40 10.00
7.32 35.92
0-46 46.40
0.04 2.32
BAG 3
2046.65
5.76458
46.02
29.37
1 .77
2.29
4. 10
1.00
0. 12
2440.92
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.83
0.38
1.58
27.58
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GPL)
-------
****** CVS 755 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-12-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEI-i 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE £
TEST MILLS: 1432
COMMENTS:
CHOKE LEANED OUT .015 MORE THEN LAST TEST
GOOD START BAG 1 & 3 3615 CC = 11.62 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
78 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH: 21 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.497
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 750.685 MM HG (EAPO)
24.617
25.025
19.95
BLOWER SPEED:
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
CF/REV: .3012
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
BAG 2
AIR EX
504. 5
7808
3.70 215.00
7.12 72.80
0.45 39.80
0.04 2.78
868.4
13439
2.40 3.00
7.60 25.64
0«66 14.40
0.05 1.60
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2035.98
4.77296
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
39.44
67.17
199.13
2. 75
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.59
2.23
13.37
2918.13
BAG 2
3504.29
8.36009
13.82
18.95
0.79
1.56
2. 17
1.08
0.09
2843.54
928.464
BAG 3
AIR EX
5C3. 1
7784
4.50 5.00
7.20 34.08
0.44 43.70
O.C4 2.31
BAG 3
2029.72
5.79113
43.34
28. 12
1.05
2.28
3.93
0.93
0.07
2410.10
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.79
0.34
.0.73
729.61
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.00
-------
******
S 756
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-13-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: WA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1465
COMMENTS:
2ND TEST ( BASELINE CATALYST )
NO VEHICLE CHANGES 3608 CC = 11.64 MPH
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (VET)
78 F (DRY)
101 F (MIX)
RH: 21 X
INERTIA WT.: 400C LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.508
PRES: 743.585 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.675 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3009
.BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.534
BAG
AIR
1
EX
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
506
7831
1.00 192.00
9.84 74.00
C.42 40.10
0.04 2.80
868.3
13436
3.00 4.00
10.08 29.00
0.57 14.20
0.04 1 .61
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2035.23
4.74263
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(Z)
39
66
179
2
77
£3
57
77
MASS EMISSIONS (GPAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.62
2.20
12. C5
2938.34
BAG 2
3491.93
8.30603
13.70
20. 13
1.23
1.57
2. 14
1.15
0.14
2867.81
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.2
7834
2.30 3.00
9.40 37.76
0.47 45.80
0.04 2.36
BAG 3
2036.01
5.66821
45.41
30.02
0.96
2.33
4. 14
1.00
0.06
2470.82
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.81
0.36
0.71
738.62
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.85
-------
CVS 760 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 1522
COMMENTS:
3 RD CATALYST BASELINE TEST - VEHICLE VILLNOV
BE TAKBJ TO EPA IN MICH. 3600 CC = 11.57 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 55
75
93
RH: 24 X
INERTIA VT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) I
(WET)
( DRY )
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES:
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.369
BAG 1
AIR EX
50-4. 1
7799
4.50 235.00
19.84 94.28
0.67 44.36
0.05 2.75
752.985
22.243
25.025
19.8625
BLOVER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-472
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.4
13422
6.30 7.50
21.16 39.36
0.71
0.06
15.40
1.61
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
vmx
DF
2063.9
4.81754
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
43.83
78.56
217.20
2.71
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.06
2.65
14.73
2917.25
3551.95
8.29893
14.78
20.75
1.71
1.56
2.36
1.20
0.20
2884.52
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.5
7806
2.40 3.40
23.04 52.92
0.60 44.91
0.05 2.31
BAG 3
2065.75
5.7868
44.41
33.86
1.25
2.27
4. 12
1 . 14
0.09
2443.98
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.86
0.40
0.88
737.60
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.89
-------
CVS 782 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-6-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-03/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DFI7EP: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1916
COMMENTS:
FIRST TEST USING ELECTRIC CHOKE TOO LEAN 1 ST«LL
DUAL DIAPHRAGM EGR SSHCPOFT VALVE 3735 CC = 1 I . 24
*** TLST DATA ***
TEMP: 52 F (VET)
72 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 21 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
928.598
BAG 1
AIR EX
50$. 6
7840
1.00 130.00
10. 12
0. 69
PRES: 748.935 MM HG (bAPO)
20.07 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.7625 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.5125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPi.Eu: 3
CF/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 923.534
0.04
94.40
46.40
2.80
3
1 1
0
0
BAG 2
AIR
863.2
13436
.00
.08 3
.76
.05
EX
4.
1 .
8.
1.
00
83
42
72
1
1
1
0
0
bAG
AIR
506.
7334
.00
.83
.57
.04
3
EX
1
2.
46-
27.
2.
00
80
90
41
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2053. 61
4. 7411
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
45.86
36.41
168.29
2. 77
BAG 2
3519.43
7.77455
7.76
22.23
1 .24
1.68
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4. 12
2.90
11.39
2964.88
1.
1 .
0.
3076.
20
28
14
89
BAG 3
2052-04
5.54395
27.43
37.06
1 -08
2.38
2.46
1 .24
0.07
2543.94
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.58
0.43
0.63
773.58
(MILES/GAL)
11.43
-------
******
735 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-9-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TiST: WA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILi.S: 1928
COMMENTS:
SECOND TEST WITH
CHOKE IS NOT SET
ELECTRIC CHOKE
UP FIGHT YET
1 1 .04 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 54 F (VET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 21 £
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
928.573
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 746.585
22.243
24.7625
19.5125
BLGUER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3006
SLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.534
MM HG (BARO)
MKi HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
BAG 3
AIR i.X
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER R£VS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
506.4
7837
1.00 345.00
22.52 120.00
0.43 34.50
0.04 2.36
367.9
1 3432
2.60 3.00
22.84 44.40
0.70 9.60
0.04 1.76
505.8
7828
1.00 2.00
28.60 66.80
0.55 22.60
0.05 2.42
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VHIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2047. 21
4.61374
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
34. 1 6
102-36
322.89
2.83
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 10
3.42
21. 79
3019.94
BAG 2
3508.75
7.59324
3.99
24.57
0.64
1.73
1.40
1 .41
0.07
3156.92
BAG 3
2044.86
5.52152
22. 15
43.33
1.03
2.38
2.00
1 -45
O.C7
2537.01
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0. 52
0.49
1.26
786.83
FUEL ECOMGMY (MIL£S/GAL)
EPAMPG
11 . 23
-------
****** CVS 737 *+****
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-10-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 63 Ob/GF
POAD TEST: i«JA
DRIVER: HIKE K
T^ST MILES: 1939
COMMENTS:
TRYIiJG TO
1 1 .20 MPG
SET UP ELECTRIC
AT 3748 CC
CHOKE TIME
*** TEST DATA ***
F (VET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
TEMP: 56
77
100
Rri: 23 A
IIJERTIA VT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (£)
928.62
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.9
7831
1.00 257.00
14.20 107.60
0.47 31.70
0.04 2.74
MM HG (3ARO)
MM HG (VAPOF)
PEES: 736-935
23.756
24.4125 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.1625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVc-R SPEED: 3
CF/HE7: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 923.605
BAG 2
AIR EX
070.6
13473
1 .00
16.40
0.57
0.04
2.00
36.40
8.45
1.78
1
16
0
0
BAG
AIR
506.
7833
.00
.00
.43
.04
3
£/:
i
2.
56.
21 .
2.
00
30
60
43
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2013.31
4.32893
BAG 2
3472.45
7.51192
BAG 3
•2015.33
5.39047
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (i)
31.33
96.34
240.75
2. 71
7.96
22. 13
1 .05
1 .75
2! .25
43.77
1 .08
2.45
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
i-JOX
HC
CC
C02
2.85
3. 13
16.02
2850. 61
1 .25
1.26
0. 12
3160.58
1 .94
1 .44
0.07
2576.69
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.43
0.46
0.94
780.67
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11.41
-------
794 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
T£ST DATE: 2-17-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DPIVLP: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 1997
COMMENTS:
SETUP TEST FOR ELECTRIC CHOKE
1 1.03 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F (WET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
55
78
100
RH : 18 %
INERTIA WT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
4000 LBS
928.527
EAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 744.985 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.85 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.516
DAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505.8
7828
1.00 298.00
9.92 104.00
0.68 32.00
0.04 2.94
867.6
13426
1.00 9.90
10-76 33.60
0.78 8.24
0-04 1.74
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2042.13
4.49915
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
31.47
96.28
278.63
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/EAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.83
3.21
18. 76
3097.88
BAG 2
3502.51
7.68212
7.56
24.24
8.65
1.71
1.17
1.39
1.00
3114.66
EAG 3
AIR EX
505. 9
7829
1.00 . 2.00
9.48 44.80
0.68 19-60
0.04 2.50
BAG 3
2042-39
5.35001
19.05
37.09
1.03
2.47
1.71
1 .24
0.07
2628.13
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.45
0.46
792.64
(MILES/GAL)
11.03
-------
£yc; 799
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2/18/76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 63 OL/OF
ROAD TEST: IJA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2008
COMMENTS:
NO
1 1 •
PPEP
OMPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 62 F (VET)
80 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 35 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.606
BAG 1
AIR EX
506.5
7839
0.00 285.00
18.84 85.60
0.42 27.44
0.04 2.93
723.335 MM HG (bARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.15 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.657
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.3
13438
0.00 1.00
26.76 38.28
0.55 8.73
0.06 1.78
*** CALCULATED RESULTS'***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
1996.39
4.51905
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
27. 1 1
70.93
266.64
2.90
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2. 69
2.31
17.55
3018.05
BAG 2
3422.32
7.51153
8.25
15.08
0.95
1 .73
1.40
0.84
0. 1 1
3084.01
BAG 3
AIR EX
506. 6
7841
0.00 7.50
22.56 48.52
0.48 19.24
0.05 2.47
BAG 3
1996.9
5.41292
18.85
30.13
7.06
2.43
1 .37
0.98
0.46
2529.77
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAHPG
0.43
0.32
1.06
776.50
(MILES/GAL)
11.36
-------
**.**** CV.~ !C1 *.<•<***
TEST iJ/
VLHICL
2-19-76
ETV 24
UiPl -j3-Oo/Ur
Ti-ST: iJ/4
LPIVLF: I;IJ:E K
Tt?T MILiLf-: 2020
PaiJ TL3T TO SLL CHOKL.
11.10 :irti.
*** Ti-ST
***
: 53 F (VLT)
30 F (LPV)
99 F (!'iiv)
P*-i: 23 ;i
INERTIA X'T. : 4CCO LBS
FUc-L: HO III
LLOVtK RPM (ACT): 928.5i9
PRLS: 736.135 Illi ;iG (t.nPO)
23.271 MK lib ( VP.PJ P )
24.5 I.vl. H20 (i:JL£T)
19.425 IiJ. H20 (O'JTLLT)
F SPL^D: 3
7: .3010
P RPM (CAD: 92J.5J9
t/iu 1
AIP
faLOV'L? RiLVS
CU (PPH)
C02
73 j 2
4. 10 313-00
11.60 76.00
C.4o 29.70
0.04 2.89
13'436
1-00 2 . 0G
14.56 28.60
0-35 9.17
C.C3 1.76
5 0 'j . 4
733S
1.00 2.00
10.SO 45.fcC
0.55 £0.00
O.C4 2.47
vmx (CF)
DF
CO?RtCTc.D
***
2C22.74
4. 5 73 1 3
l> PESULT? ***
.jAG 2
3470.06
7.60C46
2C2-4. 2/
5.41478
HO:: (PP15)
HO (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
MAS? -LSI SSI QMS < GPAl-iS/oAG)
IvJX
hC
CO
CO 2
I'EIGiiTtD MASS ENI??IO;;S
29.34
6o.93
290.0^
2.36
8.43
15.96
1.C6
1 .72
19. 55
36.3?
1 .08
2.44
2. 72
2.21
19.35
3015. 56
1 . 34
0-90
0.12
3 1 06- 33
1.31
1 .20
0.07
2573-07
HC
CJ
CJ2
0.47
C.34
1. 13
732.33
11.27
-------
****** C'/S 317 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-2-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: 11A
DRIVEF: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 6477
COMMENTS:
BASELINE TEST NO CATALYST OF ANYKIND
VEHICLE IN CATALYST CAIBRATION 3738 CC
= 11.23 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 60 F (VET)
82 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RHz 25 *
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.616
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (%)
506.3
7836
9.70 3500.00
10.16 256.40
0.65 48.09
0.04 2.61
PRES: 743.435
28.021
24.4125
19.1625
BLOVER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3000
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.605
MM HG (EARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.4
1 3423
24.20 2700-00
12.68 204.40
1.12 13.70
0.05 1.51
DAG 3
AIR EX
506
7333
14.00 3900.00
10.80 249.20
0.83 35.90
0.04 2.11
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
LF
BAG 1
2035.12
4.51904
BAC
3486.14
7.43431
BAG 3
2034.34
5.34732
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPH C)
CO (PPM )
C02 (*)
47. 53
243.49
3233.40
2.53
12.73
193.41
2573.92
1 .47
35.13
240.42
3393.31
2.03
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.53
8.26
220.64
2736.97
2.08
1 1.01
296.42
2666.46
3.35
7.99
248.09
2204.02
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0. 7?
2.55
71.03
679.95
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11.07
-------
CVS U20 **;•***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-3-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GO4 NONE
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE X
TEST MILES: 6502
COMMENTS:
2ND BASELINE TEST NO CATALYST
OF ANY KIND DIN TRACE 3725 CC = 11-28 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 64 F (VET)
78 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 46 Z
INERTIA WT.: 4COO LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.536
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 745.135 MM HG (BARO)
HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
. H20 (OUTLET)
24.617 MM
24.15 IN.
19.075 IN
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2993
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-64
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (t)
503. 1
7832
3.70 3900.00
6.08 301.24
0.46 52.62
0.05 2.54
BAG 2
AIR EX
367
13427
1 1.60 2800.00
8.68 205.60
0.94 12.48
0.05 1.50
VMIX (CF)
DF
2036-25
4.56518
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (i)
52
296
3648
25
.49
52
2.50
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAHS/JJAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
5. 5o
9.85
244.95
2555.82
3490.96
7.49309
1 1 .67
198.08
2667.65
1.46
2. 13
11.29
307.04
2551.92
WEIGHTED MASS ZMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAKPU
0-85
2. 71
73. 72
672.35
(MILES/GAL)
11.13
BAG 3
AIR EX
505- 6
7815
5.80 3900.00
8.92 260.40
0.70 31.68
0.04 2.10
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
2031.36
5.37136
31.11
253.14
3679.75
2.07
3.30
8.40
246.51
2190.70
-------
******
6ii2 ** K***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TLST DATE: 3-4-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: iJA
UWI7EF: LARRY
TEST MILt,S: 6524
COMMENTS:
3 RD. TEST BASELINE NO CATALYST
3780 CC = 11.18 M.P.G.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F CVLT)
F (DRV)
F (MIX)
64
78
100
P.H: 43 %
INERTIA VT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
4000 LbS
TIME (SECS)
dLOVER RE7S
CO (PPIO
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPH)
C02 (*)
929.164
BAG 1
AIR EX
5C4. 3
7813
2.20 3500.00
3.12 285.72
0.51 54.22
0.05 2.58
PRES: 743.485 MM HG (bAF.O)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 I1J. H20 CliJLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPIED: 3
GF/RE7: .3002
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928-537
BAG 2
AIR tX
357.7
13430
33.30 2300.00
12.56 207.60
1.45 12.97
0.06 1.55
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2030.25
4. 56352
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPH C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (,0
53.82
279. 38
3275.87
2.54
MASS eilSSIONS (GRATIS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
5.60
9.26
219.23
2690.31
BAG 2
3439.86
7.28043
11.72
196.76
2649.23
1.50
2.09
11.21
304.82
2726.73
LAG 3
AIR EX
507.9
7377
14.00 3900.00
12.23 260.40
0-89 33.33
0.06 2.13
BAG 3
2046.88
5.20539
33.1 1
250.43
3671.02
2. 13
3.47
8.37
247.74
2275.30
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.86
2.66
72.04
690.73
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10.95
-------
CVS 331 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-16-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: MA
LRIVER: MIKE K
Tc.ST MILES: 6536
COMMENTS:
HOT START - NO CAT. VVEGF
3636 CC = 11.55 MFC
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 55 F (VET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 19 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LB£
FUEL: HO III
ELOVLR RPM (ACT):
PRES: 736.185 MM Hu (BARO)
TIME (SECS)
bLUWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
002 (A)
925.534
faAG 1
AIR EX
505.4
7838
7.00 3300.OC
8.20 235.12
0.53 40.15
0.04 2.42
25.509 MM
24.15 IW.
19.C75 IN.
ELGVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3001
ELOVER RPM (CAL):
HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
. H20 (OUTLET)
928.64
bAG
AIR
EX
367.6
13426
20.CO 2800.00
10.23 208.03
1.16 13-70
0.06 1-52
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VIIIX (CF)
DF
BAG i
2016. 33
4.35311
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
HC
GO
C02 (~
:)
(PPIi C)
39. 73
273. M
3120.49
2.39
MASS EMISSIONS (GPAMS/tAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3.56
9. 1 7
207.45
2511.34
EAG 2
3453.94
7-39965
12.70
199- 19
^633.70
1 .47
1.95
1 1.23
305.61
2644.40
AIR
7U27
36.00 3800.00
9.56 256-00
0.34 35.30
0.06 2.14
BAG 3
2013.55
5.30144
34.62
3591.11
3. 1C
8. 16
233.40
2196.03
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
WOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 70
2.o4
70.76
663. 47
FU.
ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
CVS 832 ******
***
TLST DATE: 3-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
***
ROAD TiST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE 1C
TEST MILES: 5548
COMMENTS:
HOT START - NO CAT - V/0 EGR
VACCUM LINES EUR BLOCKED
*** TLST DATA ***
TEMP!
57 F (VET)
80 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 20 '*
INERTIA WT-: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
PRESS
736.185
26.271
3307 CC -=12.70MPU
MM HG (BARO)
MM Hb (VAPUP)
TIME (SLCS)
liLOVZR REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.5S2
BAG 1
AIR E:
503. I
7853
13.30 3500.00
3. 12 272.20
0.51 14C-00
0.05 2.00
23.8 IN. H20 (IwLET)
18.9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SP^Ei^: 3
Cr/REV: .2993
bLOVLR RPM (GAL): 923.o93
EAL 2 BAG 3
AIR EX A1H LX
874.4
13534
27.70 2800.00
9.43 186.44
1.39 44.40
0.06 1.36
504.7
7810
23.20 3600.00
9.08 217.00
l.£0 133.00
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2019.84
5. 5744
CORRECTED CONCENTRATI QMS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
139.33
265.51
3331.75
1.96
MASS EMISSION S (G RAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
12. 64
8. 76
221.88
206 3. 31
3476.6
3.12365
43. 18
178. 13
2684.47
1 .31
6. 74
10. 1 1
307.70
2370.36
0.04
BAG 3
20C6.23
5.71269
132.01
209-51
3420.51
1.95
1 1.90
6-86
226-25
2037.05
1.9!
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2. 53
2.37
7C.94
5S9. 16
FU.-L ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
CVS 334 ******
*** IDi.IJTIFICATIOw ***
TEST DATE: 3-17-75
Vi^ilCLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GiJI 69-52A/b
ROAD TEST: :JA
*.QTTT- T"» • >'rTtrV * '
LJri i. y i_ii v • fa 1 *i.li. *v
TEST MILES:
HOT START - W/CATALYST - V/ZGP.
TEMP 5 INLET TRRACE 3599 CC
= 1 1 .57 MFu
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F
(VET)
(DRY)
(HIX)
54
77
100
RH: 17
INZHTIA WT.: 4000
f UEL: HO III
BLGVER RPM (ACT)
TIME (SLCS)
BLOWilP. REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
HOX (PPM)
C02 (i)
0 LbS
: 923.556
LAS-
AIR
5C<;.
78G4
6.30
6.96
0.80
0.06
1
E-:
3
7.00
29.60
1 4.42
2.49
PRES: 745.735 KM HU (liARO)
23.756 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.975 IN. H20 (INLET)
13-9 IW. H20 (OUTLET)
bLOVER SPELD: 3
CF/REV: .2933
BLO VLR RPM (CAL): 9 23•s75
AIR
LX
369
13449
6.00
6. 68
0.87
0.07
6.50
21.56
9.20
1 .73
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
3AG 1
2028. 13
5.37371
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (%)
13-
23.
1
77
94
53
44
BAG 2
3495.26
7.73323
8.44
15. 74
1.05
1.67
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.
0.
0.
2532.
22
79
10
01
1
0
0
3042
.29
.90
12
31
505. 1
731 7
10.OC 11.00
5.84 34.32
0.63 21.80
0.07 2.44
BAG 3
2031.56
5.48175
21.28
29.55
2.29
2.38
1.39
0.98
0. 15
2524.44
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 33
0.24
0.03
745.53
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
* CVS 335
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DaTE: 3- 1 7-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52A/B
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: MI ICE K
TEST 1IILES: 10600
CONSENTS:
HOT START -V/CATALYST - UO EGR
CARBURETOR LEANED OUT 3330 CC = 12.62 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEKP: 55 F (WET)
76 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 22 /.
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.576
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 746.385 MM Hl> (oARO)
22.922 MM HG (VAPOR)
24. 15 IN. H20 (INLLT)
19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/RE7: .2993
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 925.64
TIT.E (SECS)
BLOWER PEVS
CO (PPli)
HC (PP!:; C)
IJOV (PPM)
C02 (X)
505. 1
7317
2.80 3-00
5.52 27.20
0.49 79.17
0.05 2.36
bau 2
AI R EX
363.3
13433
2.90 3.00
5.52 21-16
0.73 23.64
0.06 1.59
A b
AIR
7328
5.00 6.00
5-44 23.40
0.69
0-06
84. 10
2.29
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
Vt-IIX (CF)
LF
1
2035.24
5. 67075
BAG 2
3498.72
3.41495
BAG 3
2038. 1
5.84233
CORRECTED CG^CENTRATIGUS
73. 77
22. 65
0. 55
O ^ *-•
C. • JC.
22.95
16.30
0.35
1 .54
153.53
23-09
1 .56
2.24
,-jc ( PPH c)
CO (PPM )
C02 (i)
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/3AG)
HC
CO
C02
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
7.15
0. 75
0.04
2451 . 14
3. 58
0.93
0.04
2304.62
7 . o 0
0.80
0. 1 1
2331. 1 1
NOX
HC
CJ
COZ
FUEL ECOiJOhY
1.47
0.23
0.02
696.02
-------
CVS 338 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-19-76
VDilCLE: ET7 2 79
. . C.07
"^375.73
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
KOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.35
o.k:2
0.02
^94.03
(MILES/GAL)
-------
CVS 839 ******
*** I .J^I
TEST DATE: 3-19-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52A/3
. CiiTIurt ***
HOaD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 6598Vil
COMMENTS:
HOT START - 1-//EGR - VVCATALYST
INSULATED MAiJIFOLDS . 3531 CC = 11.90 MFG
*•** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 61 F (VET)
77 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 39 %
INERTIA VT-: 4000 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 923.597
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 739.735 MM HG (<
23.753 MM HG (V^POR)
23.625 IW. H20 (IWLET)
18.725 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
ELOWER SPEED: 3
OF/REV:, .2983
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.723
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
:-JOX (PPM)
C02 (i)
504. 7
73 1 1
1.00 2.00
4.76 25.12
0.44 17.95
0.04 2.47
BAb 2
AIR EX
363.2
13437
1.00 2.00
5.40 18.60
0.46 7.63
0.04 1.70
EriLi 3
AIP EX
504.9
7814
1.00 2.00
6« 60
0.35
0.05
20.56
13.00
2.44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VrilX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2012.77
5.41918
BAG 2
3462.5
7.37285
2013.54.
5.48496
CORRECTED CO;JCE;JTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (S)
EMISSIONS ( uRrf':S/i3Ab)
1 7.59
21. £4
1.07
2.44
7.23
13.89
1.05
1 .67
12.71
23. 10
1 .07
2..4C
NOX
HC
CO
C02
WEIGHTED MaSS EMISSIONS (bRAMS/MILE)
1. 75
0. 70
O.C7
2553.42
1 .24
0.79
0.12
3006.62
1.27
0.76
0.07
2519.22
NUX
HC
CJ
C02
0.36
C.2C
0. 03
7 39 . 0 3
FUEL
(KILLS/uAL)
-------
****** CVS 345
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-24-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52 A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 6685 VM
COMMENTS:
HOT START - WO EGP - U/CAT
INSULATED MANIFOLDS 3272 CC =
*** TEST DATA ***
12.84 MFL
TEMP: 60 F (VET)
76 F CDRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH» 35 %
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.735
TIME (SECS)
fcLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
WOX (PPH)
C02 (.»)
VMIX (CF)
DF
HAG
AIP
I
EX
506.2
7338
1.00 2.00
4.63 21.68
0.46 73.34
0.05 2.29
PRES: 764.435 MM HG (J3ARG)
22.922 MM HG CVAPOP)
23.975 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
E-LOV'EP SPEED: 3
CF/PEV: .2974
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 923.675
dAi^ 2 LAG 3
AIR EX AIP EX
505. 1
7817
00 2.00
03 27.72
0.30 79.95
0. 06 2.34
866.8
13416
2.00 3.00
4.60 19.20
0.59 £1.80
0.05 1.59
1
5
0
0
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 E-.4G 3
2031.42
5.84551
3562.68
3.41599
2075.34
5-71926
CORRECTED COi'JCEMTRAT'IOWS
NOX (PPI!)
HC (PpM C)
CO (PPM)
CJ2 (-)
73.46
17.30
1 .C7
2. £5
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/oAb)
HC
CO
CJ
7.29
0-61
O.C7
2440.71
2-1.23
15. 15
1.13
1.55
3.o2
0.83
0. 13
£372.26
UEI&.ITED MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/HILo)
WOX
.iC
CJ
C02
1. 50
0.21
0.03
711.35
79.43
£3.53
1.07
2.29
7.87
0.80
C.C7
2479.57
^L ECONOMY (MILi-EV u«-
-------
CVS 34o ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-24-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GC1 69 -52
A/b
POAD TEST: :JA
DPIVEP: LARRY
TEST MILES: 6S967M
COiiMEiJTS:
HOT START - INSULATED HANI FOLDS
V/EGR - V/CttT 3593CC = 11.69
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 72 F (VET)
73 F CDRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 72 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPI1 (ACT): 928.702
PRES: 745.785 Mil HG (EAFO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPJP)
23.8 IN. H20 (IwLET)
13.025 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2975
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 923-781
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
WOX (PPIi)
C02 (%)
BAG 1
AIR bX
504. 7
7812
1.00 2.00
4.92 25.28
0. 57 14. 13
0.06 2.56
AIP EX
863
13436
1.00 2.00
4.63 17.38
0.53 8.59
0.05 1.77
1
BAG 3
AIR EX
504. 5
7303
• 00
4.44
0.44
0.05
£.00
26.80
2.51
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VPIIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2021.35
5. 22383
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPII C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
13. 72
21.30
1.03
2. 51
BAG 2
3477.42
7.56218
8.09
13.82
1 .04
1 .73
iiAG 3
2020.82
5.33256
12.70
23. 19
1.06
2.47
Ma£ S El 11S 5 I 0 N S ( U RPM S/ LAG )
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1. 76
C. 70
0-07
2648.09
1.73
0-73
0. 12
3131.17
1 « 63
0.77
0.07
2602.37
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0-46
0-20
O.C3
767.09
FUiL ECO.JOMY CMIL^S/^
-------
CVf. 847 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-24-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69 -52
ROAD T~ST: NA
DRIVEP: LARRY
TEST HILc,S: 6710
COMMENTS:
MANUAL LOAD - 18*5 HP - HOT START -
CARBURETOR VENT RICH DURING SECOND
V/EGR
4439UG = 9-Mj
*** TEST LiATA ***
TEMP: 72 F (VET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 71 X
INERTIA WT. : 4500 L&S
FU=.L: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.624
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER RE7S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (S)
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG
AIR
EX
505.4
7822
00 10.00
32 15.32
0. 41
0-04
9.38
3. 16
PRES: 745.585 MM HG (LiARU)
24.61 7 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.975 IN. H2J (luLLT)
13.9 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLUU'ER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2985
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 923.675
BAG 2
AIR EX
363. 1
13435
2.00 70.CO
4.56 6.92
0.45 6.76
0.06 2.26
DAG 3
AIR EX
503
• o
7795
00 420.00
64 13.76
43 1 1.00
O.C5
31
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
2C32.38
4.23722
3490.8
5.9103
2025.37
4.00031
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
( PPM )
(X)
9.
12.
3.
3.
57
C2
42
13
MASS EMISSIONS (GP.AKS/bAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.22
0.4C
0.56
3316.85
6-39
3.13
63.73
2.21
1.4C
0.13
7.33
4023.48
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.36
0.07
2.95
939.32
10.64
10-28
332.87
3.27
1.35
0.34
25.57
3456.51
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
-------
L.VS 350 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 3-25-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: G EM 69-52A/L
PJAD TLST: wA
DRIVE!".: MII:E K
TEST KILES: 674CVM
COMMENTS:
HOT START - MANUAL LOAD - 18-5 HP - V/0 EGF.
W/CAT - NO VAC. ADV - INSULATED MAN.
*** TEST DATA ***
F (VET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
TEMP: 53
69
100
RH: 29 %
IUERTIA VT
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (aCT):
4500 LBS
928.716
BAG 1
AIR E?
PRES: 744.735 Mtl KG (EARO)
13.197 MM HG (VAPOE)
23.975 IW. H2D (IwLET)
18.9 1W. H20 (OUTLET)
faLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2989
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 923.575
BAG 2
AIR EX
3
AIR
EX
TltlE (SECS)
BLOVEP REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPH)
C02 (%)
505. 7
7823
1.00 2.00
4.00 13.40
0. 53 49.53
0.04 2.77
857.5
13427
1.00 2.00
4.00 15.40
0.94 12.85
0.06 1.93
505.2
7820
1.00 2.00
3.60 22.38
0.55 59.15
0.0.6 2.74
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2032.04
4.83401
CORRECTED COMCEMTPATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPH C)
(PPM)
(X)
49
15
1
. 1 1
23
09
2. 74
MASS EMISSIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.43
0.51
O.C7
2901. 77
BAG 2
3465.46
6.93673
12.05
11.98
1.06
1.38
1.83
0. 53
0. 12
3414.76
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (uRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.91
0- 1 7
0.03
333.23
BAG 3
2029.96
4.8861
53.71
20.02
1.09
2.69
5.35
0.66
C-07
2850.12
FUEL ECONOMY (HILLS/G^L
-------
***
/S 051 ******
***
TtST DATE: 3-26-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
GEM NOME
RJ«L TLST: NA
DPIVLP.: MIKc. }•:
TEST MILES: 6753
COin'EUTS:
HOT STA^T - NO/CAT V/'J :;:CP - iJO '/V.G.
ADV. - I.JSULATED MANIFOLDS 410? CC = 10.22
*** TjiST DATA ***
TEMP: 63 F (VET)
76 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 43 »
IIJEPTIA WT.: 4500 LbS
FUEL: HO III
LLOVET* RPM (aCT): 928.565
PR£.S: 742.135 Mil HG (LAPJ)
22.922 KM HU (VAPOF.)
23.975 Ii\i. iI20 (IuLi.T
13.9 IN. H2C (OUTLET)
bLOUER SPEED: 3
CF/R^V: .2991
iiLO VLP. RFt: ( C AL ) : 923.67^
TIH£ (SECS)
faLOUER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (nPi: o
NO'C (PPti)
C02 (-)
AIR c.K
5C4. 7
7810
1.00 3900.00
5.03 191.40
0.53 111.50
2. 56
HlR
13435
22.70 1510.00
5.7-5 132.72
1.17 37. 53
0-05 1 • 72
0.04
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
Vf.IX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2021.2
4.55132
Bali 2
3476.93
7.13931
111.C5
137.04
3646. 57
2. 53
36-62
126.91
1417.33
1.68
108.77
2C4.07
39CS.92
2 . o 1
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
MASS EMISSIONS ( GPAMS/EAu)
k i -•> * *
Vt \J t\
CO
C02
VEIGHTEL) lirtSS EMISSIONS (URrtMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
COS
2-42
1.33
55.45
7jC.Ql
L Au 3
A IF. L':
506. 1
7833
25-80 4200-00
7-2C 209.63
0.94 IO'P.50
0«C5 C..55
£027.15
4 » 52 1 1 o
11. 63
6. 19
243.00
2665.43
6-30
7.21
162.43
3040.73
1 1 .43
5.76
Col .25
2654-59
-------
* C7E 653 *•*-*•**
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST LATE: 3-29-76
VEHICLE: ET7 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
COMMENTS
PUAu TEST: UA
EPIVEP.: KIKE K
T~ST MILES: 6767
iIOT START WO VAC. ADV.
IWSULATtL. IlAiJI FOLDS 4093 CC = 10.26 liPb.
*** TEST DATA ***
F O'ET)
F CDPY)
F (MIX)
TEMP: 62
78
100
RH: 39 /i
INEFTIA VT.: A500 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.638
PRES: 745.135 MM HU (BAPU)
ci4.617 MM Hti (7APOD
24.0623 IN. H20 (luLET)
19.1625 Ii\I. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVEP SPEED: 3
CF/P.EV: .2993
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 923.64
TIKE (SECS)
BLOVEP REVS
CO (PPH)
HC (pr:i o
WOX (PPM)
C02 (i)
BAG 1
AIP EX
504. 7
7311
BAG 2
A I R LX
868.3
-I 344C
.b A b 3
A I R EX
5 C 5 • 3
7320
0.20 3400.00 14.60 1527.00 24.10 36CO.OO
4.44 ISO.40
0.25 138.00
0.04 2.63
5.23 122.04
0.68 39.39
0.04 1.66
VtilX (CF)
DF
2033.59
4.51704
3499.09
7.37033
137. 31
I 76.94
3184.38
2. 60
33.30
1 17.48
1446.51
1.63
132. 57
180.05
3357.27
2.55
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPi'i)
HC. (PPK C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/EnC)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
V7EIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2. 73
1. 69
51. 32
759. 115
6.00 1C4.30
0.55 133.00
0.04 2.5tf
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
2035.93
4.56393
13. 97
5. 08
213. 54
2756. 13
6.77
6.71
166. S3
2966.04
13.46
5.99
225.35
2706. 12
FUEL ECOIJOMY (tllLES/GA)
EPAMPG
10.44
-------
i;"/S
***
T-ST ~'«T_: 3-30-76
24
HOT START
hi ***
TEST: LJa
T~ST MILES: j737
ADV. V/0 EGP
-J MANIFOLLS 32B6 CG = 12-78 II
*** TiST LATA ***
TLT'.P: 62 F (UET)
75 F
-------
Q7S 856 ******
*** luLuTIFICATICKJ ***
TEST DATE: 3-30-76
VEHICLE: LTV 24
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMEUTS:
TEST: iJA
DRIVER: HIKE K
TEST MILES: 6799
HOT START V'/EbP. VAC.
VEHICLE STOCK SPECS.
*** TEST DATA ***
INSULATED Iw-iiJI FOLSS
3562 CC = 11.79 liPL
TEMP: 53 r (VET)
77 F (L'RY)
100 F (MIX)
FH: 45 %
KJEPvTIA UT. : 4000 LBS
FUEL : HO 1 1 I
BLJVER RP11 (ACT): 920.605
PRES: 739.085 MM Hti (E^PO)
23.756 nil Hb (VAPOR)
23.625 IN. H20 ( liJLET)
18.3125 IN. H20 (OUTLbT)
5LOVER SPEED: 3
OF/REV: .2937
bLO I'ER RPM ( C AL ): 923.71 9
EAG 1
AIP £V
AIF
TIME (Si^CS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PP1I)
HC (PPI1 C)
NOX (PPI:)
C02 (»)
505.4 357.3
7322 13430
4.80 3900.00 32.30 2700.00
7.63 245.32 10.03 206.40
0.37 35.63 0.50 12-50
0.05 2.24 O.C7 1.57
*** CALCULATED RESULTS *•*=*
VMIX (CF)
E-AG 1
2014.7
5.091 1
BAG 2
3459.15
7.2439
CORRECTED CO:JCEIJTFAT I GrtS
HC (PFi. C)
CO (Pr-n)
C02 (A)
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAb)
HC
CO
C02
VEIGHTED HASS EtilSSIOIJS (GRAMS/MILE)
0. 77
2. 60
7C.53
663. 49
HC
CO
C02
505. 1
7313
27.40 3750.OC
10.44 271.20
0.57 34.90
0.07 2.15
EAG 3
2013.67
5.27335
35.33
239. 15
3671. 34
2.20
12.07
197. 71
2551.29
1.51
34.44
262.7/1
3517. 59
2. 10
3. 57
7.37
243.37
231 1. 23
2. 15
11.17
290.97
2723.34
3.57
3. 54
233.54
2208-71
FUEL ECOl-IUiiY
EPA:;PU
11 .54
-------
***
CVS j57 *•*• ***
Ohi **•*
TEST DaTL: 3-30-76
VEHICLE: LTV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NJWE
LFI7LR: MIKE K
T^ST I1ILES: o5
COIiHEHTS:
HUT ST^iRT Ma.\IU**L LJAD 18.5 it. P. »Ju V;io. ADV.
INSULATED MANIFOLDS 4531 CC = 2 — 9.27 HFu.
*** TEST DaTA ***
TEMP: 65 F (VET)
79 F (DSY)
100 F (t-'.IX)
RH: 50 %
INERTIA VT-: 4000 LES
FUEL: H3 III
BLOWER PPM (ACT): 923.619
1
PRES: 737.3S5 1111 HU (BAPU)
25.509 Hi; Hfj (VAPOR)
23.7125 IN. H20 CI.vLET)
13.3125 IU. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOT7£P SPLLD: 3
CF/RE'/: .2990
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928-71
Z>Au 2 LAO 3
AIP
i-X
TIME (SECS)
BLJVER REVS
CO (PPH)
HC (PP1! C)
NO:: (pp:i)
CJ2 (»)
504.9
7315
5. 20 4975.
7.20 237.
0.53 40-
C-04 2.
363«6
13.^43
00 53.70 4050,00
20 10.36 182. CC
60 0.91 15.15
33 0.06 1.94
5C .':
7331
4.34 6C5C.CC
9.92 295.6/j
1 -C9 40.56
0.05 2.70
*+* CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2009.24
4.04091
BAG 2
3456.2
5.72274
IjAG 3
2013. 35
4.06331
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
WOX ( PFJ-3 )
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (*)
MASS El'iISSIOMS
HOX
HC
CO
C02
WEIGHTED riASS
WOK
HC
CO
C02
4C.20
231. 73
4619. T6
2.80
14.40
1 73.45
3739. 74
1.89
39. 74
28b. 1 6
5634.25
2. 66
(GFrtl'S/DAij)
4.41
7. 60
306. 04
2933. 73
EMISSIONS (
0.95
2.46
103- 55
834.97
2.71
9.79
431.34
3407.42
GRAMS/MILE)
4.36
9.47
374.00
2795. 3C
FUEL ECUiJOMY
EPAi'PG
-------
KaTEP.Irt^:
COMMENTS:
***
O'/S 3 j 1 *+•***
9W ***
4-1-76
~T7 2/1
/\ ^PI 7i.F: lilJIu ii
9-5^l-H/L Tl^ST iiILj-S:
A
C3LE START I.'JSUL/T^L> MAiJI FOLL5
HEAT UP RATE POOR 3319 CC =11 HPG.
TEMP: 5^4 F CVLT)
70 F
52. 76
71. i 5
2 13. 20
2.b4
7. 14
13.01
0 • 5 >
1 . 78
22.32
27. 62
5.4C
2 « 53
iJuX
HC
CO
C02
4.S9
2. 36
14. 51
2935-40
1.13
1 .02
0.07
3212.31
'^ . C Y
0-91
G « 3o
25-o6« 05
UQX
HC
CO
C02
„;, MASS EtUSSIUiJS (bP.AiiS^SIL~)
0 • 59
0.34
o.a?
!J 0 2. 15
FUEL. ELJ..-.MY (KIL^S/ ...
^.r«;;p^ 11.05
-------
•*** Il^iJTIKICATIO.J ->**
TEST DATE: 4-2-76 RC/itD TEST:
Y«~fiIoL,L; c.TV 24 LFI'/i^I\j lil'r
MATERIAL: GEM ^9 C 3 ^y T1/ST HiLES:
COLu STAPT IwSULAT^L MAiJIFOLDS
PJJP HEAT UPR/iT*. 3319 CC = 1 1 r-iPG.
*** TC.ST L/ATA ***
TEMP: 53 F (VET) PPtS: 742.535 MM HG (bAP.U)
69 7 (DRY) IB. 197 iltJ HG (7aPJP)
100 F (MIX) 23.0 I,J. H20 CIIJLLT)
RH: 32 i 13.9 lit. H20 (OUTLET)
IUERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS BLOWER SPZLD: 3
fl}~£L: HO III CF/r?£V: .2938
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 923.562 BLuVER RPJ1 (CAL): 923.693
1-> /\ I O - - f ' T
«-"«U e: 4i/ib 3
AIR LX a IP tX AIR L.Y.
Tir.'E (SLCS) 506.3 867 505-3
ELJVLR Rt-VS 7330 13417 13'd6
CO (FPM) 2.70 233.00 2.50 3.00 1.00 1.50
HC (PPK C) 5.16 71.32 5.92 21.04 5.76 29.12
Nor (PH-1) C-23 50.16 0-75 7.37 0-25 20.30
C02 (i) 0.04 2.83 0.05 1.36 0.06 2.54
*** C,HLLULaTLD RESULTS ***
b«b 2 BAG 3
VHIX
DF
CORRi
NOX (
liC <
CO (
C02 (
M«SS
WOX
HC
CO
CO 2
W^IGI
uox
HC
CO
CO 2
(CF) 2023. 14
4. 68632
L^CTLw CO.JoEIJTFATIuJS
[PPH) 57.93
[°nti C) 67.26
:PP:;> 220.47
:«) 2.20
aiissxoas (bTAMS/,
5.35
2.23
14. 74
2959.94
IT^D MrtSS LMIS SIGNS
0.59
0.31
C.86
803.49
3472.63
7. 19505
5.71
15-94
0. 73
1 .32
,AG)
1.06
0.90
0.08
3290.45
(GRAMS/MILE)
07
5 . 2 69 2 6
20. 1C
24. 43
C. oi
2.49
1.35
0.31
C.04
2632.39
FU^L LCONDMY CMILES/CAL)
EPAtlPG 11. 04
-------
****** (;'}$ 3 b'i * v ****
** * j ijiji^ T11* IL/AT 101^ * * *
TEST JATIi: 4-3-75
VEHICLE: ET7 24
H AT ERIAL: G Ei \ ...jQ-*
COMMENTS
uPI'/EP: i-ii;CE 1C
TEST MILES:
COLD START liJSULATtD MANIFOLDS
4097 CC = 10.25 HPu.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEI-:P: 53 F (VET)
63 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
Pii: 34 1:
INERTIA VT. : 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER PPM (ACT): 923.506
PRES: 747.205 Mil HG (ErtP.J)
17.535 Mil HG (VAPOF)
23.975 IiJ. H23 (
18.9375 IIJ. H2C (OUTLET)
BLJVEP SPEt,^: 3
GF/REV: .2933
BLOWER RPM (GAL): 923.06J
Tli-.E (SEGS)
bLOVER REVS
Gu (PPII)
HC (PPil C)
uo:: (PPM)
C02 (%)
u,AG
AIR
5G3.
7327
1.30 10
6.40 1
0.37
0.04
1
ET
3
15.
56 «
42.
3.
BAG
GO
03
45
30
1 1
a
0
0
AIR
i>
I
.30
.24
.62
.05
57.
343
2
r v
iw."t.
9
1
12.
21 .
&.
1 .
00
35
90
90
1
5
0
0
TAG
A I P.
•.> 0 5 «
7329
• CO
• 2A
. 13
.05
3
_ *r
JL-.-\
9
1 .
?.l •
15.
2.
50
2-';
50
56
VMIX (CF)
DF
L-a G I
2033.43
3. 92399
•Aj RESULTS ***
BAG 2
3498.
7.04048
42. 17
161.31
9.33. G 5
3. 27
6.37
14.29
1 .42
1.36
15. 35
22. 19
0. 61
2.52
CORREGTED COIJ GZTJTRATI OMS
NUX (PPH)
HG (PPM G)
GO (PPil)
G02 («)
MASS EMISSIONS ( L-RAi-'.S/BAU)
NGX
HG
GO
G02
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.47
0.47
3.64
354.53
2C39.
5-2285.
3.92
5. 37
63. 04
3476.42
1 .02
0.32
0. 16
3337.73
1.4J
0.74
C. 04
2679. 15
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/G/iL)
tPAMPG
10. 19
-------
****** CVS 8ft? ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 4-4-7*
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIAL; GEM 68
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS MIKE K
TEST MILESi 6893
VM
COMMENTS I
COLD IDLE TOO LOW CHOKE COULD BE RICHER
READJUSTED IDLE 3778 CC • 11.12 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPt 55 F (WET)
69 F
100 F (MIX)
RHS 30 X
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUELS HO XXI
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S 928.597
BAG 1
AXR EX
PRESS 742.785 MM HG CBARO)
18.197 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.15 IN. H20 CINLET)
19.075 XN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVs .2995
BLOWER RPM (CAL)s 928*64
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505.7
7826
2.50 330.00
5.48 84.04
0.20 52.67
0.04 2.87
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.6
13427
3.10 3.50
6.20 22.32
0.57 8*05
0*06 1.82
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2029.01
4.60598
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
52.51
79.75
306.63
2.84
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
4.80
2.64
20.51
3003. 70
BAG 2
3481.16
7.35227
7.56
16.96
0.69
1.77
1.19
0.96
0*08
3209.97
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7826
1.00 1.90
6.20 34.60
0*26 19.10
0.07 2.55
BAG 3
2029.01
5.24741
18.89
29.58
0.99
2.49
1.73
0*98
0.07
2638.28
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.56
0.35
1.19
800.72
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GA.)
EPAMPG 11.07
-------
****** CVS 869 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 4-7-76
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68 *
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS MIKE K
TEST MILESs 6914
VM
COMMENTS s
COLD IDLE INCREASED
CHOKE RICHER 3872 CC «
*** TEST DATA ***
10.85 MPG.
TEKPs 56 F (VET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RHs 32 %
INERTIA VT.S 4000 L6S
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)s 928.714
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 746.685
20.815
24.0625
18*9875
BLOVER SPEEDS
CF/REVs .2990
BLOVER RPM (CAL)s 928*657
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (5ECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO
-------
****** CVS 872 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 4-8-76
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 69-52-A/E
POAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS MIKE X
TEST MILESs
COMMENTS S
VEHICLE UNCHANGED FROM TEST 869 4093 CC
CHOKE RICHER AT START OF TEST (872)
*** TEST DATA ***
10.26 MPG.
TEMPS 52 F (WET)
70 F CDRY>
100 F (MIX)
EHi 25 %
INERTIA VT.t 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)l 928*097
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX IPPM)
C02 (X)
PRESS 750.335 MM HG (BARO)
18.765 MM HG (VAPOR)
26.425 IN. H20 (INLET)
21«7 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVs .3053
BLOWER RPM (CAL)s 928.146
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7818
9.10
9. 7 6
0.85
0.04
270*00
70.36
36*37
3.10
868.
.6
13435
7.50
6.40
0.49
0.06
8*00
21.00
6*14
1.60
505
781
1.50
6*64
0.59
0.06
.2
5
13.20
52.84
19.30
2.18
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX CCF)
DF
BAG 1
2075.64
4.27813
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 CZ>
35*7 2
62.88
244*79
3*07
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3*28
2.13
16.75
3322*41
BAG 2
3566.93
8.36001
5.71
15*37
1*14
1*55
0*90
0.90
0.13
2877.99
BAG 3
2074.85
6*12841
18.81
47.28
11.29
2.13
1.73
1.60
0.77
2304*50
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS
-------
****** CVS 674 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEt 4-12-76
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVERS MIKE K
TEST MILESt 7049 VM
COMMENTSi
NO INSULATION ON MANIFOLDS 3912 CC « 10.73 MPG
CARBURETOR UNCHANGE FROM PREVIOUS TEST
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPt 53 F (VET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RHt 18 X
INERTIA VT.l 4000 LBS
FUELI HO ZII
SLOWER RPM (ACT): 926.184
BAG i
AIR EX
PRESt 756.985 MM HG (BAPO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
23*7125 IN* H20 (INLET)
19*6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEEDt 3
CF/REVt .2985
BLOVER RPM (CAL)i 928.631
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
504.8
7809
1.40 325.00
5.44 77*00
0.90 57.55
0*06 2.86
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.6
13453
1.20 1.50
5.72 23.28
0.89 9.32
0.07 1*75
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2060.97
4. 62352
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
56.34
72.74
304. 1 3
2.81
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
5.10
2.45
20.67
3023* 38
3550.55
7.64634
8.55
18.31
0.40
1.69
1*32
1.06
0*05
3127.66
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7818
l.OC 7.20
5.16 42.40
0.60 30*12
0.06 2.47
BAG 3
2063.35
5.41431
29.63
38.19
6.01
2.42
2.66
1.29
0.41
2605*17
VEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.67
0.38
1.22
7 88.36
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GOL)
EPAMPG 11.19
-------
CVS 677 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 4-13-7 6
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIAL! G EH 69 - 52 A/B
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS HIKE C
TEST MILESt 7061
VM
COMMENTSS
CHOKE SET RICHER - TRYING FOR 3 X - NO OTHER
CHANGES TOO VEHICLE 3881 CC « 10.82 M.P.G.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS
57 F (VET)
78 F
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
505
7818
1.00 435*00
5.96 68.56
0*91 57.30
0.06 2.90
867
13420
3.00
6.88
1.27
0.08
4.00
26.24
10.20
1.82
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
OF
BAG 1
2044.6
4.54609
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
56.59
63.91
406.57
2.85
MASS EMISSIONS
-------
****** CVS 879 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 4-14-76
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 69-52-A/E
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS MIKE K
TEST MILESt 7075 VM
COMMENTSi
SAME AS YESTERDAY
3829 CC - 10*97 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS 54 F CWET)
74 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RHl 23 X
INERTIA VT.S 4000 LBS
FUELt HO III
BLOVER RPM (ACT)S 928*596
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 748*835 MM HG CBARO)
21.453 MM KG (VAPOR)
23*625 IN* H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVS .2985
BLOVER RPM (CALM 928.675
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505*2
7820
4.60 529.00
7.16 89.36
0.52 58.71
0*05 2.88
868*8
13444
7*20
8.36
0.88
0.05
7.50
27.28
9*91
1.80
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2023*06
4.56013
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
58.30
83. 7 7
492.18
2.84
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
5.25
2.77
32.83
2997 .29
BAG 2
3478.01
7.43022
9.15
20.05
1.00
1.76
1.42
1.14
0.11
3186.32
BAG 3
AIR EX
506
7832
5.40 7*10
6.80 41.80
0.58 29.63
0*05 2.43
BAG 3
2026*16
5.50342
29.16
36. 24
2*33
2*39
2*63
1*20
0*16
2524.41
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.69
0.40
1*91
788.54
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMP6 11.22
-------
CVS 917 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 5-17-76
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM NONE
ROAD TESTI NA
DRIVERS BOB
TEST MILESt 7750VM
COMMENTS!
HOT START V/EGR INLET TRACE
NEW GARB PORT LINERS W/0 INSULATION 3696CO 1 I . 36MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPs 63 F
71 F (DRY)
105 F
2007. 91
4.7 119
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
38.09
332.48
2697.48
2.51
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4* 13
10*90
178.58
2626.71
3408.8
7.7024
15.81
244.96
1232.51
1.56
2.91
13.64
138*52
2764.65
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.1
7777
6*30 1524*00
12*52 329.76
0.62 41.17
0*04 2.37
BAG 3
1976.9
5.26466
40.67
319.62
1417*97
2.34
4.35
10.32
92.42
2409.96
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.96
3.23
35. 73
702.37
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GO.)
EPAMPG 11.51
-------
CVS 918 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5-17-76
VEHICLES ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM NONE
ROAD TESTI NA
DRIVER! MIKE E
TEST MILES: 7762
COMMENTS!
HOT START V/0 EGR INLET TRACE
NEV CARB. PORT LINERS V/0 INSUL.
*** TEST DATA ***
3363 CC • 12.49 MPG.
TEMP*
64 F (VET)
74 F
105 F (MIX)
RHl 58 X
INERTIA VT. : 4000 LBS
FUELI HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I 926*921
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 738.685 MM HG (BARO)
21.453 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.75 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.2875 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVt .2968
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 928*86
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
PLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
1.
10.88
0*58
0*04
503.5
7790
00 1467.00
367.84
137*00
2.24
14
12.72
1.43
0*04
867*9
13391
70 1514*00
259*64
37.78
1.41
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
1979*44
5*55001
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
136.52
358*92
1375*46
2*21
MASS EMISSIONS (GR/ttS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
14.60
11.60
89.77
2276.45
BAG 2
3402.65
8.47877
36.52
248*42
1431*82
1.37
6*71
13*80
160*63
2439*41
VEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2. 72
3.21
33.48
618.09
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 13.14
BAG 3
AIR EX
504*1
7793
25*80 1503*00
13.96 297.56
1.03 122*00
0*04 2*10
BAG 3
1980*2
5*90006
121*14
285.97
1393*06
2*07
12*96
9*25
90*95
2134.31
-------
****** CVS 920 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5-18-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52
A/B
ROAD TESTl NA
DRIVERt MIKE K
TEST MILES* 7782VM
COMMENTS*
WO EGR
HOT START CVS
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP* 59
78
75
RHt 30 X
INERTIA VT.S
FUELi HO III
BLOWER RPM CACT)t
-------
CVS 921 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5- 18-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52
A/B
ROAD TESTi NA
DRIVER! MIKE K
TEST MILES* 7793VM
COMMENTS!
V/EGR
1ST AND 3RD BAG THE SAME
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 58 F (WET)
78 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RHl 27 X
INERTIA WT.I 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOVER RPM (ACT)! 923*733
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESt 743.185 MM KG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.4 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.1125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REVl .2957
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.913
TIME (SECS)
ELOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
507.1
7849
LOG 11.70
9.24 61.12
0.55 31.96
0.06 2.58
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.3
13441
2.20 0.00
10.16 42.08
0.46 13.70
0.04 1.79
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2001.85
5.17932
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
31.52
53. 66
10. 22
2.53
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.93
1. 75
0.67
2642.88
3428.06
7.46848
13.30
33.28
-1.89
1.76
2.11
1.86
-0.21
3138.10
BAG 3
AIR EX
507. 1
7849
1.00 11.70
9.24 61.12
0.55 31.96
0.06 2.58
BAG 3
2001.85
5.17932
31.52
53.66
10.22
2.53
2.93
1.75
0.67
2642.88
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 67
0.48
0.06
7 70.80
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMP6 11.67
-------
CVS 922 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5-19-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 69-52-A/E
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER* MIKE K
TEST MILESt 7839 VM
COMMENTS!
HOT STAPT CVS V/EGR V/0 INSUL.
PORT LINERS 3594 CC * 11.68 MPG<
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
54 F (WET)
70 F (DRY)
104 F (MIX)
RHl 33 X
INERTIA VT.t 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) » 923.984
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 744.085 MM HG (BARO)
18*765 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.75 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.2 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVs .2963
BLOWER RPM (CAL)s 928*869
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
506.2
7839
1.70 12.40
6.68 42.32
0.43 24.20
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.9
13452
1.00 2.00
6.80 36.32
0.70 11.30
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7828
1.90 2.00
6.28 49.56
0.45 30.21
0.04
2.68 0.05
1.73 0.04
2.51
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2007.33
4.98996
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
23.86
36.96
10*28
2.65
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.20
1.21
0.68
2772.00
3444.64
7.72858
10.69
30.40
1.05
1.69
1.69
1.71
0.12
3029.54
BAG 3
2004.51
5.32773
29.84
44.46
0.36
2.48
2.74
1.46
0.02
2589.87
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.56
0*41
0.06
759-70
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/G/L)
EPAMPG 11*72
-------
****** CVS 923 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5-21-76
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER! MIKE K
TEST MILES! 7850 VM.
COMMENTS!
HOT CVS 3RD BAG RESULTS WERE RUN OVER THE NUMBERS ARE
FROM THE 2ND RUN 3649 CC » 11*51 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP! 57 F (VET)
69 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH! 47 X
INERTIA VT. ! 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)i 3448.
PRES! 744.585 MM HG (BARO)
18.197 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20
IN
(INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
22.925
18.4625
BLOWER SPEED! 3
CF/REV! .2969
BLOWER RPM (CAL)i 928.825
BAG 1
AIR EX
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505. 1
7821
6.00 7.00
7.20 48.56
0.50 25.98
0*04 2.75
868.5
13446
2.30 3.00
6.88 36.36
0.77 10.00
0.05 1*79
1
6
0
0
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2003.44
4.86299
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
25.58
42.84
1.83
2.72
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.49
1.40
0.12
2839.99
BAG 2
3444.35
7.46967
9.33
30.40
0.89
1.75
1.56
1.71
0.10
3137.47
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.57
0.48
0.03
791.13
BAG 3
AIR EX
-867.2
7840
00 2.00
20 72.56
46 29.46
,04 2.67
BAG 3
2008.31
5.00478
29.09
67.60
1.08
2.64
2.84
2.22
C.07
2762.86
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES /GPL)
EPAMPG
11.25
-------
****** CVS 925
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 5-25-76
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! G EM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TESTJ NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILESt 7879
COMMENTSi
PORT LINERS W/EGR P<>
3844 CC * 10.92 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 59 F (VET)
74 F CDRY>
100 F (MIX)
RHi 39 X
INERTIA VT.I 4000 L6S
FUELl HO III
BLOWER RPH (ACT)s 928.998
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (S£CS>
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRESt 743*185 MM HG (BAP.O)
21.453 MM HC (VAPOR)
22.925 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEEDS 3
CF/REVt .2970
BLOVER RPM (CAL)t 928.825
BAG 2
AIR EX
5C5. 7
7631
1.00 457.00
7 .72 183.00
0*55 34.50
0.04 3.02
868.8
13452
4.40 11.20
8.92 37.52
0.77 10.60
0.06 1.82
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2020.6
4.34957
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
34.08
177.05
423.92
2.99
MASS EMISSIONS CGRAiS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.33
5*84
28.24
3149.85
BAG 2
3470.97
7*3432
9.93
29.81
6.91
1.77
1*67
1.69
0.79
3200.59
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.3
7838
1.10 6.60
7.40 50.08
0.64 23.50
0.06 2.42
BAG 3
2022.41
5*52434
22.96
44.02
5.32
2.37
2.25
1.45
0.35
2500.52
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.58
0.67
1.75
797.38
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/
EPAMPG
11.04
-------
****** CVS 927 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 5-26-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: KIKE K
TEST MILES: 7890 VM
COMMENTS:
CHOKED WAS LEANED OUT AND COLD IDLE SPEED WAS DROP
3851 CC • 10.90 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 58 F (WET)
70 F (DRY)
100 F CMIX)
RH: 48 X
INERTIA WT»: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928*822
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 747.585 MM KG (BARO)
18.765 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.75 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.2 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2960
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.869
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
506
7834
l.OC 713.00
5. 16 267*16
0.43 47.78
0.04 2.99
BAG 2
AIR EX
868
13437
1.00 2.00
6.52 35.88
0.55 10.20
0.05 1.84
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.8
7829
1.00 1.30
5-00 47.56
0.42 27.21
0.06 2.42
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2028.64
4.34669
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
( PPM )
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
47.45
263. 19
660. 15
2.96
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
4. 73
8.72
44. 15
3130.64
3479.55
7.26769
9.73
30.26
1.05
1.80
1.66
1. 72
0.12
3260.59
2027.34
5.52605
26.87
43*46
0.41
2.37
2.67
1.44
0.03
2506.61
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 70
0.84
2. 55
804.74
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GPL)
EPAMPG 10.94
-------
CVS 928 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 5-27-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 6 9-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 7902 VM
COMMENTS:
NO COM. ^°
3632 CC « 10.96 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPt 58 F
70 F
95 F
RH: 48 X
INERTIA VT. I
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
40CO LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.918
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.9
7833
1.00 465.00
5.08 162.00
0.46 33.69
0.06 2.86
PRESS 750.985 MM HG (EARO)
18.765 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2966
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.807
BAG 2
AIR EX
868*1
13440
5.20 7.10
5.68 34.04
0.55 9.79
0.05 1.80
BAb 3
AIR EX
505.8
7830
l.CO 5.40
4.48 43.16
0.39 26.39
0.07 2.44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2058-73
4. 58995
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
33.33
158.03
431.42
2.81
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 36
5.31
29. 28
3020.20
3532.41
7.42762
9.31
29. 12
2.31
1.76
1.61
1.68
0.27
3236.17
2057.94
5.48097
26.07
39.50
4.26
2.38
2.63
1.33
0.29
2557.23
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 61
0.63
1. 74
7 99.00
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11. 08
-------
****** CVS 930
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEt 5-28-7 6
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL t GEM 69-52
A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 7913VM
COMMENTS:
NO CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS TEST
WEIGHTED FUEL 3778CO11. 1MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TRACED P-IN
TEMP: 64 F (WET)
83 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 31 Z
INERTIA WT• : 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.671
EAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 745.885 MM KG (BARO)
28.847 KM HG (VAPOR)
TIME CSECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
23.1875
18.6375
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2974
BLOWER RPM (CAL
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.6
13446
0.70 0.00
6.32 37*60
0.55 9.90
0*06 1.71
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
): 928.781
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7828
0.00 12.90
6.28 64.00
0.40 25*00
0.06 2.50
506. 1
7829
0.00 435.00
5.80 162*08
0.35 35.60
0.04 2.90
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2029. 19
4. 53186
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
35.33
157.56
406.36
2.87
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3. 52
5.22
27.19
3035.86
3485*06
7.81906
9.42
32.09
-0.60
1.66
1.61
1.83
-0.07
3012.75
2028.94
5.34372
24.67
58.90
12.15
2.45
2.45
1.95
0.81
2593.62
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 60
0.6 9
1.61
7 72.87
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GA.)
EPAMPG 11 . 30
-------
CVS 931 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION +**
TEST DATEl 6-1-76
VEHICLEl ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TESTt NA
DPIVERi KIKE K
TEST MILESt 7925 VM
COHMENTSl
PORT AIR IS WORKING ON BOTH SIDES
FIRST TIME CAR RUN IN FOUR DAYS
*** TEST DATA ***
3901 CC
10.76 MFG.
TEMPI 67 F (VET)
74 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH: 69 X
INERTIA WT.i 4000 UBS
FUELS HO III
EL OVER RPM (ACT)I 924.572
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESt 741.685 MM HG (BARO)
21.453 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.575 IN. H20 (INLET)
18*025 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDi 3
CF/REVt .2960
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.904
BAG 2 BAG
AIR EX AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505.6
7800
1.00 275.00
5.44 136.40
0.28 32.11
0.04 3.14
868.3
13421
2.00 4.40
6.60 37.32
0.50 8.17
0.06 1.88
506.3
7752
1.00 15.90
8.48 54.48
0.22 24.00
0.04 2.75
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
1985.87
4.21534
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
31.90
132.25
251.50
3.11
MASS EMISSIONS (GR^IS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3*66
4.29
16.47
3220.29
3416.98
7.11197
7.74
31.65
2*46
1.83
1.53
1.77
0.28
3258.19
1973.65
4.8605
23.83
47.74
13*93
2.72
2.72
1.54
0*91
2797.77
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0
0
1
831.
62
60
05
69
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10*56
-------
CVS 934 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6 -2-76
VEHICLE* ETV 24
MATERIAL! G EM 6 9-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 7936 VM
COMMENTS:
PORT LINERS V/0 INSUL.
3760 CC « 11.17 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F
F
F
62
76
90
RH: 44 %
INERTIA VT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(W ET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
928*92
BAG 1
AIR EX
506.8
7848
1.00 355.00
4.60 145.96
0.34 43.53
0.04 2.94
PRES: 746.985 MM HG (EARO)
22.922 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2969
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928*807
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.2
13455
1.50 2.00
4.96 35.56
0.47 9.75
0.06 1.76
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.7
7814
1.00 9.80
4.84 51.96
0.37 28.96
0.05 2.50
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2071. 78
4.48523
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
43.27
142.39
329. 10
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4. 53
4.82
22.48
3142.89
3551.96
7.59746
9.34
31.25
0.62
1.71
1.68
1.81
0.07
3163.62
2062.8
5.34692
28.66
48.03
8.39
2*46
2.98
1.62
0.57
2645*65
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 7 1
0.64
1. 34
803.08
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ G/)L)
EPAMPG 10.93
-------
****** CVS 935 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 6-3-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: G EH 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 7948 VM
COMMENTS:
RICHEM UP CHOKE
3776 CC » 11.12 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 60
73
95
RH: 45 X
INERTIA VT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)i
(VET)
(DRY)
(MIX>
4000 LES
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO CPPM)
HC CPPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.642
BAG 1
AIR EX
505. 5
7825
1*00 256*00
5*04 129.16
0.31 40.30
0.04 2.96
PRES: 749.235 MM HG (BAPO)
20.815 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.6375 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REVJ .2970
BLOWER RPM (CAL)» 928.79
BAG 2
AIR EX
869
13453
1.60 7.00
5.16 34.52
0.48 8.87
BAG
AIR
EX
506.1
7835
1.00 5.
4.72 53.
0.28 31.
50
12
07
0.05
1.77
0.04
2.51
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG ! BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2054.03
4.47161
CORRECTED CON CENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
40.06
125.25
236 .93
2.93
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.07
4.20
16.05
3137.42
3531.36
7.55305
8.45
30.04
5.29
1.73
1.48
1.73
0.62
3179.75
2056.65
5.32628
30.84
49*29
4*35
2.48
3.14
1.66
0.30
2657.24
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.67
0.60
1.02
805.80
FUEL ECONOMY (MI LES/GO.)
EPAMPG
10.91
-------
****** CVS 937 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6-4-76
VEHICLE: ETV £4
MATERIAL* GEM 69-53A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES* 7960VM
COMMENTS:
RICHER CHOKE THAN PREVIOUS TEST
CHANGE TO ENGINE 3769CC » II.
IS ONLY
14MMPG
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 61
74
97
RH: 47 %
INERTIA VT
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)t
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
: 4000 LBS
928.846
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 752.885 MM HG (BARO)
21.453 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
ELOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV* .2965
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.807
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505.4
7825
1.00 370.00
5.00 174.92
0.24 37.80
0.03 2.96
868.6
13445
1.00 2.00
5.76 33.92
0.47 9.18
0.05 1*72
1
5
0
0
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2053.75
4.44913
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS.
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
37.61
171.04
342.54
2.94
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.89
5.74
23.19
3145.35
BAG 2
3528.78
7.77451
8.77
28.90
1.05
1.68
1.56
1.67
0.12
3085.07
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.3
7823
00 2.70
00 46.40
23 31.41
06 2.54
BAG 3
2053.23
5.26545
31.22
42.35
1.73
2.49
3.23
1.42
0.12
2667.68
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.68
0.66
1.35
794.42
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10.99
-------
CVS 939 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6 -7-7 6
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL* G BM 6 9-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER; KIKE K
TEST MILES: 7971 VM
COMMENTS:
CHOKE IS RICHER FROM PREVIOUS TEST
3803 CC » 11.04 KPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
63 F (VET>
78 F (DRY)
110 F
-------
CVS 941 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6-8-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL* GEM 69-52
A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 8004VM
COMMENTS)
CHOKE SET AT .220 - NO OTHER
CHANGES TO VEHICLE 381 ICC
11.02 M.P.G.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F
F
F
65
80
95
RKl 44 X
INERTIA VT.i
FUELt HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(VET)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES:
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
926*892
BAG 1
AIR EX
506
7835
10*60 490*00
7.32 120.56
0.25 24.90
0.04 2*95
746.285
26.271
23.275
18.4625
BLOVER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2972
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 926*79
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.6
13445
11*90 12
8.52 36
0*46 8
0*06 1
BAG 3
AIR EX
00
00
04
76
6
7
0
0
•
•
•
•
504
781
30
84
26
07
.8
6
30
51
27
2
•>
•
*
•
00
88
76
67
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2048.83
4.45541
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
24. 7 1
114.88
447.11
2.92
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.66
3*84
30.20
3116.82
3515.83
7.59318
7.64
28.60
1.24
1.71
1*41
1*64
0*14
3131*44
2043.86
5.00375
27.55
45.61
23.06
2.61
2.96
1.52
1.55
2786.18
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.57
0.56
1.87
808.09
(MILES/GA.)
10.81
-------
CVS 944 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 6-10-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIALi GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 8022
COMMENTS:
PORT LINERS MANIFOLDS INSULATED
NO CARE. CHANGES 3771 CC = 11.14 KPG<
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 67 F (WET)
83 F (DRY)
90 F (MIX)
RHl 41 Z
INERTIA VT.S 4000 LBS
FUELs HO III
BLOVER RPM (ACT): 928*866
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES* 744.385 MM HG (BARO)
28.847 MM HG (VAPOF)
IN
23.0125
18.2875
BLOVER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2968
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.834
H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG 3
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
VMIX (CF)
DF
505.2
7820
3. 1C 583.00
5.76 194.84
0.24 35.42
0*04 2.82
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
868.6
13447
9.60 10*00
8.00 31*92
0.63 9.02
0.08 1.74
5i
71
4.70
6.48
0.31
0.05
BAG 1
2056.15
4.62051
BAG 2
3535.69
7.68285
2
16.20
53.68
15.70
2.52
BAG 3
2056.68
5.30297
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPK C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
35.23
190.32
541.23
2.79
8.47
24.96
1.29
1.67
15.45
48.42
11.44
2.48
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.84
6.39
36.69
2990.21
1.59
1.44
0.15
3080.01
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
1.68
1.63
0.78
2659.33
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.56
0.68
2. 18
784.22
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.17
-------
******
946 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 6-11-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 69-52 A/B
ROAD TEST* NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILESl 8035VM
COMMENTS*
W/EGR-W/PORT LINERS-W/INSULATION
HOT START WEIGHTED FUEL=3640CC-11.54MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F
F
F
71
85
95
RH: 54 X
INERTIA VT.I
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT) I
(VET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRESl 740.685 MM HG (BARO)
30.745 MM HG (VAPOR)
928.929
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
506
7834
1.
5.
.00
.64
0.27
0.04
12.50
50.08
13.65
2.82
22.8375 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.375 IN
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2969
BLOWER RPM (CAL)
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.1
13441
1.00 7.00
5.68 30.88
0.36 6.63
0.05 1.77
. H20 (OUTLET)
: 928.843
BAG 3
AIR EX
506
7833
1.00 16.30
5.36 52.80
0.25 17.4-0
0.05 2.67
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VKIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2032.44
4. 7 414
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS.
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
13.44
45. 63
10.83
2. 79
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.67
1.51
0.73
2955.51
BAG 2
3487.11
7.55461
6.32
25.95
5.79
1.73
1.35
1.48
0.67
3139.91
BAG 3
2032.18
5.00598
17.20
48.51
14.39
2.63
2. 14
1.61
0.96
2787.22
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NCX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.44
0.41
0.20
799.93
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.07
-------
****** CVS 947 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6-11-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52-A/B
FOAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 8047 VM
COMMENTS:
V/0 EGH W/PORT LINERS
HOT START CVS 3659 CC
V/INSULATION
> 11.48 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F (VET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
72
87
95
RH: 48 X
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928*926
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 740.685
32.934
22.8375
18.375
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2969
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928*843
MM HG CEARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIKE (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
505-8
7831
1.00 2.00
4.80 45.56
0*15 82.16
0.04 2.46
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.4
13461
1.00 2.00
5.24 30.16
1.44 19.50
0.07 2.05
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.1
7819
1.00 11.90
5.24 49.60
0.69 38.98
0.07 2.60
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2031.66
5.43667
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(S)
82. C4
41.64
1.07
2.43
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
9.95
1.38
O.C7
2571.82
3492.3
6.52638
18.28
25.72
1.06
1.99
3.81
1.47
0.12
3625*58
2028.55
5.14184
38.42
45*38
10.33
2.54
4.66
1.50
0.69
2690.86
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.43
0.39
0.07
835.37
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.06
-------
****** CVS 948
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 6-14-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 8061 VM
COMMENTS:
V/0 EGR V/PORT LINERS W/INSUL.
ROOM TEMP. (HOT) 3343 CC = 12.
56 MPH.
TEMPI
F
F
F
CWET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
74
92
91
RH: 42 X
INERTIA VT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
*** TEST DATA ***
PRES:
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
929.029
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.2
7823
1.00 2700.00
4.80 334.40
0.35 122.00
0.04 2.22
743.585 MM HG (BARO)
38.44 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.55 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2973
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.798
BAG 2
AIR EX
849.6
13154
1.00 1310.00
6.80 245.24
0.44 34.11
0.04 1.43
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2054.05
5.34239
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(X)
121.72
330.50
2547. 19
2. 19
BAG 2
3453.79
8.48026
33.72
239*24
1255.30
1.39
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7826
14.70 1562.00
8.64 334.52
0.63 114.00
0.06 2.18
BAG 3
2054.84
5.67561
113.48
327.24
1463.31
2.13
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
15.
11.
172.
06
09
50
2343.21
7
13
142
2512
.02
.49
.94
.10
14.
10.
99.
2283.
05
98
14
12
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.87
3.27
36.48
642.81
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.46
-------
CVS 949 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 6-14-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL* GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 8072 VK
COMMENTS:
V/EGR - V/PORT LINERS - V/INSULATION - V/0 CAT.
HOT START CVS - ROOM TEMP " HOT " - 3551 CC = 11
83 M-F.G
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 75 F
92 F
92 F
RH: 45 Z
INERTIA VT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)t
CWET)
CDRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME CSECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO CPPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.977
BAG 1
AIR EX
5C4.8
7815
3.20 2950-00
7.52 338.00
0.56 31.30
0.06 2.30
PRESl 743.485 MM HG (BAPO)
38.44 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.55 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2973
BLOWER RPM
-------
****** CVS 950 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 69-52 A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 8088 VM
COMMENTS:
V/EGR - HOT START CVS - V/CAT - W/PORT
LINERS - V/INSULATION - 3610 CC = 11.63 M.P.G-
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 74 F (VET)
93 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 39 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.982
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 742.185 MM HG (BARO)
39.659 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
22.925
18.4625
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2970
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.825
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
505. 7
7831
1.00 6.20
4.84 47.12
0.28 12.50
0.04 2.81
868.7
13448
1.00 30.70
5.24 28.12
0.30 8.42
0*07 1.82
I
5
0
0
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2018.24
4.75972
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C>
(PPM)
(X)
12.28
43. 30
5.01
2.78
MASS EMISSIONS (GR/HS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.46
1.43
0.33
2924.30
BAG 2
3465.88
7.33951
8.16
23.59
28.38
1.76
1.67
1.34
3.24
3180.28
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.43
0.40
0.78
802.74
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.06
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7826
.00 69.30
28 60.92
•25 14.30
05 2.68
BAG 3
2016.95
4.97664
14.10
56.70
64.06
2.64
1.68
1.87
4.26
2776.91
-------
****** CVS 951 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEt 6-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: G EK 69-52 A/B
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 8099
VM
COMMENTS*
W/0 EGR - HOT START CVS - V/CAT. - W/PORT
LINERS - V/INSULATION - 3264 CC = 12.87 M.P.G.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 75 F (VET)
94 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 38 X
INERTIA VT. I 4000 LBS
FULL I HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 929.
031
PRESl 741.585 MM KG (EARO)
40.904 KM HG (VAPOR)
22.75 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2968
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.843
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWtR REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.3
13444
00 26.20
24 26.92
45 11.50
06 1.67
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
505. 8
7833
1.00 14.70
5.16 38.08
0.18 32.18
0.04 2.44
1
5
0
0
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2016.55
5.48C14
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPK)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
32.03
33.86
13.C2
2.41
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.82
1. 12
0.87
2531*59
BAG 2
3461.07
7.99907
11.11
22.34
24. 17
1.62
2.28
1.26
2.76
2919.50
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7828
1.00 117.00
5.12 52.12
0.35 30.74
0.05 2.52
BAG 3
2015.27
5.28349
30.46
47.97
109.09
2.48
3.63
1.58
7.25
2605.82
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0*80
0.35
0.97
732.45
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAKPG 12. 18
-------
CVS 952 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 6-16-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TESTI NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES! 8111 VM
COMMENTS:
W/0 EGR COLD STAART
V/CAT. 3520 CC *
W/PORT LINERS W/INSUL.
11.93 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 74 F (VET)
85 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 61 X
INERTIA VT.l 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I 929.003
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIKE (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
1.00
4. 68
0.18
0.04
PRES:
738.685
30.745
22.8375
18.4625
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV? .2972
BLOWER RPM CCAL): 928*834
MM HG (BAPO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
.8
>2
597.00
185.12
95.67
2.83
868
13440
4.10 6.10
6.08 33.68
0.80 14.60
0.04 1.68
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.7
7830
1.00 2>00
5*36 49*92
0.41 57.34
0.05 2.38
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2017. 52
4. 61467
BAG 2
3448.93
7.9575
BAG 3
2009.31
5.61803
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
95.53
181*45
551.95
2.80
13.90
28.36
2.27
1.65
57.00
45.51
1.06
2.34
MASS EMISSIONS CGRPttS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
COS
12. 73
5.98
36.71
2944.59
3*17
1.60
0.26
2958.78
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
7.56
1.49
0.07
2450.83
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1. 73
0.67
2. 14
749.59
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.67
-------
****** CVS 954 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 6-17-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 69-52-A/B
ROAD TEST* NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST KILES: 8123 VM
COMMENTS:
V/EGR V/FORT LIMERS V/INSUL. V/CAT-
COLD STEART 3809 CC » 11.03 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 63 F CWET)
77 F
110 F (MIX)
RHt 45 X
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LB£
FUELt HO III
BLOVER RPM (ACT): 927.72
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 746.885 MM HG (BARO)
23.756 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.4875
18.375
BLOVER SPEED:
CF/REVI .2959
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.878
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
504.6
7605
1.00 780.00
4.68 207.44
0.29 35.66
0.04 2.99
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.9
13449
>.90 5.
80
6.24
0.51
0.06
35.36
.99
.76
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.3
7796
1.00 2.00
5.12 50.64
0.33 19.50
0.06 2.58
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
1984.41
4*34625
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
35.44
203.64
723.01
2.96
3419.4
7.59599
7.55
29.94
0.47
1.71
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 61
6.51
47.30
3062.40
1
1
0
3045
.32
.67
.05
.55
1982.13
5.18325
19.23
46.51
1.08
2.53
1.96
1.51
0.07
2616.84
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.53
0.72
2.72
780.53
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11. 15
-------
****** CVS 974 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-6-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OE/OF
POAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LAERY
TEST MILES: 2042
COMMENTS:
NO PREP. FOR FOUR DAYS
3798 CC = 11.06 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 69 F (VET)
82 F (DRY)
108 F (MIX)
RH: 48 Z
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUELt HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)t 929.029
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 746.885 MM HG CEARO)
28.021 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN
IN
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
22.8375
18.2875
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2963
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.851
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS'
CO (PPM) '
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (S)
505.5
7827
7.00 501.00
5.60 153.72
0.26 36.24
0.04 2.95
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.4
13447
9.50 24.00
6.48 33.80
0.42 10.00
0.06 1.75
EAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
7817
.00 39.
.48 56.
22 15.
06 2.
70
12
30
57
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
1997.82
4.44909
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(S)
36. 04
149.38
459.44
2.92
MASS EMISSIONS (GR/WS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.99
4.87
30.26
3041.18
BAG 2
3432.3
7.63245
9.64
28.17
14.69
1.70
1.83
1.58
1.66
3039.08
BAG 3
1995.26
5. 19516
15.12
51.69
33. 15
2.52
1.67
1.68
2. 18
2623.75
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.60
0.62
2. 12
778.98
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.21
-------
CVS 975 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-7-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST:NNA
DRIVER: KIKE K
TEST MILES: 2053
COMMENTS:
NO COM.
3773 CC
11.13 MPtt.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI
F
F
F
(VET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
68
80
99
RH: 54 Z
INERTIA WT»: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.948
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 743.685 MM KG (EARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN
23.5375
18-8125
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV; .2963
BLOVEP RPM (CAL): 928.728
H20 (INLET)
IN* H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG
AIR
6.
6.
o.
o.
5C5.5
7827
20 451.
36 140.
32 35.
04 2.
00
92
19
91
12
8
0
0
868.2
13443
.£0 34.
.08 33.
.76 9.
.07 1.
10
88
96
71
7.
6.
o.
o.
51
79
00
64
40
07
1.4 '
16
43.
70.
14.
2.
50
12
35
44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2030.16
4.51805
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM) 34.94
HC (PPM C) 135.97
CO (PPM) 413. 13
C02 (%) 2.38
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.02
4. 51
27.65
3047.92
BAG 2
3486.83
7.80601
9.30
26.84
21.93
1.65
U84
1.53
2.52
2998.45
BAG 3
2053.24
5.46697
14.02
64.69
35.C81
2.38
1.63
2. 17
2.37
2551.43
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0. 60
0. 63
2. 10
768.45
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11*35
-------
****** CVS 976 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST CATE: 7-8-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OE/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: KIKE K
TEST MILES: 2064
COMMENTS:
MAN. VAC. DELAY 2 MIN. 15 SEC.
3887 CC » 10.80 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 70 F (VET)
81 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 61 5
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: KO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.969
EAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 743.585 MM HG (BARO)
27.055 MM KG (VAPOR)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX CPPM)
C02 (%)
506
7834
7.10 433.00
7.04 176.00
0.38
0.04
21.20
3.03
23.5375
18.8125
bLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2983
BLOWER RPM (CAL
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.6
13449
7.90 20.10
7.72 37.36
0.43 8.30
0.07 1.70
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
): 928.728
EAG 3
AIR EX
506
7834
5.20 47.80
6.64 56.48
0.30 11.35
0.07 2.51
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2028.11
4.34005
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
20.91
170.58
393.86
3.00
BAG 2
3481.75
7.85629
7.92
30.62
12.29
1.64
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.
5.
26.
3172.
58
65
34
15
1
1.
1.
2975.
68
74
41
82
BAG 3
2028.1 1
5.31724
11.11
51.C9
40.41
2.45
1.37
1.69
2.70
2594.61
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.48
0.63
1.90
775.84
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.17
-------
****** CVS 977 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-9-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OE/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2075
COMMENTS:
VAC. RETARD IS WORKING ON A TIMMEF
4012 CC = 10.47 MFC.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 65 F (VET)
76 F CDRY)
90 F (MIX)
RH: 55 X
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 929.034
BAG 1
AIR EX
FRES: 748-435 MM HG (EAFO)
22.922 MM HG (VAPOR)
22.925 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.4625 IN. K20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/F.EV: .2966
ELOVER RPM (CAL): 928.825
TIKE (SECS)
ELOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (£>
505. 1
7820
3.70 373.00
5.32 170.68
0.44 23.20
0.0*4 3.26
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.7
13452
8.00 52.20
6.84 26.12
0.62 8.21
0.07 1.77
BAG 3
AIR EX
505-7
7830
,70 139.
.24 37.
,31 6.
,05 2.
00
40
05
67
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2067.07
4.04667
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PFH)
HC (FFM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z>
22.87
166.67
340.23
3.23
3555.79
7.53842
7.67
20. 19
42.68
1.71
MASS EMISSIONS CGR*ftS/£AG>
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.55
5. 63
23. 19
3481.74
1.
1.
5.
3169.
47
17
00
60
BAG 3
2069.71
4.98757
7.80
33.21
128.05
2-63
0.87
1.12
8. 74
2838.73
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.41
0.56
2.66
837.98
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAKPG 10.29
-------
****** CVS 978 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-12-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DP1VEP: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2086
COMMENTS:
CAP WAS NOT PREP. FOR 2 DAYS
LOW EARO. 4065 CC = 10.33 MOG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 64 F
73 F
99 F
PH: 61 Z
INERTIA WT.
FUEL: HO II
EL OVER RPM
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
(VET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
: 4000 LES
I
(ACT): 929.004
BAG 1
AIR LX
505.8
7831
3.50 247.00
4. 64 95.92
0.23 21.60
0.04 3.23
PRES: 739.185 KM' HG (EARO)
20.815 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.0125 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.55 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
ELOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2975
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.807
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.7
1 3450
4.80 38.80
5.00 25.08
0.32 8.04
0.06 1.76
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
Vf-:iX (CF)
DF
EAG 1
2015.9
4.10757
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM) 21.43
HC (PP^3 C) 92.41
CO (PPM) 224. 18
C02 (%) 3.20
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.35
3.04
14.90
3363.36
BAG 2
3462.38
7.587
7.76
20. 74
32.64
1.71
1.46
1.17
3-73
3083.85
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.9
7834
2.40 64.60
4.88 44.96
0.28 6.48
a.04 2.66
BAG 3
2016.67
5.01779
6.26
41.05
58. 14
2.63
0.69
1.35
3.87
2763.82
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.38
0.43
1. 64
814.09
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10.63
-------
CVS 979 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST LATE: 7- 13-76
VEKICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GDI 68-OE/OF
KOAE TEST: HA
DRIVER: MUIKE K
TEST MILES: 209
COMMENTS:
ONLY CHANGES TO
TO FRONT HOLE
ENGINE VAS
4024 CO =
LL PUt'.F ROD
10.44 MFC
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 64 F
77 F
99 F
Pli: 48 Z
IKERTIA WT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(VET)
( DPY )
(MIX)
4000 LUS
928.807
EAG 1
AIE EX
PPES: 741.365
23.756
23.1875
18.8125
ELOVEE SPEED:
CF/PEV: .2979
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-763
MM HG (EAFO)
MM HG CVAPOF)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H2C (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
ELOVER PEVS
CO (PFK)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (*)
504.9
7815
2.20 260.00
0.16 116.83
0.39 27.45
0.04 3. 16
869.4
13459
5.20 33.00
5.12 29.20
0.50 7.20
0.06 1.77
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
EAG 1
2020.07
4. 19313
CORPECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
COS (X)
27. 15
116.76
238.50
3. 13
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/EAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.38
3-35
15.38
3296.87
BAG 2
3478.97
7-54481
6. 77
24.76
26.92
1.72
1.23
1.41
3.09
3116.85
BAG 3
AIR EX
5C6.5
7841
2.80 64.40
4.44 39.24
0.18 6.26
0.04 2.68
BAG 3
2026.79
4.98154
6. 12
35.69
57.88
2.65
0.65
1. 18
3.87
2798.39
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.38
0.50
1. 62
817.32
(MILES/GAL)
10. 63
-------
****** CVS 980 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-14-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2112
COMMENTS:
SPRING
CHOKE SET LEANER & COLD IDLE SPEED SET LOVER- ONE RETUPi:
REMOVED - CARE. IS NOT RIGHT! 4068 CC = 10.33 M.F.L.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 65 F (VET)
77 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 52 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.906
BAG 1
AIP. EX
PRES: 742.285 MM HG (t-ARO)
23.756 KM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.55 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2974
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.798
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
5C5.8
7830
7.90 342.00
5.84 186.80
0.36 19.40
0.04 3.26
BAG 2
AIR EX
869
13453
7.80 60.00
6.00 27.60
0.41 6.91
0.05 1-76
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2012.58
4.04814
BAG 2
3457.89
7.57723
19. 13
182.40
30C.94
3.23
6.55
22.39
50.30
1.72
6. 15
35.59
162.22
2.62
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPH)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CC
CO 2
VEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GPAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.33
.0.60
2. 76
816.30
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.8
7832
7.00 180-00
40.80
6.40
6.52
0.31
0.06
2.67
BAG 3
2013.1
4.97983
2.07
5.99
20.50
3389.96
1.22
1.26
5.73
.3095.52
0.67
1.17
10.77
2752.71
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
10. 56
-------
****** CVS 981 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 680E/OF
RGAL TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2130
COMMENTS:
ENGINE, SET LEANER WITH StMALLER RODS - ROOM VERY HOI
CARBURETOR LOOKS BETTER - 4004 CC = 10.49 hFG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 75 F (VET)
82 F (DRY)
107 F (MIX)
RH: 73 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUELi HO III
BLOVER RPM (ACT): 928.477
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 742.185 MM HG (BARO)
28.021 MM HG (VAPOR)
23.1 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.375 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2972
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.816
BAG
AIR
EX
DAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
&LOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (£)
505. 6
7823
1.2C 257.00
5.36 105-60
0.41 15.10
0.05 3.10
867.7
13423
2.10 50.00
5.64 26.80
0.35 8.10
0.07 1.84
506. 1
7837
.00 132.
32 47.
32 8.
00
16
35
06
2.76
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
1991 . 29
4.27552
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
KC (PPta C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (S)
14. 79
1 01. 49
234.71
3.06
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.06
3. 30
15.41
31 79.44
BAG 2
3416.73
7.2535
7.80
21.94
45.28
1.78
1.S7
1.22
5- 10
3171.03
BAG 3
1994.85
4.82552
8- 10
42.94
121.1C
1. 13
1.40
7.96
2821.79
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.45
0.46
2. 17
819.55
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAKPU 10.66
-------
****** CVS 90i£ ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST LATE: 7-16-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: G EK 68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST: HA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 21
COMMENTS:
IAD START 3RD EAG
3992 CC = 10.52 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 71 F (VET)
79 F (DRY)
105 F (MIX)
RH: 68 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOVER RPM CACT): 928.996
EAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REV,S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
PRES: 740.285 MM KC (EARO)
25.509 MM KG (VAPOR)
22.925 IN.
18.375 IN.
BLOVEP SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2971
BLOVER RPM (CAL):
BAG 2
AIH EX
H20
K20
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
928.834
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.3
7839
2.80
5. 12
0. 40
0.04
31 LOG
144.36
15.40
2.99
867.9
13438
4. 80
6.40
0.48
0.06
41.40
29. 16
8.59
1.76
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
1997. 19
4.41798
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
15.09
140.40
284.15
2.96
BAG 2
3423.69
7.58423
8.17
23.60
35.01
1.71
MASS enssIONS (GRAKS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.
4.
18.
3081.
89
58
71
96
1
1
3
3049
76
32
95
39
505. 7
7830
1.70 112.00
5.52 65.64
0.40 6.74
0.06 2.66
BAG 3
1994.9
5.00571
8.42
61.22
102.47
2.61
1.06
1.99
6. 74
2717-35
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.42
0.59
2. 11
789.80
FULL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMFG 11 - 04
-------
CVS 9G3 ** J-
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7-19-76
VEHICLE:
MATERIAL:
COMMENTS:
LTV
GEK
24
68-OE/OF
ROAD TLST: NA
DFIVLF: MIKE K
TEST KILLS: 2152
NOT FE PFEP. FOP 2 DAYS
377 2 CC = 11.13 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 66 F (VET)
81 F CDFY)
102 F (MIX)
F.H: 40 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
ELOVhR RPM CACT): 928.425
PRES: 750.985 KM HG
27.055 MM
23.45 IN.
18.55 IN.
ELCVER SPEED: 3
CF/FEV: .2972
BLOWER RPM (CAD:
KG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
EAL.
AIR
1
EX
BAG
AIR
EV
/v
928.763
BAG 3
AIH EX
TIKE (SECS)
ELOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
5C6. I
7634
2.20 200.00
4.96 107.60
0.36 35.64
0.04 2.86
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
866.8
13418
3.10 21.90
5.60 32.84
0.62 8.64
0.06 1.70
505. 7
7817
2.80 10.40
5.12 48.32
0.36 15.10
0.06 2.46
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2035.69
4.63764
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
KC
CO
C02
( PPM )
(PPM C)
( PPM )
(X)
35.
103-
184.
2.
36
71
70
83
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRANS /LAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 7 0
3. 45
12. 40
3002.90
3486.71
7.85751
S.10
27.95
18.23
1.65
1.45
1.59
2. 10
2995.92
2031.27
5.43432
14.81
44. 14
7.52
2.41
1.55
1.46
0-50
2554.03
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.52
0. 52
1.03
7 65.73
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG
11.46
-------
CVS 984 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TL.ST LATE: 7-2C-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: C.EM 68-OE/OF
ROAD TEST: NA
LRIVEP: MIKE K
TEST MILES: £163
COMMENTS:
WO CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS TEST
3776 CC = 11.12 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 68 F (WET)
82 F (DRY)
101 F (MIX)
PK: 48 %
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.461
PRES: 747.935
28.021
23.3625
18.6375
ELOVER SPEED:
CF/REV: .2975
ELOtER RPM (CAL): 928.763
MM HG (bARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. K20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
LAG
AIR
1
EX
TIKE (SECS)
DLOVEE REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
506. 7
7832
10.50 262.00
6. 20 1 41 . 52
0.34 36.16
0.05 2.95
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.8
1345C
9.70 25.30
7.00 33.64
0.61
0.07
30
72
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2031.97
4. 48392
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (FFM)
C02 (S)
35.90
136.70
235.C3
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CC
C02
4. C4
4.54
15. 75
3084.87
BAG 2
3489.53
7.76465
6.77
27.54
15.75
1.66
1.31
1.57
1.81
3019.06
BAG 3
AIR LX
506
7833
10.20 30.40
6.68 55-72
0.37 14.60
0.07 2.46
BAG 3
2032.23
5.42857
14.30
50.27
2C.30
2.40
1.61
1.67
1 .36
2545.61
VEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.53
0. 60
1.25
772.95
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPL 11.32
-------
****** CVS 985
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 7 -21-76
VEHICLE:
MATERIAL:
COKKEIJTSs
ETV 24
GD-i NONE
EOAL TEST: NA
DRIVER: t;iKE K
TEST MILES: 2174
BASELINE TEST
3761 CC = 11
NO CHANGES
17 MFG.
MADE FF.OM LAST CATALYST
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 72 F (V.'cT)
77 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
F.H: 79 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FULL: HO III
BLOWER RPM CACT>: 928.938
BAG 1
AIR LX
PRES: 744.785 11M HG CEAEO)
23.756 MK KG CVAPOR)
23.3625 IN. 1120 (IIJLLT)
18.55 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2976
ELOV7ER RPM (CAL): 928-772
TIKE (SECS)
BLOVEP. EEVS
CO (PPH)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (JO
5C5.2
7837
2.50 1582.00
5.36 394.12
BAG 2
AIR LX
868.1
13440
17.40 1576.00
8.46 270.64
0. 41
0.04
33.46 0.52
2.70
0.06
12.30
1.52
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2028.66
4. 64415
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
KC (PFK C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
38. 14
389.91
1457.50
2.67
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAtiS/tAG)
NOX
KC
CO
C02
5.CS
12.92
97.48
2323* 25
BAG 2
3479.03
7.9008
1 1.85
263.23
1474.86
1.47
2.71
14.95
169.17
2662.68
HAG 3
AIR EX
506.3
7839
34.40 15CC.CO
12.88 339.84
0.54 31.53
0.06 2.31
BAG 3
2029.13
5.39564
31 -C9
329.35
1367-71
2.26
4. 15
10.91
9 1 . 50
2392.75
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.97
3.56
35. 10
698.74
FUEL ECONOMY (KILES/GPL)
EFAHPG 1 1 . 50
-------
t_,vs 966 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST UiTE: 7-22-76
VEHICLE: LTV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NAONE
ROAD TEST: NA
LF.IVEP.: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2185
COMMENTS:
BASELINE TEST NO CHANGES MADE
3742 CC = 11.22 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEHP: 67 F (VET)
77 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 59 Z
INERTIA WT-: 4000 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PP!I)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
928.878
DAG 1
AIR EX
5C5. 1
7820
2.00 1612.00
5.32 344.00
0.26 50 . 1 0
C . C4 2. 78
FEES: 748.335 MM HG (BARO)
23.756 KM HG (VAPOR)
23.3625 IN. H20 (INLET)
18.8125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2976
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928•746
BAG 2
AIR EX
866.9
1 3452
19.60 1495.OC
7.96 252.40
0.38 13.90
0.05 1.50
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2034.97
4.52107
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (5.)
49.90
339.66
1493.49
2. 75
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
5. 71
11.29
100.20
2917.16
BAG 2
3500.56
3.03562
13.57
245.43
1406.51
1.46
2.67
14.03
162.33
2658.40
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.3
7822
21.80 1513.00
9.96 320.28
0.43 35.35
0.04 2.16
BAG 3
2035.49
5.73887
34.99
320.06
1403.6C
2. 13
4.C1
10.64
94.20
2257.80
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.99
3« 33
34.55
693.30
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAliFG 1 1 . 58
-------
Y f •• 1 1 1 I i - 1 r • < 'A I , ^ * * *•
* '- K I '••• v i J r lC'A ( «": 15--?- 7S
vrJr-.IOLr: riiv H'< ».).•:! vKn: LAnui
i«IAlFi3 60 •.>')/ or irSi r.'iILrl.S: 500
covitt'r.M'i s: .;•'> o i i";L.i/ i.'-iU'.'ui'i •i"W'Vvii:> 3')
'?. S -il>;.N)-i v/A.O'.n>< •it,'
j.-y,^. «.;j j. (.-tj) Ht-FS:
7K F ( DH O 'I-" • fi 1 7 I'M H (-. C v i • r ) iO
100 t- C^l.O :->S- .17h I-M. H'^i) CJ^LKM
RH: 4,1 •»: I9..'^.b I'** H^u (Jl'iLJ-.l
I.grl;iIA :w i . : -JlOUU L !-.'.•> ''-"-> % - St-r-j'i: 3
F'.i»-L: H'J III Cr/;-r.^: .JOlx
CC 1-i'VJL: 1047. r-LJ-.t-j ;,.••; (CAD: i^^.-J-'l
Al ;i r..s.
1 I /)!••: Ci-.C) '"> »'")• 7
CO Cr-K-O Id.UO :->'J.()U
HC (1-rVj i.:> 4.«/.i ;.'7. 7--!
M •-)/*. (rrv;> (.)•••"-> •< <• 7')
COP. (5) U-O/i -• ^ .'
*** CALUUF-'MKj) hKSULTS
MAC-!
Tf .">• H J > r-.iji
CO ii f. KC I Ki< CO ^ C rN i h A i I 0 vJ S
CO J l.'<. I 7
:/Fi«vu r->.^><
7 |jl r. V V i<»- \if!T- - 1 . S
-------
•-", -I :.-•-. B.
*** I .':.- M I I r i*:''» I I ) ,
i -> i ) '- i - : .>- >••- 7q»
./ -.;•• I I'iji- : u. i v/ -V! ii: I v/'v<
'. A i .c.:-.l <%L: '.-••-.' ^ )jV j >• i > .'-. i -'
i-Jni-! VMt.'. 'iii'-i 30 SKC j'JHi AT:.
* * fc 1F.M UA1A * •= l«
TF^r-1: 63 F (••.H."M FK^.S: 7«-f.73S -1^" HI- C;"M,.,»)
7>? F (un/) ^Vi.'U? -;v iir-; ( v-vK.Ji-:)
100 F (/i CO ••:>. 37S !•>!. Mr''; CI>JL!-ii
HH: /1 3 T l.-»./r-JS fM. KP.O COUif.. ".. j )
IMirhTIA ;-'f.: 4000 LHS MLOV-'H SK-vKn? 3
FUFL: H-) III CF/nKO: .301X
CG KUFL: lO^'i V^...IVKK HF/' (C«>L"): 9^*./i>M
tiLO iv h: iS h H^' ( A U i ) : ;> M ^ • "' <•'! I
-AG
} I i K \
i Iv F ( SKO SOS. •'
H_ ) • -F.H I'.KVS TrrtO
C.) ft-P'X) lu.OO v^.no
H C ( H h"yi (.'. ) ^ . 9 6 >' •:-> . 3 H
00 « C 5) 0.0/J -^..MK
tr^t: i, MLO" )!..<'• i ?:>:• j- ;-..;• ii. i s fci;^
UF S. 61^7
co H h EC i -: 1 1 c- ) -J i : ••: >n i-: M r '.) x
i*s. 7"
HC .C^l'M C) ^•^..•-Vl
C) (lK'5) l/i.-i'
COX C T) ^.JS
MASS E^.IbSI-.'J v)S Cl-ij-jA^.i
:>j )/. o. 7S
-U: O.«l
CJ .-0.^7
FUFL FCOMOM*
5? DlFPE:r-tEv4CE -1.6
-------
'-'«*•- t ,11 i-i> • •:'•"- £J ' * I:
\f * '•• I ':FO JIM (:•• i I ) -; :"k *
i-:sr i/AjFs >-•-<- 7 ^
^ F". I ( :L v : K f v '•>.* :) f. I vK n : L ^ •< r i
X-^l^r.I AL: N^'. 6< -Ji)/ i • i>..Si '-jiLrS: SOU
S: F)J-iHi' VACUUM ftDVAMU'F 30 SEC P)i-T ^IH
1.5 :^IM. vl-) VACi'^M ADs/A-JC?: FUKL y? )'r:^l^r.^ 0
*** J K.S1 DA j A t= k*
.3 ¥ C .vIT) Fi^F.Ii; 7^>^.73S :v •:i Hb ( V'M-J .O
100 F C-IIX) '!b. 37:S' I^J. H>>0 Cl \ILF.i)
r.H: 43 7 19./t'r->5 IM. H^O (-.)..iLFJ)
IMKriilA Vr.: -'JOOO LL'iS HL'lvr.k SPEKU: 3
FUEL: rt-J III UP/r.v.v: . 3'Jli-»
CC FLIfcL: 1064 H.O\Kh HP^ (CAL): >) '->><. ••«>.< 1
t.:L:.)'.."r. ht-".y> (Atjn: ^.^;.<"-J'>
C'j (Pi-/. ) 7.mj r?y. uu
HC (PHM C) /J.^fi X^.H/i
uoy ( s
CCr)
t/)i-i-.F.i.. 1 r.t.) C') -JC'". >/ i K^> i 1 -) \) S
•J'J < C K^.•') :;.H. • .-
MC at1:-; u> ^-:. '/••
C-.M ( X)
•••• <\ .s s ; v-i i > s I )
-------
*** THIRD BAG 5><2 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9/15/75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM BASELINE
DRIv/ER: LARrtf
TEST MILES: 2790
COMMENTS:
THIRD BAG COMPUTATION OF BASELINE
N/A
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 73 F (WET)
80 F (DRV)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 68 %
INERTIA ¥T.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
CC FUELSNONE
PRES:
751.135
26.271
26-075 IN.
19.95 IN*
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3026
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
928.358
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.25
BAG
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NO* (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX (CF>
DF
AIR E<
499.65
7730
1.00 2.00
14.60 36.52
1.07 77-42
0.04 2.23
*** CALCULATED RESULTS * *
BAG
2033.76
5-99864
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
76.53
24.35
1.06
2.20
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NO*
HC
CO
COS
FUEL ECONOMY
CARBON
2.75
0-23
o.oa
650-56
(MILES/GAL)
13.62
-------
*** THIRD BAG 5d4 ***
.*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9/15/75
VEHICLE: ETV 24 DRIVERS LARRY
MATERIALS GEM BASELINE TEST MILESS 3813
COMMENTS: THIRD BAG COMPUTATION OF BASELINE
N/A
** TEST DATA **
TEMPS 73 F (WET) PRESS 749-135 MM HG (BARO)
80 F (DR*) 26.871 MM HG CV/APOR
100 F (MIX) 26.075 IN. H20 (INLET)
HH, 72 % 19.95 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
INERTIA WT-: 4000 LBS BLOWER SPEEDS 3
FUELS HO III CF/REVS .3028
CC FUELSNONE BLOWER RPM (CAL)S 923-35«
BLOWER RPM (ACT)s 929•228
BAG
AIR EX
TIME (SEC) 505
BLOWER REVS 7821
CO (PPM) 1.00 2.00
HC (PPM C> 17.60 38.36
NO* (PPM) !•17 82.58
C02 (5) 0«03 2.23
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
VMIX (CF) 2057.96
OF 5.99815
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM) 81.61
HC (PPM C) 23.69
CO (PPM) 1«05
C02 (X) 2.21
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX 3.08
HC 0.22
CO 0.02
COS 659. 18
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON 13.45
-------
*** THIRD BAG 587 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION **
TEST DATE: 9/15/75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM BASELINE
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 2858
COMMENTS:
THIRD
N/A
DAG COMPUTATION OF TBASELINE
TEMP: 74 F (WET
82 F (DRf)
100 F (MIX
RH* 69 %
INERTIA WT«: 400 L3S
FUEL: HO III
cc FUEL:NONE
* * TEST DATA * *
PRES: 75L995 MM HG BARO)
28.021 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.9 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.3625 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3022
BLOWER .RPM'(CAL): 928.384
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.414
BAG
AIR
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
506*8
7842
13.00
14.24
1 • 43
0.07
20.00
35- 12
80.00
2.32
VMIX (CF)
DF
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2068.96
5-7625
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
78.78
23.35
8.16
2.26
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NO*
HC
CO
CO 2
3.02
0.22
0. 15
679.88
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
13*03
-------
*** TriIRD BAG 2 **.*
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-15-75
VEHICLE* EIV 24
MATERIAL! GE-4 NOME
TEST
.41 KE. E
3000
COMMENTS:
EGrt lE£ C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 58 F (WET)
75 F (DR*>
90 F (MIX)
RH: 34 *
INERTIA WT.S 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
CC FUEL: 1068
PRES: 753*965 rfi«l HG CDARO)
22*243 MM HG (VAPOR)
26.075 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.95 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED* 3
CF/REV* .3024
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-358
BLOWER RPM CACT): 928*419
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REN'S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOK (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
3AG
AIR EX
504.6
7803
53*00 2084*00
7.76 248.80
1.03 87-50
0*04 2*00
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2103-72
6-02798
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NO* (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
86*64
242.33
1933.03
1.97
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
N0<
HC
CO
C02
2>40
2.32
37.35
601*00
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
13*30
12*73
-4*5
-------
TVST DA IK: '.>- 1 !•>- VS
JtKlv.f.h: Mjvj.- (..
IKSf •>jIL.u:S: ;1000
MS i)«.vTH(r>. c. . o 7i/ • O'-i;5 i-. V.A
lh.'MH: 57- V (!-. Kl)
,'/.•« h (i.)i-Y1
^0 F (MIX)
hH: 35 %•'
I^F.hJlA if. 1 . : 4000 Lbb
FUV.'L: HJ 1 1 1
CC I-UKL: HWi .
HWO (MLi-i)
(OUlLr.i)
.hLO'wFu -S»-;KV, .».:•: J
C{--/uc.y: .30--:a
hL'JVKH »ajv (CAI., ):
PL'.r--'J-; M.^ (ACi):
K
'1IVK (SRC)
F.
ivi')< ( i-V •* )
KX. •
Si 1 7. J
7'':')
'i.')n -.'I
n. U-'l '.J. i-''
ij. f'M VT
(CK)
DP
KRSUL1S
MJ\ (i'f-0
HU (l^r"< (J)
MASS Kty? i ss I J xi s ( '/i;-i'v^ s/ •; i L
WA v>. -M
HC '^' /J-:)
CO 4f>« 1 S
FJ. FC > vl')^ i' (:^ I L t:S/ GAL )
!>•<•
'«.•»• I f-i { 1
f L-I l-rKs-.K -iCK
-------
i.H
K.'iv VM
CJMMKN1S:
Ht.iis
KUKL
t)hl vr.;-.: •:•'. 1 \> h.
i Ki, 1 rtlLF.S: 3(100
CAl;nUHF i'Jh CHA^dES vi
t-J
» ()
77
}.- C-'-"i'>
F
F
3/J
I MEAT I A Wf.. : 4000 LPb
HiH-: 4'J lit
CC F"fL: lO'-^S
t-'HFS: 7S.^.'^^S MM tl-i ( HAr, I )
33. 7S^ MM HH (VAFJ/O
:3f.. OY-S IM« H'^0 CMLhl)
HO. IP. 5 L*J. .HP.O (JUILKn
RLOwKii SPF.KU: 3
Or/r.EV: . 30P6
M.'J.vrin r.H> (CAL): 9 '-V: . J-'t
ML'lx'i-. i-:PY (AC1): J ->.?<. 'V^ 1
t-.-ii-,
Air 'A
I IMF (SFC)
«LJ»Kr. hKVS
CO Ci-HM)
HC
'i/J.OO i-! 34V. 00
10. 3« -V^.,UM
(<• V7 »K C4L,rJ- ^
i-UEL KC'
2 fill-i1 r:\rNCK -3. 1
-------
J H..J i I)-- 1 - : '- I s- "/:}
VFHICLfc: n:iu :V.i
viAlF>l*>L: 'iF* vj ) vts;
•< >• , - i •,. . i ,\-; -; i: » : '• J .<
i .-.b i ^it.hb:
"i'ii-. CO) o ) CM
-Ur.L '•'•'. 1 ur.'-r-KI'.
(17 1 / . (I-4.-J r
77
->«
HH: 3?.
f «• M">
(Ot-f)
lA Wl«: ^UDO LHS
ri'j It!
CC HUKL: 1030
y-«5 Hi-
19.95 IM. 'H«0 (UUILKJ)
h SHEr,D: 3.
i^LO.-KK HHvi COAL): 0 W . .-<
"':>«.<•'
''il/iE (SKC)
DL-JV-Fh hTV
CO ( HPX! )
M I h
41 • OU ^ ^ 7- 00
COS C S>
( • Af,. i; i n, ft i F.D >< ^ SOL IS
CCi-)
Ml 01
CO h hV C I r, 0 CO ^ i '•"". ^J 1K * i I 0 vJ S
MO A Cf-t;v> 7^..J^
HC (rW C) •->./!-'.i^J
CO C^fo) ^.<'4'4.0J
CO'^ C '/> l-'M
"i .'i. h. s KV i s s j.) --i s < c-ih '>:•: s / ••' ILK)
CO /'rT 'V-'.i
C J 2 bH 1 • J &
i-UKL F.OJMi)Mf C-1ILF.5/GAL)
-------
•c r !. | -I | | > , i •-,••»'•» *
x [ . .- -j i i r | I;A( J .1
ff :- i • -'' i '-.: •- 1 7- 7 -.
V/.--1 .,'L-.: -' i v ^!..: I.-TI- '' T)M-
CJXMR, JJ .;:
» i L'-7.:-.: J
J ->S i^'-.'-iuK*-. C S I vJ(>! Si Sir'* ^'."Xl'-.S Plri-.!'
S i i ^ !.'va IM.I LHMllI;^ M! Si. I'Lii'iS f H J I ;< i:)^1-- 'MIL
IMF.^l'IA M'.:
MJKL: H'l III
CC FURL: 996
-M-
r.KSs 7 -'»•*. 0.
UH/i'P:vt . 30--J^
HLOfe-hri hHv) (UAL): •)'•>>*• "I I
>-LO'?i\ hh- C''».CI): x'1-1 '• 7 •!••
II '"• (SKC)
PI. )T.«;ir
CO
HC C-rl^i C)
:VJ;J.K >. '-.C 1 *.: ) i />> vJ ( " -: \i i h 'U I I '-i ' •
7 'i. x^
HC (rHX C) ;<:><=. ^«'>
C) Ci-PX) 17 Si. ->J
oS I1?! I SSIU JS ( '-r.AX S/y 1 I>I)
KJF..L KCO>JOMlf (MILKS/i-JAL)
13.65
-S.O
-------
*"* IJ> 0 j I Hi: A il ) J »; t *
( "~S i ; •'"• 1 " : J- 1 7- 7~>
V - - i GL *• : 5" J v/ •-! '-i > > • I v )-.„ . : •• I i :-. .-.
N'l'U F.i-. I ALt tiH'i \jO\j~, l"..ii '/-[Lr.:?: .vii.i'i
C J «' '•" V >J i' S : r • 'LL ••• -^ v I r .) L i ,• v ' s *.; C- ' J/i A i > ;' . » J i.: )•
S 1 A\il)-\!"i.' i'sv} i i'l-) -I C .1 >lrO >l ;v^ 1 S ;j.fil)r '•;-.:- t- -. ij rv.,i.<.
IhX'c: 6*1 K (;-.^.i) i-i'.i-S: ?/i>.u;iS :v/«i HI- ^n^i.)
77 r C u.- i ) :•',-(. 7. S'-> ');1 H;- < w.-'u- i r-
Jrf !• C-iIX) P. S. T'-i S i \l. :1.^.0 ClJL
hH: 5P 7 1.>.6, !:>). H'^.O C J i*iL :-.
UF-nflA wl.: ^000 L".S HL-JVfcn SPKlvD: 3
FUEL: HJ III CF/HKVr .3019
CC FUKL; 1003 '-LO -.•< Fh jx . /(r./i
All- -*;
'il^r. (S^.C) si.;.<. •'• • •
HvJV.FJH HEV/S 77Vf-«'
GO (PFiX) 30.00 17b-!.O'.)'
HG 1631.^1
M ft S S KM I S S I . ) vl S ( IX i-i A-X ^/ lV! ILK)
•>J )X
HG ^.^'>
C J 31. i 1
i;.j!r> -JH^'. 14
FUEL EGO»OM* CMILKS/GAL)
CAHK)N 13.83
WKIH41 . 13. S5
S »IFFKHE>JCF. -9.0
-------
IT it IT , I 1 i i • •••'»!- r> • *: ( t
: •'••• i - «j i i r I < • • ill; v f "
i •-.- 1 • > i ••:: .»- i 7-'/-i
^ '- M i t;i_. r t r.i >! J M K i r..-> i -IL.-:-: :«: ' , J ; i 3 » '\ » * fc
^.s H < •'•:«.) re. i-..-,: v -^ 7 •..'<;•« s "•' / •''••
77 F Cl>l-f> -'J. TT^ r>i ') !-":
J. '-J
IA ;•»!.: /iMfiO L*'S HL'J.v?".!- i>t KhD: 3
J) II! Ci-/^r.vs ..VM9
(HI HJ=t<: ^/ll r«LJ-.f'.h. ht"l (CJAL): 9 ?
l- ins.''
Jc (.- v f,.-:.| .i;iil.,'> i .ri) ;--'S-'LTS >r «=
MA S
!1") CJ J'-^'xil^'M I HS
-vI'U: <.->;-''> "0. 1 7
HC (»->•»} C> •••'-
c") ( tVi> i v-^.« -: ^
(JO-1 C 7) 1« 7 i
:>I '"j S S K '•'! I :> S I ' ) 4 .'•> f l-n •>' .-/ •»; I L
X.JX •-'-•'/ 7
hC ^.tu
r, ) -i''' :vH
HJFJL ECONOMY CrtlL.-.S/
WEI RM I 14.
i DH-I-FKF.>*CK -6.0
-------
t. I *:
'.'••• VI
i :v:> i '•,'> i ••": .>- i /-
"v F .-i I CL r.t !r" i v : -'. '<
^AI Fi''''/ S-'C •-»•' ' (.'•".•f-.i M
i, >-'S: 3tju0
J^O .30^ M .'-(•!•
I tS f uA i A >• »••
77 r (Mar)
i/^ «• i • :
HJKL: HO III
CC FUKL: 993
•:•;'>'; fir, (v .-j
[M. .-;;/(..! Clvji
'-iL'j^'Fih SPF.F.D: a
Ul-/ ^tv/: . 3019
bLO*Krt nH-5 C CAD : -9«« . 437
) -L:j * 5 h ht-M . C AC T > : 9 '<(.< . bo 6
'1 IMF (SFC)
«L;)rv.-:h HKV
CO C FFM )
HC (PPM C)
CvJ'.JX (Pi-X)
'CO''! (5)
Ali! -A
SO 0.9
7^/Jfs
:>3 . 00 1 '» S ) . 0 0
10.36 .-iSs.P.O
Q. 7/j s ••..!() .
0. O'j 1 . -^
'-• fc
(UF)
3
L'J- ft. .sol 1
COiih?!C 1 1;!..1 CO ^'>'\i 1 1- '"> i i J \ s
N) ) -i C PH- ) s"/. /.•/
ML" ' C i 't"-"" C ) ,vif- . -.1 S
CJ (Pf ••>•) 1H37. i7
r/j^ c -:•;) i.,- i
•YiASS r^lSSIO wS ( U- A •' :>/;'U
HO
C')
1.77
3. :JC>
HUH.L F.CJ.>JJ'*1Y (MILKS/ fiA
13.69
-7.U
WE I IX I
"% Dli-P
-------
* - i i -ii i I) >'• 'ji- 1 0 ** *
* * K I '.>;• g i i *• i r, A j 1 1 ) «i *!•*•-
VKilI'JLF.t 'F.'l'v ^-'l
jJi-.I vKi'! LAiu-.i"
77 F C'.'ai')
97 F f'U O
S« T
lfX vj.S ''"jOO f..'|l~
IT) III
. MW HO C v/>'u; •.") i.)
,-!S. .375 -l'>i. Hi'.l't (IvLK
Id. 9 IM. H*U (J'liL.K 1)
'-L » .• r r. S.-'u"n: 3
0
V--5JX (Ch)
Dh
AtK
r.A
H^i) A-KH H-:VS 7^ ! '
Gv3 (HK-'i) :^H. K"> ^OO*.U
HG Cr^H'i C> ri..36 XA8 .lo
MUX Ch-lW)' 0.71 MS. M/I
COS ( b) O.U^i H. 1U
«\ G
'rtfi'-iS. 66
COi-i'.r.l" i Ku GOMi;>: vl i^':> i I ) J <-
H(J (^Kf C) t»frl.:
CO (b'H*5) id6S. .'<
tu hFSUL'I'h
: Lh
HC
CO
K','f.L KCON JMi
-------
* i -u •<
i L'-.-Jl I.
IKSi i)Ai£: J-l^-VS
VEHICLE: ETV J-VJ
•4AijvniAL: UK*) \r_Hr:
r:iIVKn: L-.IM-.I'
i KM K-ILF.S: 300
KGh 1220 (.302 ) UuMCE 'iET S/Si'.M
D^LAl' fi
THMF: ^6 F C'-.-EI')
77 F (>.».'AFOr:)
t: 1'KSr DATA +**
P.HFS: 744. 7^ =>
^^.7L-»6
'->5. ? IM
19.075 IM. H«0 COU'lLFO
MLUi-'Kh SPF.ED: 3
KVJ • 300!->
F.r Kj-'M (CAL •>: ')'->><. S.Vi
H.n Ki'M (A I'M"): ^rf«.--JLi«
r-5E (SEC)
ER hEVS
co (FHM)
HC (t'F'-'5 C)
NJ<),< (rt-X)
C-):> (5)
Vil \ (Cr )
Alh.
5(36
Y.sl-tO
. 3.0 '-"
1. -.1
V, . '/(J
«(VS7.
K.D MLSULIS
MU*.
HC
-KC'i EiJ CO >)U.i7..M i --^- II •)>! S
7';-.-':<
-H'i C) v-<^.t,S
HF>1V 19/H. 7'.»
CO rf ( V. ) 1 « ^ 0
'•' A :> S F^5 1 S S I '.) *' S ( l -i^ A'.«i .•? / •'« t L
CO
CO a
FUEL EO
»• VI-
3*. 82
-S67* 3U
(MILES/ GAL)
1/J.OO
-------
!c.M: I ••'" , |f !• I I,1''-. 1 I
i !-.:•• i -r%- i ••;: >- 1 -^- V
v- il.JLE.: '""iv '-V4
UK rt
7. -
7-'! F (r.:.^l)
^« F C^ilX)
hri: 65 7
I^KhflA »:i.: -0000 LHS
FUEL: HO III
CC i-Ll^: 10 WO
vK (Sfc-'U)
CO
HC (PK^ O
r^O x ( Ft- VJ )
G0« Cb)
1-6 I,
•\ i h :- A
Sl.i'i. 7
1 (-.• 0<) f >9S. i.lQ
0. f,-» 7-''. 70
r»LJ-vivH Sh-KF)): 3
CJ-/KKV: .3U1^
CCAL);
HC (t''i»'> i.')
UO
V/-»U>; CCK)
DF b- 147V 6
CJr.hF.Ci Kfj CO -J- : -'J i FA ri ,) >).
7u. iy
3 10. On
( Cn< A:-'. .-/
•->. 37
M.etf
.'«<£». J/4
570.V1
13. :*'<*
MA1-.S H*I
MOX
HC
C'J«
FUF1.
CAKllkJ'J
WEIGHT
JE PIKFEHBMCE
-------
*" 11r I'-UfJ •>- 1 -t-'/r.
v/KMlCLi-.: !•• !•••' -'./i i.)i'l v.-:,•: L.^^^i
/.ft 1 Ki'xlAL: (.!>•:'' vi J ••!u, lir.si .ilLyb: .j'.H)-
vi'V«J I !• JL, i> V/AiJJM^ A')^. SOS.:} $?'.(.' J'l <'•'-.< -r.-IK i:
J hi* r G I y 0 C'J ^J i>:: ^ i : •• ^ 1 I ••> ^ S
HC < 1JF"* «J> .H'')^-. 05
c:..» d-r'/:) ivi-:.'^-
C'J« (7) U-Tv
M A S S P>' t S S I 0 >J S ( (jt\ • \>*' S/ i-i I L ,
HC
uo
FUEL KCOMOMV
1/4. 5 «
WEIGHT 13.H7
'* DUFFHE.MCF. - 5» 4
7A h.'(Uf'i) -'-il . '-i3:i .•!;•;' .
y?'- r f'-lX> MSt^'/'i [\1«
H: 65 7 19.07S iv.
MKHl'IA >'f. : 4000.L;"«S F? H.OO 1*36.00
Hi; IOX CFF--5) 0«H.6 10U..OO •
.co« (5) o. i)^ IV'H
-------
«*• I •([ I ,. i'AU 1
! •<• J J I r IC<-J ! ).
FV'SJ :.••- i -.: •>- I -<-7=>
A r'i ':•(.; -fii >»;-/* M uFLAi' VALv/i. (.'. ').
J'.i '.'I'^MK-'. 0 t-UuL J W'"]-'
H-!. H.'.O
CfVi.-.V:
H»(./j(.-t,
t 9 «•:-?. S 1 (•
Jn'JV C
U>U. (N-.'J)
V-L«JvtJ.H h^.v-S
CO ( r r -o
HC C»Jh^ i;)
^.)A C *->••*"•)
COP ( S)
'M.- -.<
SUV. 1
'I •*•'•* ft
: > 6 . i )<} :•!.•< P A . 0 0
't?.4U v>y>.6«
0« 7^ .'(7. ;J,4
O. 'l'i ;>. 18
**'; L '•• >..'.".' iLMt
v.XI .-i
DF
GlfcnKUl "ii* UO'K'h >ii'^Al'I'.J»(S
•JO A Cl-K"'> ^6. *V?
HC Cf-i-"''- o ;-»v^. •! l'v<. r> .1
t J'; C ") J. i -J
•< A .S S V "*• I h S I . J is ( ' -i n A •' :> / ;-i I L
^ t\ \ . i. >
-U: :•*.. r>.*
lV) •'!<). •' 0
F UXL «-.C ) M '.) «t (MIL r: -S / <- \L )
AC I (1^ J I-?.
7 uli-FKrtr.vJCF. 0. S
-------
*•• '•• ': i -i 1 j- 1 1 J •. f M : 1 »: k I-
t*k ..I IT- >( II M G'Al H.J xi kk k
RSI' I) A I " t T*- I-'- Vi
-~i!.l CLK: F.I'V/ -VJ V'.\J v'-...: L''KKi
AI KHI At: G K* J ) KL«i -- i:j
S1"'-. 1 NhC r1^ j.>-i-)-.Kr . •!.:
HO i- (l.'JV/) -.^. H'/ 1 .•'.-.' i'i (v-^hitx)
r»J r. C>*il^) .••>.'•»« P IM. ri'^U- M >if. " i )
50 ? ' 19.'^S M« ri^M OOiL'-
lA * I • t 'JiJOU L'-i:? HL-.i-.\Kl-; SJ^v-.O: 3
: H') III Ul-^hr-'v: .30i:i
CC HU.KL: 1037 HLO '/h'u ht-'M CHAD: 9^d«L>l'
i'l.. i ••." ]• h hi '! C AC I ) : ^ «•<.•••" :->
• Tir.v (SKr:) so-.. -^
>y..J:.«!-:H hKVb 7- H-!
C'J (rFM) 18.00 1H
rA; (eH:-' r:> ^.:->0
(Hh-M) H. 71
HAG
yo;
C i ~.\y co ^ J.^IMA no i .?
,g.)\ OK- > S-4. (H
HC (»-»-•••• 0 >' ''^ 7"-
ui (j-t-'-n ro>. 7«
CO'-^ ( X1* •••).O'.-?
MASS FM ISSUES (Gh«"'S/vi
HG
uo
FUEL EC-J^OM'f (MILKS/ liALJ
GAhbU>> 1^* SI
WEIGHT U. 11
t DUFFnK>JCE -3-1
-------
'•<•• I 1 1 I '• "••>: ; I •
I •.-'•. \l I I H <>»1 I )Vi
1-
:-:AIK.-:IAL: riH/'
4-:
.••.-. I ',;;••: j : L-M-l-.i
iKSi :- IL^.S: 3000
J h i r .D V A i: . .• I 1 ri SHAM O ^"J. A ^ V AL V K
: f-7 >' (VEI'>
77 v
100 h C^I
IMKhFIA -^f. : 400U LHS
F(JEL: HO III
CC.. hU£L: . 1053
KnKS: 741. =
«;<.7
«3. P.
-X'i ud C 'MAr. ) >
^LO*FK SPFJEDJ 3
CH/Hfcv: .3013
BLOWKii HP" (CAL^S
•iL'V.vVV. K1J/ 'CACl">t
:^E (STC)
CJ
HC
^IX (CF)
HC (H
CO (
CO:? C
-X C)
HC
CO
COP
Air -'.
SOS. f-
y^.-1;*
11.00 1679.00
^.«^ -Kj.umj
0.67 4->.60.
0.04 •->. 1^1
UALf •' II.. M i '" 'i '• r. " MIL 1 o
7731>i
1-UEL
CAhBJ'M 13
IKHl .ia
DIFhRKKMCK -1-9
;^. 1 1
( lj)-'\X S/f- I LJ-.
1.57
•-»• U>
i>").f:^
f-Pl.-JS
fMILKS/(iAL)
-------
'. f • \j i I r I :A i I J •' * ':' '•
v '^ 1 •• i- 1 :>L :
- 7 ^
I
) I }•
.;; i •; t [., >•'. -• : .no t.)
jv M.iv - M.) StJ^j,<
( i\>- f )
(MA)
HH: S> "
: /-IOOO
HJKL: H J 111
CC KJF.L: 106
--ih. ^ I 0. H'-ii.i (FvL. -i)
•l^V-'S l.M« HrV.) ()i.ilL>
.-. Kr> bi-'J- ,r.!.>: 3
i'FV: .30K<
'.vr.i\ ^PfS CGAL): JHP.SK-
, •;?-.;•.. hi-v ( AC1 ) : 1^:-J:--*. ;;. ••'••''
lI^iH: CSFC)
BLi.)!-,Kif a'4 f'/i^.OU
(). 70 S'-% 7i'.i.
o. 0'! '•>.. V3
( '. f\ I . I ; I iL A i p) ]••>'•> f JL 1 S
UP S. 56573
CO hh F.'3 1 -.)) C-.'J ^4 C --^ i i -A i 1 0 \' s
MOX. (rWY
fiC 'f i!l-v' n
CO (Fl-^)
^.* 13
Vi A S S KX 1 S S I ) >l S C ii :•. V-' S / "i f L
M'J A l.'v/
HC '•^•17
CO . 9#."S
FUFL
1.;^. 77
LI
«• I
-------
fc * * I :. •• v i I M Li -M I ) i * k *
'.'Ml .:.: )- 1 >- 7fS
L:-.: K I tf >w «it-:i v r.: vl
•>t Ai Frfl Ai.: HP'* »T>i)» 1KSJ 'y.'i I. *.S
> C; h^VvTl )f I* VI 1 7
I1 * k i P.S i /)£ 1 A * * fc
H'lhS! 7/.i .-i •/'i ,-'• 5 '"!"'> HI-I ("Ai'.l'>
/^ F (MIA) P'T^ I \i. HP.O CML-i)
HH: ^7 2 1*»9 i^- -i^O COUlLi-.i
f>lEhliA wl.: /lOOO L^S ML'»t,-Kl< SFKF.l")* 3 ,
HJFH-: H;) III Cl-'i-KV/! .3007
CC K.IF.L: U).'<(J ML)"-:-: Ht-'': (CAL): >'^.S.S-i
• *L ) \- •• a hJ'i-'i ( AC 1 > : -^ '*'•. • ) '->'!
' i.-\i,
Qlh ! A
11 :*. F. ( S F(j) ->;.> S. <•'»
MLO*:KH HF.VS 7v -?s
CO CHt^li 17.60 l.^/ift. Of)
•MOX (Fr'. > O. 77 S.'». r-,s.
0. f.)'J •'.I''
b. 13
UU Khf.C i rJ> C-) J Jri i iis A 1 I ) ^ a
'U: (j-j-s «:>. "u
CJ (rrf ) 1 7-U-
WASS 55yiSSl:3>»S C fir "v: 'V vii L
rJC
CO
HIEL EO^OMY cy
;1 DIFhfh^.^Cfc -0. 3
-------
*k- I ''!••-•] nrlCAil ) 4 I-'*"
IKS! UA£TC: 0-1 >-7--,
KIV v»a >>.,IV'V: •. >.«
O- 'iKSI •/'ILKS'
DF
C.)
MASS
HC
co
IKSi ''DMA
66 F CW,T> FKF.-Sl
AI
ii ye: CSKCV ^" • I*' ia
NUO CPFM) 1-°^
FUEL. ECU.^OMY < MI LKS/ l-
13.91
V3.34
7. UlKtBH^CE -0.5
-------
k ' * i i t :• 'J ':-\'-. < i t fc •-.
M*- I ;;'• -\ i 1 J- t :.'M I J J > '**
i KSi" DAi'?.: J- 1 ->- VS
U =1H I CL -:: K i v 24 ! -'H \\>v\-: M •<, F
MAIEKIAL: . GFM AlJ MM H(i
00 f COiif> ^6.871 MN1 H'^
HH: "4 7 l^.'^b 14. HiiO f--)(ULKi)
14,-Kll^ Wl.: .'4000 LT-.S i>L):.»r:i-. -SiJKK:i): J
1-UEL: HJ III O/I-vt/: ..<011
CG hlift: l()9-< I-'.. )-^r ni-'i (i:AL>: ^ :•!-«. sps
AIR CX
i'lf?; (SPO .5 os. :\
iLJ >.-::» MKvb 7^:'(t
co CPI-^) i /.--jo i • »o. M
HC (IVi-i C5 >• ^^ " ''I. -S^
>JJA (^1 /!) 0. 77 /iK. 1 I
COS (S) O.OS J.:>^
-Or>. a-
'^^ V-^ 1.5.1
ajti^-:ci - > u ) «;o.r^ i -.- ^i
MJX (fr^'-i) '''7.
HC (r-K"! C> '^.'^
C ) V ( ^ ) •->• 1 r<
^ A S S fct< I S 5 i 0 J ::• ( ' - r*\-' ;•• / X T L ^:
HC y
CJ .«.
go a *^J*
V*OEL •E
*.- £ •-;•-( j
•/ ''-I i-r ;->•-: H;F
-------
"• 'f *• I -< i i '• I :• '"'»'• r1 i H J:
* < I .'•-. -J J i :-I';Ai i J J **
\j K-i 1 UL h::
: lit '
H' !•<:». l
* * * T KS IDA t A
I^IPJ 66 r O.-E1)
>*1 K (Dni)
^ 9 P. !« (MIA>
hH: 41 7
I^KHTIA V(T. s /1OOO LB:>
CC > UKL : 1 1 1 h
i'KSl •'•J
Cp: 6 iHDU P-JH1EL) VAC.
i- HAD TUBE /mjl.l.S'JfF.O MCHKKV
'< «--
P'/.O-^S
'^S. v; I -
t9.S5
rl H'i
ril-.
HiiO
H20
I: 3
K»KLS HO i i."
*• K r- H K« < C AL ) J > '^H . S I L
1 »LO •«' EH nt^'I ( AC 1 8 : 9 -kg • '< '). j
THWK (SEC)
1.4-VEh r.-.VS
CO (PFiX)
H (PFXj C)
:>IU.< (PP-;>
C-J3.C5)
Alh .Kv
50 S. ^>
10.72
0-U4
-«". 6V
VWIX CCF)
DF
CO i'hvci Kt> CO
t JA (i:f.-.)
KC Ci5i^ C)
CO
TiA 'T
^06-1. 17
5- 5,-i i 7«
••.:- i i ^ ^ I i J^ S
MASS
CO
+ L
liC
49. H 6
630 •3*
CXILES/GAL)
I «. 38
CAKB):4
VEtiril' 1^.
fDIFFEKSiCE -1-6
-------
*** THIRD BAG 22 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATES 9-20-75
VEHICLE: ETtf 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
COMMENTS:
DRIVER:
TEST iMILESs 3104
TEMP: 62 F
75 F (Drtf)
RH: 51 *
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: rfO I I I
CC FUEL: 107b
• 34tf CfiFICE 12 BTDC
25 C FUEL
* TEST DATA * *
PRES:
VAC* AD\7
(-JAHO)
.rtrt HG
25.2 li\». 420
19-25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3012
HLOrfER RPrt (GAL): 92t5.
BLOrfEH HPM (ACT):
bl6
TIME CSEC)
BLOWER RE\7S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
BAG
AIR 1
507.6
VJMI*
-------
••••:• | i I. I I > :- ', - ••:.'< ;- l '•
I - • -i J I I- i I.'- J 1 O v '•••*•<
H-oi • '•-1... : .'-••)- 7 -.
''-••'let.1-: r; i'v :: :i J.M , I v •• ." t H'i.v ivi
0 •;••:-» I i>: . 3 1 r; ''j.UC '' '•:• -J • 0 ••'»(/. />">V,'. "/>liv7
H '•> C r > i r.'j
^ * * j'-, - i U^ 1 A r- ^ I-'
^)3 F (11 A) -•"-».« IN. f'^U r'<-''Lrl)
;.H: 51 >' 'lJ.^r-?is I.\). .-i P. 0 <••'•>(• in ii>.
IMKni'IA Vvl.: ^000 Lj-S !-.LO.vH;i\ Si-1«,,-'.r>: 3
I- uhL.: HO III C !•/«•; b v: • 30 14
CC FHR.: :H<3 !'-f>J'.'. FH i-,1-^ (CAJ,): 9 2t<. a'M'"1
iXL-.i-'.r.i. i a •->•] (ACi): y;;'=v "-.xio-ii-
BLO .v>.h nRv/S 7;^ I*
C'J (PPM) I!?. 10 -A ;•>.;•: 'i. Of)
HC (F.-V C) '^0.^0 ;<. U. 63 ') I. 60
BOH (5) O.O4 l.M;
V'-'I.-; CCF)
J-F 'S.JJ1iCK >J I'h^'I T O vj s
;>JOA (Pivi) M. 07
HC Cjj^ c> ;u.-i. 13
CO (FHO> ^(i ):v. 1 i
COM ( ?:) 1. >-••••';
i^lASS ra I .S^I 3 M:- ( Cij-ii'i. 'S/ -i I L "?.;
vjox. .->. •';•)
HC -!. >/4
CJ j.:» *''•'-»
C?:« 5 61.7 r-
HIHi. KCOMOMr C^tLRS/GAL)
WE I G. IT
7 DIFFF.HE;>JCF:
-------
J I M J •.:
i - '- i ."A i .".: ->- -J')- '/ -s ,
>.'^'l'-L-J r'i'W .J"
•Xi/i 1 KH i AL : b K ', \i .) -4 K
<_>:;1 V,-.,-: i_,/>
1 Kb J ': M . >• S :
i- .;> l «>'\ J A
01 !• ( • r.I)
73 1- (i'.if)
.»V) p ( .Jl.-^)
SO ^
iA .• i . : .'i.'jO1.' L^
MJ 1 1 I
.;0. 'ti • -i '••:-; fv--i.>..)
:>S. -^ 10. .-i:V.i C I -Ji. '-. O
1>..JS I\). -I .M (.I'M^-
;^(. •»!••>•!• si-K •"•:•.': .•(
f..r/ : - .v: . .vn:>
F.I.. ) • ^h h-:v/>
CO (i-t-'M)
JH-
7- 1 V
10. (JO 1 'i>,<. (it.
n/\r-
C'J :ii *•.'.' 1 r / ' C1 1 -.' ' • --^ v' I . ••< i I ) vl •>
>l«)\ (t-r--;)
-iU Cl'l^' C)
G.) c :-:-•]>
L%J^ c 7)
'7-
" PI rr Ki\- v
- ;-J. 7
-------
*** i'tilHU MAli 2> ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-22-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
DRIVER: LARHY
TEST MILES: 3121
COMMENTS:
6 DER. BTDC PORTED VAC. ADV..348 OftFICE
506.6 SEC. 37 DEGREE C REPEAT OF TEST # 21
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 61 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
98 F (MIX)
RH: 34 %
INERTIA WT«: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
cc FUEL: 1096
PRES: 747.435 MM HG (I3AHO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*725 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.775 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3022
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.411
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.425
BAG
AIR
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
506.6
7839
15
6
0
0
00
52
61
04
2008.00
290.80
44.80
2-04
VMIX
-------
*** THIRD BAG 26 **
*** IDENTIFICATION * *
TEST DATE: 9-22-75
VEHICLE: ETv/ 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
DRIVER: LARR/
TEST MILES: 3125
COMMENTSs
6 DEGREE .328 ORFICE PORTED VAC- ADV.
505.9 SEC. 27 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 59
76
98
RH: 34 %
INERTIA WT.t
FUEL: HO III
cc FUEL: 1100
( WET )
(DRV)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES: 747.435
22.928
25.725 IN
19.775 IN
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3022
BLO-rfErt KPi'l (CAL)
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG VAPOR)
IN- H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
92d-411
BAG
AIR
E<
TIME CSEC)
BLOw/Ert REVS
CO CPPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
COS (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
505.6
7324
16.00 2152.00
6.76 278.4O
0.69 42.OO
0.04 1.94
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2059.22
6.16761
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOK (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (35)
41. 42
272.7/J
2034.74
1.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRA.-lS/'lILE)
1.13
2.55
38.4*
570.29
JIG
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMf (MILES/UAL)
CAR30\J
WEIGHT
% DIFFERENCE
12.36
-12.4
-------
*** THIRD BAG 27 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-22-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NOME
DRIVER: LARR/
TEST MILES: 3130
COMMENTS:
12 DEGREE
505.6 SEC.
BTDC -328 ORFICE
27 DEGREE C
PORTED VAC ADV.
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 61
78
98
RH: 35 %
INERTIA WT«:
FUEL: HO III
CC FUEL: 993
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES i
MM HG (BAKU)
MM HG (VAPOR)
747.435
24.617
25.725 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.775 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3022
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.411
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.611
BAG
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX
DF
(CF)
AIR EX
505.4
7822
33-00 1661^00
11.24 265.60
0.92 73.40
0*12 2*02
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2058.7
6.07896
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM) 72.63
HC (PPM C) 256.21
CO (PPM) 1550-37
C02 (%) 1.92
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.02
2.40
29.31
574.11
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
14.13
13.69
-3.3
-------
*** THIRD BAG :M ***
*** IDENTIFICATION * *
TEST DATEJ 9-22-75
VEHICLE: ET\> 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
COMMENTS:
12 DEG. BTDC
509-6 SEC. 26
UHI\/Ert:
TEST
.328
DEG.
LARR*
3134
ORFICE PORTED WITrt SPARK
C
*+* TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 60 F
78 F
90 F
RH: 33 X
INERTIA WT«:
FUEL: HO III
cc FUEL: 995
(WET)
CDKO
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES: 747.435 rtrt HG (BARO)
24-617 tXliXl HG Cx/APOR)
25.725 IN. H20.
-------
a
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-24-75
V/EHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
DRIv/ER: LARHf
TEST MILES: 3150
COMMENTS:
•453 ORFICE 12 BFTDC PORTED VAC*
27 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMP: 63
73
98
RK: 43 %
INERTIAWT.:
FUEL: HO III
cc FUEL: 1047
CWET)
4000 LBS
PRES: 747.735 'M"l HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (\7APOrO
25-725 IN. K20 (li^LET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REv/: .3020
SLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.426
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.407
BAG
AIR
EK
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REV/S
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
N0:< (PPM)
C02 (5)
504.3
731 1
41.00 1879. OQ
8.46 276.40
0.64 3b.80
0.04 2.00
CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
v/MIK (CF)
DF 6.07518
CORRECTED CONCEMl'HAriONS
N0< (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PP4)
C02 (X)
35.27
269.32
1746.79
1 • 97
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
N0<
HC
CO
CO 2
1.03
2.52
32.97
537.08
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
13.72
12.98
-5-7
-------
*** THiKU BAG 3O * *
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 9-25-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
COMMENTS!
DRIv/Ert: LARrtf
TEST MILES: 3213
• 428 ORIFICE 16'BiDC PORTED \Mufj<.i.'i
STIFF EGil SPRING 30 DEGdEE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 65 F (WED
98
RH: 49
loJERTIA
FUEL: HO
CC FUEL:
F
F
(UFlf)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
III
1000
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
PRES: 744.2«5 MM H"j (BAPO)
^4-617 M.I- riU (JAPO'U
25-725 IiM. H20 (IMLED
19.6 Itf. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3023
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928»42cJ
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.666
BAG
AIR EX
504.4
7807
13.00 1803-00
7.44 285.60
0.79 53.60
0*04 1.92
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2045.73
6.32272
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM) 52.93
HC PPM C) 279.34
CO (PPM) 1697.05
C02 X) 1.89
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.61
2*60
31.88
560.56
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
14.34
13-59
-5.5
-------
*** THIRD BAG 31 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATEl 10-13-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIAL! 6 EM 68-OB/OF
DRIVER! BOB
TEST MILESI 723
COMMENTS!
• 422 ORIFICE .175 REAR BRK. 12 DEGREE BTDC
PO RTED VAC. 4 INCH SYSTEM 29 DEGREE C
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 64 F (WET)
80 F (DRY)
98 F (MIX)
RHl 41 %
INERTIA WT. I 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
CC FUEL! 1123
PRESl 745.685 MM HG (BARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
25*375 IN. H20 (IMLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED! 3
CF/REV! .3017
BLOWER RPM (CAL)J 928.464
BLOWER RPM (ACT)! 928.472
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO 2 (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG
AIR EX
504.7
7310
8.20 107.00
7. 16 47.20
0.26 16.70
0.04 2.58
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2048.5
5.16428
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
16.49
41.43
93. 74
2.55
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.48
0.39
1.76
758.15
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
11*64
12. 10
3.8
-------
*** THIRD BAG 32 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATES 10-16-75
VEHICLE! ETV 24
MATERIALS GEM 68-OB/OF
COMMENT Si
MANIFOLD VAC.
GM EGR
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST HILESS 800
.422 ORIFICE
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMPS 59
78
98
RHs 30 X
INERTIA VT.S
FUELS HO III
CC FUELS 1076
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRESS 747. 535
24.617
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEEDS
CF/REVS .3013
BLOWER RPM (CAL)S
BLOWER RPM CACT)«
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG CVAPOR)
IN.
IN.
3
H20
H20
C INLET)
(OUTLET)
928.481
928. 577
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
506
7831
11.00 23.00
8.20 49.20
0.39 33.00
0*04 2*44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2056.98
5.47589
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO8 (X)
32.68
42.50
12.79
2.41
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.88
0*40
0.24
719.32
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
12.31
12.63
2.6
-------
*** THIRD BAG 33 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-16-75
VEHICLE* ETV 24
MATERIAL* GEM 68-OB/OF
COMMENTS:
MANIFOLD VAC-
RAN WARM UP
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES! 805
STOCK EGR
*** TEST DATA ***
F
F
F
TEMPI 59
78
98
RHt 30 X
INERTIA WT.t
FUEL* HO HI
CC FUELS 1069
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRESt 747*535 MM H6 (BARO)
24*617 MM HG (VAPOR)
85*2 IN. H20 (INLET)
19*425 IN* H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDl 3
CF/REV* *3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928*499
BLOWER RPM (ACT)f 928*588
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (5)
VMIX (CF>
DF
BAG
AIR EX
505*8
7828
9*10 20*00
6*76 33*16
0* 7 0 125*00
0*04 2*56
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2055« 49
5*22377
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
124.43
27*69
11*53
2*53
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3*36
0*26
0*22
754. 73
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEI GHT
X DIFFERENCE
11* 74
12*71
7.7
-------
*** THIRD BAG 34 ***
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 10-16-75
VEHICLE) ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OB/OF
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILES! 900
COMMENTS!
PORTED VAC* -328 ORIFICE
GM EGR
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 59 F CWET)
79 F CDRY)
98 F CMIX)
RHt 38 X
INERTIA WT.I 4000 LBS
FUEL! HO III
CC FUEL! 1078
PRESt
747.535
25.509
25.375
19.425
BLOWER SPEED!
CF/REV! .3013
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t
BLOWER RPM (ACT)I
MM HG CBARO>
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN.
IN.
3
H20
H20
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
928.481
928.342
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SEC)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (5)
VMIX (CF)
DF
504.9
7312
9.20 20.00
6.20 36.56
0.87 52.10
0.04 2.44
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG
2051.99
5. 47935
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C03 (X)
51.39
31.49
11.43
2.41
MASS EMISSIONS ( GR4MS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1*38
0.29
0.22
717.57
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
CARBON
WEIGHT
X DIFFERENCE
12.34
12.61
2. 1
-------
* * *• I) ) - M i f H 1 C A II O >J * * k
DAI E: 6/^S/ 7S HJAD iF.SI:] BASKLI^E TrL.Sl W I L.K.S: Md'0
COMX) F.'-i i S: ViA SKL I \) !~
>:?:.! CiH l -.1.1 1- Ht-.L S. H 3 4- -4. 1 4 S 1 6.
k* fc i H;ST DAI A * * M<
71 F C.vKO PnF.S: 750.^:35 WM Hh (HAH.))
79 h OJhi ) y.4.^?c?7 I\l. H;-J0 (IxlL1-.:!)
100 F ('Y1A> 19-163S I\). :-t;JO (O(ULKl)
KH: 6* Tt. BLOWth SPKED: 3
IMKHl'IA VT. :AOOO Li'KS HU.)'.-iKK r.F/j (CAD: 'JW«.'->P.3
HJKL:MO III H.,..).;.", Kn hi-X (ACT): V^H.^l^
Cc/nF,V: . -^-^5L>
A I »<• F,A
I IMF (SH.CS) 'it*. £.4
BLOl-'FR REVS 1 IB 5^
CO CfPM) 1.00 ^.00
HC CiJP« C) . 14. V' ^4. 38
i'JO^ C ") 0. O.-t 3. b^
*:*:•*: C Ai. C UU A 1 H. t > KKSULIS
}jf 3. 761 H^
MASS F.W I S S I 0 M S ( fin M 5/V IL F.
HC 0.066
CO 0 . 0 1 1
COP, 549.310
h DEL ECO MOM* (MILES/ (iAL)
EFAMPG 16. 15
-------
k k fc k * )c H • ,• H- j- %] . ) . > S fc k k K * k
* •=* i iJK.'in F ICAI DM ***
DA 1 p.: 6/ r'6/ 7"S 1-0 A i) 1 -.S i : \1 A
VKHICLE: ri'v 'S.'\ Unl WKh: LAHnY
MAI>:KJAL: fix/ HAS EL u?: TESI MILKS:^?^^
TS: AFl t^H f F.D P 'JSiL S. 3} =j- A. P. J b 1 6. HAXi-'t-i
«vj> HA.Sr.LJ VK H*t-Ki
ffc* iESi DA I A ^**<=
7S F C.vK.n Hi^|^.S: 7/4J.13S Vn"l H(,
^y F Ci)nY> HS. 10?. 6 I\l. ri;i
100 F (XIX) 19.77S Ivj. HSU (OnjLH:i>
HH: 73 X riL.)'*r~.h SFF.ti): 3
IJKH1IA * i.:^iOOO LHS ^Li'-.^.n nKI (CAL): 9P.«.'J71
FHKL:HO III HLJi-F,j\ KPX (AC'1'>:
Air F..K
riXF (SECS) 7^S. 7
HLOVKH jvEVS 11 ''/iK
CO (F^X) l.Oti -i-00
HC ( PHX C) 17- '4^ ;->7."n
COP (^) 0-')< \\.f<\
r, UL A 1 F.Lj t-i H:.'O I iL f S * *
X 3033.36
DF 3
W ASS K* I SSI 0 J S C i^i-.A*; S/'X I L F.)
HC 0-071
CO O.Ull
COP SS4.07"
HJr.L KCJJ)v.t C'XILfc.S/f-'Al.')
16.01
-------
\i>).
DA r K : 7/ 1 / 7 5
VEHICLE: KIV H4
MATr-hlAL: GnXi BASF.LIMR
h J A I) [ K. S r : N) A
DJI! VFiVrMMK
1 KS 1' M 1 LKS: virf
COMMENTS:
.JHD RASVLIM?. riui-Fl f-ACl'Jhr' SPFCS
41,-!S 17.
74 F CrF.l)
?« F CDri/>
100 F CM IK)
H: 69 %
3 bin i I A V f. : 4UOO LPS
HJ III
T DATA
PHF.St 7S0.99S MM HiLO.vki- ^p!X> CACJ): -J^M
Of-/ t-f'Ev: • y.^'HO
UK 1
IIYiE
HLJ',vER KEV/S
CO OV'M)
eiC (PPM C)
coy ( ?-)
VMI.K
DF
Air- h'X
Vfrfi. S
1 1H6U
. Q( fe(). (J(j
/J.Q8 ^'(.6()
o. o* .1. bo
^•1=* CALCULA1F.D
MASS KMISSIOMS ( (-.h'V^S/ >' I LK)
HC
CO
F U h.L FC;
0. H.ll
533-33^
(MIL K h>/ b M L )
1 6. 63
-------
****** HWFET NO. I'M ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATEI 11-18-75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM NOME
ROAD TEST:NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 5368
COMMENTS:
STOCK EVERYTHING CARB. OFF ETV
BASELINE TEST 2255 CC = 17.
26
16
MPG.
TEMPt 58 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
101 F (MIX)
RH: 31 X
INERTIA WT.:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
*** TEST DATA ****
PRES:
753.435 MM HG < BARO )
24-9342 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED! 3
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928*543
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S 928*156
CF/REV: .3000
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
CO2 (X)
VMIX (CF>
DF
BAG
AIR EX
766. I
11851
19.00 25.00
9-96 46.80
0*04 3*40
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3114.29
3.93309
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0. 196
0.091
531.344
(MILES/GAL)
16* 68
-------
****** HWPEF NO. 148 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE: 11-19- 75
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL! GEM NONE
ROAD TEST:MA
DHIVEHt LARRY
TEST MILES* 5401
COMMENTS:
2ND TEST STOCK CONDITION NOTHING CHANGED FROM 1ST TEST
2256 CC= 17. 15 MPG.
TEMPI 59 F CWET)
78 F CDRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 30 %
INERTIA WT.S4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
*** TEST DATA ****
PRESl
752.735
24.6814
19.3375
BLOWER SPEED:
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
CF/HEV: .2998
MM HG (BARO)
IM. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
988.56
939.444
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (%)
VMIX (CF)
DF
756
11837
12.00 22.00
10.96 46.00
0.04 3.40
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3102.12
3-9335
MASS EMI SSI QMS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 187
0.115
529.267
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 16.74
-------
>: fc le k- k fc (i A' p -I 1 Vi ) . 1 1 ,; I" ' fc '<
fck< i ..I'. v)i [MC-i i > v) I: ,- I
n*i -.: y-.-i--?-> t-. •••»!) i»si: ] ->
vR.iIOLK: Fiv ^ 'i,.-,[ V'F ;•:
'•1:> i'K.-i I Ai,: i-iK-' f>r!- jt.''/ ) '•: ih.SJ '-J
C »:•<'. -.Jl..-: . r.ti-J'vi v,A',;. Ai>«J. SIOCK
;' H f- I ,- S i L<^ J A * it K !=
i-.-ij-: r>/» H c - •- i i !-•;<••. >s 7 'K- . * ,v:> .' >•' -*'• f •' -i ))
'/•< F Cl'n r ) Jij. S'-J y-' I ^« ;i -ill fI>JL>i)
•^•5 h C-'lA) lH.7i:>S ig. HMO ('ini^;..j>
KH: /<6 " ?- f . : /jOOn L'^S '; } vjvii<.,,-;:<
(.!•/ v.c.vs
1 l'':r (SKU.S) Vf I
HLiUvJr.rt hKWS
c:o (HfW) is. on
HI; CP^^ c> e. ^
'>J« ( ') 0. 0^«
W-5IX CCP) TU^V.^7
f^f ' 3. ^b'/uv
* A .> S K-l I S.S I 0 1 .-. ( (Sn A Vi S / * I L
HC (>. '.)"/'<
CO (i. 1 o/i
) x / c <• i L. - ^ / • •••• t
1 ^. ) i
r
-------
157
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE: 12/17/75
VEHICLEi ETV
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS!
24
68 OB/OF
ROAD TESTtNA
DKIVER:LARRY
TEST MILES:1301
REPEAT OF PREVIOUS TEST
WEIGHTED FUEL=16.0 MPG
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 27 %
INERTIA WT«:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
*** TEST DATA ****
PRES:
MM
IN.
746.585
23.6706
19.3375 IN.
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOWER RPM (CAD:
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
CF/REVJ .2989
HG (BARO)
H80 C
H20 (OUTLET)
928
929
668
372
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
•C02 (50
VMIX (CF)
DF :
764
11834
26.00 33*00
10.52 32.80
0.06 3.53
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3083.89
3. 7 8924
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.123
0. 114
544.214
(MILES/G AL)
16.29
-------
****** HWFET i\iO. 158 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-12-76
VEHICLE: ETV 24
MATERIAL: GEM 680B/OF
COMMENTS!
FIRST CATALYST
BASELINE TEST
ROAD TEST:NA
DRIVER:BOB
TEST MILES:1454
2362CC
16.38 MPG
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 54 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RH: 21 X
INERTIA VT.:4000 LBS
FUEL*HO III
PRES: 747.835 MM HG (BARO)
24.7657 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOWER RPM (CAL>: 923.525
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.342
CF/REV: .3007
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (X)
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG
AIR EX
765.3
1 1841
95.70 99.00
19.88 39.16
0.06 3.36
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3089.45
3.9726
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 120
0.207
518.492
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 17.09
-------
****** HVFET NO. 159 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-13-76
VEHICLE: ETV
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS:
24
68-OB/OF
ROAD TEST:WA
DRIVER:MIKE E
TEST MILES:1485
2ND CATALYST BASELINE TEST
2347 CC = 16.48 MPG.
TEMP: 59 F (VET)
78 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 28 S
INERTIA VT.:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
*** TEST DATA ****
PRES: 732.485
24.0075
19.1625
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOVER RPM (CAD:
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
CF/REV: .3003
MM HG (b«RO)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
928
928
645
443
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (Z)
VMIX (CF)
DF
15
15
0
764.7
11833
• 00 16.
20 33.
.05 3.
00
68
42
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3032.69
3.91258
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
0. 108
0.036
519.356
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 17.07
RUNNING
READY
TIME: 1.5 UNITS
BYE
-------
****** HWFET NO. 160 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-14-76
VEHICLE: ETV
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS:
63-OB/OF
ROAD TEST:HA
DRIVER:MIKE K
TEST MILES:1510
3RD BASELINE CATALYST TEST
2382 CC * 16.24 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 57 F (WET)
77 F (DRY)
101 F (MIX)
RH: 26 Z
INERTIA WT.:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
PRES: 747.635 MM HG (BARO)
24.4287 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6875 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.55
BLOVER RPM (ACT): 928.398
CF/REV: .3003
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (£)
VMIX (CF)
DF
765.9
11851
10.00 20.00
16.04 45.20
0.04 3.43
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3095.91
3.89946
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 164
0.11 1
532.923
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 16.63
-------
****** HVJFET NO. 171 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:2-23-76 ROAD TEST:NA
VEHICLE: ETV 24 DRIVER:BOB
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OE/OF TEST MILES: 2045
COMMENTS: RAN HVFET TO SEE VHATES - VHATES
2430 CC = 15.60 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 55 F (VET) PRES: 752.335 MM HG (EARO)
80 F (DRY) 24.0918 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F (MIX) 19.5125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RH: 15 % BLOWER SPEED: 3
INERTIA VT.:4000 LBS BLOWER P.PM (CAL) : 923. 602
FUEL:HO III BLOWER RPIS (ACT): 928.408
CF/REV: .2993
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 763.8
BLOVER REVS 11396
CO (PPM) 1.50 2.00
HC (PPM C) 47.20 45.34
C02 (£) 0.04 3.65
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF) 3126.02
DF 3. 56644
MASS tHISSIOWS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC O.C57
CO 0.008
C02 573.025
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 15.48
-------
HVFET NO. 172 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:2-24-76 ROAD TEST:MA
VEHICLE: ETV 24 DF»IVEP:MIKE E
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OB/OF TEST MILES: 2065
COMMENTS* 2 ND TEST DUAL DIAPHRAGM VALVE
2518 CC = 15.37 M.P.G.
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 57 F (VET) PRES: 743.955 MM HG C3APO)
80 F (DPY) 24.0918 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F (MIX) 19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RH: 20 * BLOVEP SPEED: 3
INERTIA UT. :4000 LBS BLOVEH RPM (CAL): 923.628
FUEL:HO III BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.471
CF/REV: .2992
bAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 765
BLOWER REVS 1 1838
CO (PPM) 5.00 6.00
HC (PPM C) 15.64 22.64
C02 (X) 0.06 3-71
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VKIX (CF) 3095. 11
DF 3.60912
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC 0.056
CO 0.019
C02 574.522
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 15.44
RUNNING TIME: 1.6 UNITS
READY
-------
****** HWFLT NJ. 179 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:3-3-76 ROAD
VEHICLE: ET7 24 DRI VER:MIICE K
MATERIAL: G £11 NONE TEST MILES: 6513
COMMENTS: 2ND TLST LASEL1NE HO CATALYST
2555 CO = 15.15 MPG
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 65 F (VET) PRES: 745.IBS MM Hb
78 F (DRY) 23.7548 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F (MIX) 19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RH: 43 % BLOWER SPLED: 3
INERTIA WT.:4000 L3S BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.68
FUEL:HO III ULOWER RPM (ACT): 928.57
CF/P.EV: .2933
BAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 765-5
BLOVER REVS i1347
CO (PPM) 7.50 6500.00
HC (PPM C) 3.16 331.96
C02 (%) 0.05 3.22
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF) 3079.33
DF 3.45218
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC 1.601
CO 62.240
C02 496.431
FUEL ECONOMY (MILLS/GAL)
EPAMPG 14.81
-------
APPENDIX 3
EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION TESTS - ETV 25
-------
******
539 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 7-8-75
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM NOME
ROAD TEST: NA
DSIv/ER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 2636
COMMENTS:
6100 - 3575 = 2525 = 12-31 MPG
STALLED ONE MINUTE FROM END OD TEST NO REASON
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 73 F (WET)
80 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 74 Z
INERTIA WT«: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 927.003
PRES: 739.685 MM HG CBARO)
26.271 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3015
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 923*516
BAG
AIR
1
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NO* (PPM)
C02 (Z)
504.7
7808
1.00 300.00
16.64 60*52
1.05 55.60
0.06 2.19
BAG 2
AIR EX
870.5
13429
1.00 2.00
15.03 23*92
0.95 24.20
0.06 1.66
BAG 3
AIR EX
526.8
8149
1.00 253.00
16.24 464.00
0.95 52.77
0.06 2*19
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF>
DF
2022.71
6.02499
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NO* (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
54.72
46.64
279.37
2*14
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
7.49
1.54
18.63
2257.33
3478.87
8.05976
23.37
10.71
1*03
1.61
5.50
0«61
0*12
2916*23
2111.05
5.92913
51*98
450.50
235.48
2* 14
7.42
15.53
16.39
2356*09
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.73
1.35
2.33
697.32
FUEL ECONOMY1 (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.89
-------
k fc » • f * V ,j v , ', HJ * • •. t I: t:
*** I )•'.-.>) i I'r t (JAl f j v ***
{-.SI u^r?.: 7-10-7-» r.JMiJ i -Kij i : viA
^HK.'Lv:: Ffv ->S D:iIvKi-t LAi-hi
•*»Ai :.ni AL: Ci.-_-i ^_)MV; » U,M viLr.b: £'- 73
CaXMF^lS: 6.170 - J7-<0 = 9390 = 13.0 MPli
HAS EL HE iEbl
* * * i'KS'I UAIA ***
'lE/lr1: 67 F OF.l) Fi-sES: 7^0. i^S .v»v- Hb C^q.-.J)
7> I- (J)r.Y) «S. 50-) MM H'.i (WAt-JrO
100 h («IX> :JS.^r<75 I vJ . HV.iJ . C I >ILK1")
HH: 5« 7- l->.y5 Iv. K<>U CJlULKl)
HEhi'IA kl.: 4000 LBS HLO'.vEh SPFF.I3: 3
FUEL: H'J III Ch/HEv/: .3015
BLO WEH KPM < AC n : 9 3^ . 3 3 *"- ML'J % FH HFM C UAL ) : ^ i?e . 50^
KQi, 1 ) SO.'i . «6.^. 1 ^D'S
PL>)*!-;h hKVS 77ca l.'^-'if 7^i;<
O) (wo i.oo f)^o«oo 1.0') >»• no i. no ?.. on
HC fPPX C> 7-16 l^O.f.2» T.S^ M« HO 6.9^ 27.1'J
VOX CPF-^) 0.70 7»r.;J3 O.M/4 «7. >6 0.71 ^l.J^
C02 C*) O.Of- '^.4^ 0.06 1.S7 0.05 R.I a
««kf< CA'^riJL 'U F.P uKSULTS l1^^
WIX (CF)
DF
G3 KHEC FED C'J 4 C F.vi IKA ll'
MOX (PHVO
HC CPH* O
CO
CO 2 (
75.66
i i-'i.a i
•^. 37
3. 1)
36.fi 7
4^7. 75
87. «*
1 1. 53
1.04
i. by
)
5. 4>
o. \*
Ml .
i .
7.
0.
'J.
33
31
<)(•*
10
1 ^
71
O'/
CO
'*FICiHTF:D MASS KMISSI.)4S ( GnAMS/M ILK)
MOX 1.7^
HC O-3^
CJ y. iy
-------
|e It * (e k
TF:>T DAFF;: 7- 11-75
VEHICLE: FTJ 2b
MAI'Eh'IAL: CJF.-.4 AJOxlF.
i )..»- x) 1 I e I CAI I JN * * *•
K IA!) 1 r. S I : -j A
•Jr\l'J'"\-l L:\t-r.1
i r.M :'iIL--S: V.
MJ55 - 36/40 = 2415 = Irf.X.? f/,
BASEL I v K. l ES 1 GO J U S i'AH I
1= K * '1 L-S 1 DAI A
63 > (*El)
77 r COHY)
1UO I- CM I/O
KH: ^*5 ^
IM Eh MA *T.: 40UO LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWEK hPM (ACT):
19. ^b
EH .SPEED:
Hd ( ^MJ- .)i-.)
^>0 (IxiL". I)
H80 (OUTLei'i)
3
BLO ft Eh'
IIMK Cb«.Cb)
LiLOiAEh KKVS
CO (PPM )
HC CPP>: C)
>JUA (PrM)
HAt-f 1
Alh
LOO
S.AO
U. 67
0.04
CCAL): 9P.H.516
3
7h.37
AtH E.<
t'f>~l.'<>.
1.1 '4 1ft
1.00 2.00
0.7-5 8J.60
O« 04 1 • 54
All-:
SO 4
7*0
1 . 00 •
0.67
0. 05
K>:
.?5
9
W. ()')
57. 30
1 . -J2
*** CALCULAiE.'J . ttKIi
BAG 1 J'AG ;ri
**«
RAb 3
\MIK CCF)
Dh
CORnFCIED CO
NJOX CPH1)
7.S
HC
co c
CO 2
C)
5. 60769
iRATIONS
,g*
y5
1.04
1 . SO
>6. 73
1.05
1 .«*
MASS EWISSIO-J.S
MOX
HC
CO
COrf
WEIGHTED N
\1 1 ^ in"
^9 tj f\
HC
CO
CJ8
7.
f^.
5 J .
2374.
!ASS EMIS:iI
1.
o.
3.
651 .
90 5. 1«
67 O.HS
3J 0. 12
7"i 2733.4^
Tg.S CGhAMS/MlLK).
5'J
55
43
4^
s. ^ i
O« 6-.»
0 . U 7
19)45.05
HJF.L
13.66
-------
******
723 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 12-9-75
VEHICLE* ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-ov/ou
KGAD TEST: NA
DRIVER! LARRY
TEST MILESt
COMMENTS:
FIRST TEST WITH CATALYST
1 FItf-SE START BAG ONE 11
*** TEST DAIA ***
59 MPG.
TEMP:
60 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
102 F (MIX)
RHt 31 X
INERTIA WT. I 4000 LBS
FUELI HO III
BLOWER RPN (ACT)t 928*55?
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESJ 739.985
25. 509
23.8875
18.8125
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REVt .2990
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928*693
MM HG CBARO)
MM HG CVAPOR>
IN. H20 CI^LET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO CPPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
506.6
7841
9.80 247.00
9.4? 84.80
0.52 32.00
0.04 2.59
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.9
13431
16*00 19.00
9.76 25.36
0.52 22.90
0.04 1.44
*** CALCULATED, RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF>
DF
2015. 66
5* 11119
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
31.58
77.17
224.41
2.56
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3.05
2.54
14.91
2688* 7 0
3452*66
9.27744
22.44
16.65
4. 15
1.40
3.71
0.94
0.47
2526.55
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.9
7829
11.00 32.00
9.00 30.44
0.65 27.00
0*04 2.02
BAG 3
2012. 57
6*61373
26.45
22.80
21. 19
1.99
2. 55
0. 75
1.41
2084.47
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.86
Q. 33
1.02
649. 71
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EFAMPG 13*42
-------
****** CVS 727 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 12-12-75
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL! GEM 68-OV/OW
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 54
COMMENTS:
2ND CVS AFTER CARB. WORK
CAR STARTED GOOD 1ST * 2ND TIME
11.86 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPt 57 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 35 T
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 988.371
PRES: 750.735
20.815
24.7625
19.5125
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAL>: 928.534
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H80 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
505.8
7826
8.90 107.00
8. 12 54.40
0.66 40-90
0.04 2.48
865. 1
13386
27.00 39.00
8.12 25*88
0.98 25.00
0.05 1.47
506
7829
1 1.00 33.00
6.64 43.60
0.58 39.20
0.04 2.08
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2054.24
5. 36965
BAG 2
3513-67
9-07654
BAG 3
2055.02
6.41919
CORRECTED CON CENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
40 . 3 6
47. 79
93. 58
2. 45
24. 13
18.65
13.70
1.43
38. 71
37.99
22. 18
2.05
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3.90
1.60
6. 33
2621.91
3.98
1.07
1*59
2612.07
3. 74
1.28
1. 50
2192.94
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1. 04
0. 33
0. 69
665.26
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
13.21
-------
****** cvs 733 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 12-15- 75
VEHICLE: ETV as
MATERIAL! GEM 680V/OW
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 76
COMMENTS:
EGK AT VERY START OF TEST DUAL DIAPHRAGM
VALVE - BOTH STARTS GOOD 3900CC * 10.77 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 62 F (WET)
79 F CDRY)
100 F (MIX)
RHt 37 X
INERTIA WT.i 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928*486
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESI 743.285 MM HG CBARO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
24-675 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-569
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER HEVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X)
506. 7
7842
6*30 238.
7.76 112.
0.21 31.
0.06 2.
00
76
46
87
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.2
13419
12.00 14.50
8.44 28.08
0.34 15*41
0.06 1.49
BAG 3
AIR EX
504.9
7813
8.90 31-90
9.08 43.44
0.23 30-82
0.04 2.72
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
DF
2038.03
4. 61516
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
31.30
106.68
217.13
2.82
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
3. 17
3.55
14.59
3000.37
3487.41
8.96802
15. 1 1
20.58
3.38
1.44
2.62
1.17
0.39
2612.89
2030-49
4.91323
30.64
36.21
22.64
2.69
3.09
1.20
1*53
2846-48
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.77
0.45
1.00
736-74
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
-------
******
737 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 12-16-75
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/Ofc
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVERt LARRY
TEST MILES: 77
COMMENTS:
3 MI*. DELAY BEf-ORE EGR VALVE COMES ON
SAME AS PREVIOUS TEST 11.82 MPG»
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP» 59 F
79 F
99 F
RH: 28 Z
INERTIA WT.
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
CWET)
( DRY )
(MIX)
4000 LBS
923-457
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESt
747.435
25. 509
24.7625
19. 5185
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3006
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.534
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 CINLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO CPPM)
HC
-------
****** CVS 748 *
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-6-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATEKIAL: GEM 68-0 V/OW
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: LARRY
TEST MILES: 109
COMMENTS:
DUAL DIAPHRAGM EGA VALVE LASTED TEST ON
3582 CC = 11.72 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
12-18-75
TEMPJ 55 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F
RH: 17 %
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.4
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 748.135 MM HG (BARO)
25-509 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.2 IN. H20 (INLET)
20.125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3019
BLOWER RPM (CAL)J 928.428
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (X>
505
7816
6.90 190.00
7*64 87.20
0.49 35.00
0.04 2.74
BAG 2
AIR EX
868
13428
7«80 9.70
7.92 26-60
0.64 17.50
6.04 1.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX
DF
(CF)
BAG 1
2052.33
4.84347
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
MOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CQ2 (X)
34.61
81.14
173.4<5
2.71
MASS EMISSIONS (GR/MS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 12
2*72
11. 74
2898.62
BAG 2
3525.93
9.0321
16.93
19.56
2.47
1.44
2.62
1. 13
0*29
2655.98
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.2
7818
4.20 11.00
7.36 38.44
0-66 32.00
0.04 2.16
BAG 3
2052.85
6. 18968
31.45
32-27
6.98
2* 13
2.83
1.08
0.47
2276.51
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
MOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0. 74
0.39
0. 75
693. 33
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/G
EPAMPG
12.52
-------
****** tvs 757 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-13-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OW
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 144
COMMENTS:
FIRST TEST USING GM EGR VALVE 1221
WITH .3C2 ORIFICE 1 FALSE START 3514 CC = 11.95'MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
77 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 23 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.457
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 743.285 MM HG (BARO)
23.758 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.5125 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.56
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
503.5
7791
4.00 224.00
9.08 92.80
0.53 46.90
BAG 2
AIR EX
871.3
13482
3.10 4.00
0.04
2.66
9.64
0.67
0.05
26.20
22.50
1.49
BAG 3
AIR EX
503.8
7797
2.30 . 3.00
8.12 35.92
0.57 43.60
0.04 2.18
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
f
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2026.29
4.98073
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
46.43
85.54
207.69
2.63
3506.41
8.97518
21 .90
17.63
1. 12
1.45
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.25
2.83
13.88
2777.07
3-
1.
0-
2643.
46
01
13
36
2027.85
6.13588
43. 12
29. 12
0.94
2. 15
3.94
0.96
0.06
2270.00
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1.00
0.37
0.82
684.19
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.75
-------
****** CVS 759 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE* 1-14-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL* GEM 68-OV/OV
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 156
COMMENTS:
LAEANED OUT CHOKE
GOOD STARTS 11.15 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F
77 F
98 F
RH: 23 X
INERTIA WT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (I)
928.352
BAG 1
AIR EX
506.1
7831
5>80 155.00
12.84 78.40
0.57 61.80
0.04 2.62
PRES: 748.735 MM HG (BARO)
23.756 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.85 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.775 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3009
BLOWER RPM (CAL)l 928.499
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.8
13442
10.00 12.00
13.23 29.44
0.91 30.80
0.05 1.47
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2060.72
5.07106
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
(PPM)
(PPM C)
( PPM )
(X)
61
68
141
2
34
09
41
59
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
5.69
2.29
9.61
2781•12
BAG 2
3537.25
9.09029
29.99
17.62
2.74
1.43
4.78
1.02
0.32
2629.59
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1.29
0.36
0.61
725.33
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/uAL)
EPAMPG 11.90
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7820
7.60 9.00
17.40 50.80
0.61 47.20
0.05 2.63
BAG 3
2057.83
4.98897
46.71
36.89
2.44
2.64
4.33
1.24
0. 17
2833.16
-------
****** CVS 761 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-15-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OV
ROAD TLST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 197
COMMENTS:
DUAL DIAPHRAGM VALVE VEHICLE IS ACTUALLY SET UP FOP.
BACK PRESSURE VALVE LEAN IDLE 3540 CC = 11.56 HPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 55 F CVET)
76 F (DRY)
97 F (MIX)
RH: 22 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.403
PRES: 749.785 KM HG CBARO)
22.922 MM Hti (VAPOR)
25.025 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.775 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.481
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG 2
AIR EX
504.9
78
15.60
20.04
0.39
0.04
13
230.00
101.00
31.98
2.74
867
13415
14.40
21.16
0.62
0.06
15.40
35.20
21.93
1.48
9
25
0
0
BAG
AIR
5C5
781
9.90
25.40
0.56
0.06
3
EX
4
10-90
51.12
24.48
2.08
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2062.9
4.33454
BAG 2
3542.02
9.02354
BAG 3
2063-16
6.42331
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
31.67
85. 1 i
203.95
2. 71
21.38
16.38
2. 14
1.43
24.01
29.67
2.09
2.03
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2.91
2.37
13.87
2913.57
3.38
0.95
0.25
2635.25
2.21
1 .00
0. 14
2183.45
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0-79
0-37
Q.84
684.35
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.63
-------
****** CVS 764 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: i/17/76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OV/OW
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 245
COMMENTS:
IDLE READJUSTED ANTI-STALL ADDED
120 SECOND PA AMD RETARD
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F
F
F
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
62
73
98
RH: 53 %
INERTIA VT.:
FUEL: HO HI
BLOWER RPM (ACT
4000 LBS
PRES: 748.645
20.315
24.9375
19.775
SLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.49
MM UG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG 2
AIR EX
TIKE
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (i)
1
11
0
0
507. 1
7845
,00 155.
,48 69.
,56 35.
• 05 2.
00
96
25
65
13457
5.00 6.00
11.88 26.36
0.43 21.70
0.06 1.46
BAG 3
AIR EX
- 303'
7840
3.00 72.00
12.20 38.36
0.53 27.90
0.05 2.15
*** CALCULATED RESULTS_***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX (CF)
UF
2054.54
5.016C2
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
( PPM )
(PFH C)
(PPM)
(Z)
34-
60.
143.
8C
77
65
2.61
3541.43
9. 15795
21.32
15.78
1.35
1.41
2063.23
6.20194
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.72
2.05
9. 73
2810.05
3.
0.
0.
2597.
91
91
16
70
27
28
65
2
2.
0.
4.
2268-
46
13
31
1 1
93
95
44
22
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX.
HC
CO
CO 2
0.96
0.31
0.92
679.85
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.77
-------
****** CVS 765 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATS: 1-19-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OW
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 256
COMMENTS:
ANTI STALL ADDEXD
120 SEC. P.A. RETARD
1 1.83 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPt 53 F (WET)
75 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 18 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928-522
5AC 1
AIR EX
PRES: 952.935 MM HG (EARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
25.025 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.95 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2879
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.464
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ' ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (I)
3
15.40
0.41
0.04
507.8
7853
10 194.00
84.30
38. 10
2.63
867.5
13425
4.50
16.24
0.56
0.04
5.00
30.28
25.60
1.46
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2543.83
5-04369
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (S>
37.71
72.45
180.5E
£.6C
BAG 2
4346-01
9.15606
25. 10
15.81
0.85
1.42
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4
3
15
3446
1 i
01
15
.44
4
1
0
3228
67
, 12
, 12
.25
BAG 3
AIR EX
510.6
7902
3.80 4.00
14.24 44.00
0.46 31.60
0.04 2.16
BAG 3
255S.08
6. 19
31 .21
32.06
0.64
2. 13
3.42
1 .34
0.05
2836.78
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1. 12
0*42
0.89
843.63
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 10.31
-------
****** CVS 766 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1/20/76
VEHICLE: ET7 25
MATERIAL: GEM 63 OV/OW
ROAD TiST: MA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 270
COMMENTS:
2MIN 15SEC
11.49MPG
PA TIME
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F (VET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
57
78
100
RH: 24 %
INERTIA WT. :
FUEL : HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.472
PRES: 749.035 MM HG (BARO)
24.617 MM HG (VAPOR)
4000 LBS
BAG 1
AIR EX
25.025 IN.
19.775 IN.
BLOVLR SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3012
BLOVER RP1I (CAL)t
BAG 2
AIR EX
H20
H20
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
928.431
BAG 3
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (I)
2
46.40
0.45
508-3
786o
80 143.00
96.80
36.00
2.80
0.05
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
866.3
13405
6.90 7.90
46.00 62.00
0.85 15.20
0.05 1.55
503.3
7866
4.50 34.00
54.80 74.80
0.57 27.50
0.05 2.24
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2063.96
4.74656
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(£)
35-
60.
131-
2.
64
18
99
76
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.35
2.02
3.98
2971.32
BAG 2
3517.35
8.60651
14.45
21.34
1.55
1.51
2.31
1.23
0. 18
2762-10
BAG 3
2063.95
5.95368
27.03
29.20
28.56
2.20
2.54
0.98
1 .94
2366.26
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (URAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.69
0.35
0.69
718.47
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.11
-------
CVS 767 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-21-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GDI 68-OV/OU
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE X
TEST MILES: 281
COMMENTS:
1 STALL ON COLD START
2 MIN. 15 SEC. P.A.
11.74 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
F (VET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
TEMP: 54
76
100
RH: 19 %
INERTIA VT.t
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
VMIX
DF
(CF)
928.319
BAG 1
AIR EX
506.9
7844
2.20 241.00
21.20 92.00
0.46 33.10
0.04 «E.70
PRES: 740.385 MM HG (BARO)
22.922 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.675 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.534
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
Ev
/\
868.6
13439
6.70 7.00
22.68 35.56
0.55 15.10
0.04 1.52
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
2034.58
4.9050.1
3435.82
8.79132
507
7843
6-90 . 52.00
23.20 44.40
0.54 26.90
0.04 2.23
BAG 3
2034.33
5.93379
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC . (PPH C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
32. 73
75. 12
225.25
2.67
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.53
2.50
15. 1 1
2831.01
14.61
15.46
0.85
1.48
2.24
0.88
0. 10
2698.70
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.65
0.22
1. 10
699.15
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.46
26.45
25.08
43.74
2.20
2.37
0.33
2.93
2330.46
-------
******
772 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-22-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OV
ROAD TEST: WA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 293
COMMENTS:
PORT AIR 135 StC.
11.75 MPG.
RETARD 165 SEC.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP:
F (WET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
55
73
93
RH: 18 Z
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.596
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESt 746.085 MM KG CEARO)
24.SI 7 MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20
IN
(IWLtT)
H20 (OUTLET)
25.1125
19-8625
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3016
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928-464
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
506.2
7834
26.00 176.00
33.00 30.80
0.67 34.50
0.04 2.69
BAG 2
AIR EX
868.4
13441
27.00 28.00
33.08 46.40
0.74 15.40
0.04 1.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2056.94
4.93615
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
33.97
54.49
145.25
2.65
MASS EMISSIONS (CEAME/fcAo)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.06
1.83
9.85
23 51 . 33
BAG 2
3529.14
9.00935
14.74
16.99
3. 18
1 .44
2.29
0.98
0.37
2658.42
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0- 67
0.3C
0. 76
696.72
(MILES/GAL)
12.48
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.4
7821
18.00 46.00
27.72 47.60
0.48 28.30
0.04 2.23
BAG 3
2053.52
5.98445
27.90
24.51
28-85
2.20
2.52
0.82
1.95
2352.46
-------
******
773 ******
*** .DENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-23-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OW
ROAD TEST: MA
DRIVER: MUIKE K
TEST MILES: 312
COMMENTS:
ASHCROFT VALVE ON AMD SET AT 9 INCHES OF HG
RICHEN CHOKE INCREASED COLD IDLE SPEED
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPI 52 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 19 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.439
BAG 1
AIR EX
MM KG (BAHO)
MM HU (VAPOR)
FRES: 733.485
20.815
24.675
19.425
SLOWER SPEED:
CF/RE7: .3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.552
IN.
IN.
3
H20
H20
(INLET)
(OUTLET)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
505.9
7829
6.10 70.00
67.20 90.40
0.46 25.00
0.04 2.29
BAG 2
AIR EX
369.3
13451
5.20 6.00
69.20 80.40
0.63 16.20
0.04 1.53
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2024.67
5.81171
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (£)
25.62
34. 76
61.4"
2.2o
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.2o
1.15
4. 1C
2382.97
BAG 2
3478.59
8.70911
15.64
19. 15
1 .21
1.49
2.37
1.09
0. 14
2711.31
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.7
7825
5.60 . 26.00
81.60 95.60
0.57 23.00
0.05 2.20
BAG 3
2023.64
6.05777
27.52
27. 47
20..09
2-16
2.43
0.91
1 -34
2277.66
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.63
0.28
0. 36
671.23
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
13.33
-------
****** CVS 776 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-27-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIALS GEM 63-OV/OV
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVES: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 344
COMMENTS:
1ST CATALYST BASELINE TEST HIGH BACKGROUND
HC NOT SURE WHY ? 3615 CC = 11-62 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMPS
F
F
F
55
76
99
RH: 22 Z
INERTIA WT. :
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
PRES: 754.385 MM HG (BAP.O)
22.922 MM HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
928.496
BAG 1
AIR EX
507.4
7852
3.20 262.00
73.76 126.56
0.51 34.06
0.06 2.75
25.025 IN
19.775 IM
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: '.3007
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.481
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.7
13444
5.70 6.70
79-92 85.60
0.77 15.72
0.08 1.50
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2076.32
4.80755
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
^G--!. (PPM C)
&0 ' ( PPM )
::C02 CS)
33.66
68. 14
243.75
2.70
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. 12
2.31
16-69
2926.96
BAG 2
3555.83
8.37884
15.04
14.68
1 .44
1 .43
2.33
0.85
0. 17
2649.95
BAG 3
AIR EX
507.3
7834
3.90 5.0C
93.44 109-63
0.56 29.29
0.05 2.25
EAG 3
2072.06
5.92542
28.82
32.01
1.53
2.21
2.66
1 .03
0. 10
2386.39
WEIGHTED MASS Q1ISSIOWS (GRAMS/KILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.70
0.33
0-99
702.50
(MILES/GAL)
12.31
-------
CVS 777 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1/28/76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 63 OV/OV
ROAD TEST: HA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 376
COMMENTS:
TRACE AFTER GETTER CD-GIN) 2ND TEST
(BASELINE CATALYST) HI HC BACKGROUND
3643CC=11. 53NFU
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 54 F (VET)
76 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 19 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LES
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.495
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 743.835
22.922
25.025
19.6375
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3011
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.49
MM HCi (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
507. 1
7847
7.80 434.00
103.30 169.03
0.63 34.34
BAG 2
AIR EX
366
13401
7.30 8.10
103.32 112.20
0.51 15.99
BAG 3
AIR EX
505. 1
7817
5.40 22.00
113.40 124.
0.53 29.01
23
0.05
2.88
0.06
1.51
0.06
2.20
*** CALCULATED RESULTS'***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VIIIX (CF)
DF
2057.83
4.55422
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
33.85
88.07
448 • 1 5
2.84
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
COS
3.06
2.96
30.41
3048.89
3514.42
8.8042
15.54
20.62
0.94
1 .46
2.40
1 . 13
0. 1 1
2670.00
BAG 3
205C.CI
6.05097
28.57
25.45
16.45
2. 15
2.57
0.35
1.11
2298.43
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0. 69
0.39
1. 84
7 05.48
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.19
-------
v 3 I I't
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 1-29-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 63 OV/OV
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE -E
TEST MILES: 409
COMMENTS:
3RD CATALYST BASELINE - HI HC BACKGROUNDS?
DRIVER AFTER PTX TRACE MaDE 3672 CC = I 1.44 MPb
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 56 F (WET)
74 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 29 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)J 928.826
BAG t
AIR EX
PRES: 739.635
21.453
24.7625
19.3375
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.552
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
COS (£)
505.5
7324
5.30 342.00
62.60 127.16
0.45 34.47
0.06 3.01
MM HG (EARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IH. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
367.4
13425
6.20 7.00
51.64 69.72
0.44 14.53
0.04 1.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG I BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2025.73
4.38681
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
CS)
34.
78
314.
12
33
93
2.96
3475.91
9.00752
14. 14
23.81
1 .27
1 .44
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.6
7331
4.30 5.CO
47.6S 74.24
0.64 23.21
0.05 2.24
BAG 3
2027.55
5.96113
27.63
34.56
1 . 19
2.20
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.
2.
21 .
17
61
03
3130.39
2.26
1.35
0. I 5
2613.32
2.58
1.14
0.08
2324.50
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.63
0.42
1 .23
705.23
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/UAL)
EPAiMPG
12. 13
-------
****** CVS 792 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-13-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OV
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE 1C
TEST MILES: 747
COMMENTS:
CAR WAS RUN LIKE THE LAST
TEST MT EPA
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 57
F (WET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
100
RH: 33 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 L5S
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.482
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER F.EVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PP11 C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
PRES: 745.935
21.453
24.5075
19.425
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.56
MM HG (EARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
SAG 2
AIR EX
5C6- 3
7835
1.00 215.00
21.04 30.80
0.72 30.10
0.04 2.33
367.9
13430
1.00 2.00
26.36 46.40
0.54 10.90
0-05 1.54
BAG 3
AIR EX
507
7346
1.00 29.00
37.04 32.40
0.53 25.2C
0.04 2.22
*** CALCULATED RESULTS-***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2043.79
4.60773
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (S)
29.54
64. 33
200.01
2.85
MASS EMISSIONS (URAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2.83
2. 15
13.48
3036.23
tiAG 2
3503.27
3.67403
10.33
23.03
1 .04
1 .50
1 .70
1.32
0. 12
2732.70
2045. 'i6
5.00632
24.7S
51 .53
26.63
2. 19
2-37
1 .72
1 .30
2333.90
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MIL^)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0. 57
0.43
0.93
715.31
(MILES/GAL)
12. 10
-------
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-17-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROALt TEST: NA
LFIVEF.: MIKE 1C
TEST MILES: 3709
COMMITS:
MPG
FIF.ST EMISSION BASELINE TEST - NO CATnLYST
VEHICLE UNCHANGED FRON ANN ARBOR TESTING 3600CC
*** TEST DATA ***
= 11.67
TEMPI 57 F (WET)
30 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 20 X
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO 11 I
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 923.498
BAG
AIR
1
EX
TIME
-------
CVS 797 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2/18/76
VEHICLE: ET7 25
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: KIKE K
TEST MILES: 3742
COMMENTS:
2ND BASELINE TEST NO CATALYSTS
ANN ARBOR CARS CAL IBF.ATIOM 1 1 . 4MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 61 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: -34 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.607
PRES:
730.635
25.509
24.325 IN*
19.25 IN.
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REVt .3010
BLOWER RPM (CAL):
MM HG CBAPO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
928.605
BAG
AIR
EX
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM )
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (2)
506.3
7837
6.00 5400.00
17.32 284.40
0.41 44.20
0.05 2.60
367.3
13422
34.00 2000.00
23.56 173.72
0.33 21.00
0.06 1.36
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2005.C7
4.27366
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
43.89
271.13
5065.88
2.56
(PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4.31
8.85
334.89
2678.62
BAG 2
3433.97
8.53536
20.22
152.92
1895.99
1 .31
3.40
8.58
214.66
2340.65
BAG 3
AIR EX
506- 7
7842
26.00 4200.00
22-00 263.08
0.69 33.15
0.05 1.93
BAG 3
2006.35
5.53739
32.53
244.95
3976.o4
1 .39
3-20
3.03
263.C5
1976.26
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (URAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0.94
2.26.
67.81
615-36
(MILES/GAL)
1 1. 79
-------
O U O
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-19-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 3753
COMMENTS:
3RD EASELINETEST NO CATALYST 11.53 MPG.
VECHICLE UNCHANGE FROM TESTING IN ANN ARBOR
*** TEST DATA ***
TB1P: 57 F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 22 5
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
PRES:
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (2)
928.51
BAG 1
AIR EX
505.6
7825
3. 70 4650.00
12.44 265.20
0.45 56.90
0.04 2.66
738.935
25.509
24.4125
19.1625
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3003
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.605
MM HG (bARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.7
13427
5.40 1400-00
17.12 161.60
0.66 27.70
0.04 1.39
BAG 3
AIR EX
505
7815
14.00 3900.00
20.12 240.00
0.74 39-50
0.06
1 .84
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAU 3
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2021.54
4.288S2
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPK C)
(PPM)
(S)
56
255.
.55
66
4376.04
2.63
3468.73
8.69329
27. 12
146.45
1347.85
1.35
2018.95
5.98905
3G.03
223.24
3722.57
1 .79
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
5. 13
8.44
291.66
2771.92
4
8
154
2450
.26
.30
.15
.43
7.36
247.79
1384.63
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
1. 13
2. 15
56. 11
628.83
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/3AL)
EPAHPG 11.91
-------
******
G U
**•«***
*** IDENTIFICATION *-**
TEST DATE: 2-21-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM HONE
ROAD TEST: NA
DRI7EP: Ml'CE K
T-ST MILES: 3764
COMMENTS:
4TH CATALYST CALIBRATION
WEIGHTED FUEL 11.82 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEST
TEMP: 58 F
CO (PPM)
COS (%)
54.94
226.79
3960-54
2.42
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
5. 16
7. 60
267 .62
259 1 . 64
BAG 2
3520.14
8.4974
23. 58
134.61
120U25
1.39
4.61
7. 74
139.42
2546.30
bAG 3
AIR EX
504.6
7309
16.00 3500.00
24.80 244.00
0.31 41.94
0.04 1.96
BAG 3
2047.12
5.77936
41 .27
223.49
3323-SI
1 .93
3.37
7.47
224.67
2057.13
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
1.21
2.04
51.02
644.44
(MILES/GAL)
11 .92
-------
HWFET NO. 9« ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:7-8-75 ROAD TESTtNA
VEHICLE! ETV 25 DRIVER:LARRY
MATERIAL: GEM NONE TEST MILESt2651
COMMENTS* 5770 - 4125 ~ 1645 » 17.41MPG
BASELINE TEST RAN GOOD
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMPI 74 F (WET) PRESl 740-285 MM HG (BARO)
82 F (DRY) 24.513 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F (MIX) 19-075 I.M. H20 (OUTLET)
RH* 69 % BLOWER SPEEDI 3
INERTIA WT.:4000 LBS BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.603
FUELtHO III BLOWER RPM (ACT)J 928.334
CF/REv7: .3002
BAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 765.5
BLOWER REVS 11344
CO (PPM) 1.00 2.00
HC (PPM 0 16.76 26.72
C02 (X) 0-04 3.73
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF) 3065.67
OF 3.58975
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC 0.072
CO 0.011
C02 574.413
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 15*44
-------
1)A IK: 7- 1 0- 7.S
VEHICLtT.: ETV
VA1FKIAL: GEM
k k |c * K * 4\ i- """ i J..). 101 * K k fc •"» k
*** I O.-.v i I f-IC-U I J ^ ***
r 3A O I KS 1 : -J A
ui»I v^h:*'.I S (-1
66 F
-HH: . 70 7.
UShTIA «f.:/iO(JO LBS
FUFJL:HO III
"IlYiK CSRC.S)
F'LU'wFh KKV/S
CO CPPM)
HC (Fr^i C)
OF
t*ASS HWl
HC
C.)
• -i :>.' -
A!K »:.\
1
1.00
1 0. 64
FH.^S:
CJUl'LKD
bLJ*Kr Sl^ED: 3
) :-»3 . S J S
4.0CU1
,J..OO
:?• l->
0.0 I 1
-------
DATK: 7-11-75
VEHICLK: ztv
MATEhlAL: GFM
k k le (t It fc H '*. I* " I gj. 1 ) f> fc k !: k fc k
h)Ai) 1-:SI:
Dhl V;!
4 KS F
39 SO - /43<>0 - 1630 = 1 7.
BASEL iNiF. lEJji
i DAT A *
TEMPS ^4 F CW:ED
79 F CDh(Y)
100 K C^IX)
txri: /ij X
IMFnllA !-.T. t 4OOO Lt-S
SHJ III
HG (i'AhO)
'*LJ'*f.i< S^F.r.O: 3
ML.)A-.r n> <• CCAL): J
»-L ).•*•« r;i- / (^L'i): ^
.1 y /J
1IMT (SKCb)
.h-LO ^T« h^Mb
CO (PHX)
HC CPi^ C)
VXIX (CF)
DF
MASS EX ISSUES
HI;
CO
Alh
.-.<
1 1 :>6V
1.00 ' '-!.00
7.00 •>:•». >>><
o-'js j..-)-!
O.C. 11
EHAMPG
16.71
-------
HWFET NO. 161 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-14-76 ROAD T£ST:WA
VEHICLE: ETV 25 DRIVER:MIKE K
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OV Tc.ST MILES: 178
COMMENTS: TRAIL RUN TO SEE HOW CO IS
2313 CC = 16.7 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 59 F (WET) PRES: 749.235 MM HG
-------
*******
wu
ii.-.« ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-27-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-OV/OV
POAD TESTlNA
i/RIVER:MIKE K
TEST MILES:366
COMMENTS:
HIGH BACKGROUND HC NOT SURE WHY ?
2336 CC = 16.56 MPG.
#** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 52 F (WET)
80 F (DRY)
99 F (MIX)
RHl 20 X
INERTIA VT*:4000 LBS
FUELJHO III
PRES: 754.335 MM HG (BARO)
25.1026 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.775 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.473
BLOWEP RPM (ACT): 928.243
CF/REV: .3008
BAG
AIR
EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (X)
VMIX (CF:
DF
764.8
11832
14.00 15.00
97.20 34.80
0.04 3.27
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3131. 69
4. 08552
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
0.057
0.035
513.641
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 17.27
-------
****** HWFET NO. 164 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE: 1/28/7 6 ROAD TESTtNA
VEHICLE: ETV 25 DRIVER:MIKE K.
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OV/OV TEST MILES:337
COMMENTS: HI HC BACKGROUND
WEIGHTED FUEL 2417CC 16.01MPG
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 53 F (VET) PRES: 747.835 MM HG CBARO)
74 F
-------
HWFET WO. 165 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:1-29-76 ROAD TEST:NA
VEHICLE: ETV 25 DRIVER:MIKE E
MATERIAL: GEM 68 OV/OW TEST MILES:431
COMMENTS: 3 RD BASELINE TEST HI HC
BACKGROUNDS 7 2431 CC = 15.92 MPG
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 56 F CVET) PRES: 741.585 MM HG 24.4287 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F C-MIX) 19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RH: 27 X BLOWER SPEED: 3
INERTIA UT.:4000 LES BLOVEP PPM CCAL): 928.576
FUEL:HO III SLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.521
CF/REV: .3005
SAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 764.7
BLOWER REVS 11834
CO (PPM) 21.60 22.00
HC (PPM C) 42.24 43.60
C02 (*) 0.06 3.39
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VtilX (CF> 3071.77
DF 3.94536
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC 0.059
CO 0.0^3
C02 520.206
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 17.05
-------
HVFc,T IJJ. I 5''J ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATS: 2-1 7-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
P.GAD Ti^ST
DRIVER:MIKE K
TEST MILES:3730
COMMENTS:
MPG.
FIRST-EMISSION BASELINE TETST NO CATALYST
VEHICLE UNCHAWGE FROM ANN ARB3H TESTING 2330 CC
= 16.25
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 58 F (WET)
82 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 20 *
INERTIA WT.:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
PRES: 744.685 MM HG (3APO)
24.0918 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
BLOVER RPM (CAL): 928.628
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.463
CF/PEV: .2995
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (X)
VM1X (CF)
DF
3AG
AIR EX
765.2
11841
18.00 7200.00
40.92 492.80
0.04 2.78
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3030.41
3.82191
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
2.272
66.983
428.922
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 1 6•39
-------
APPENDIX 4
EMISSIONS & FUEL CONSUMPTION TESTS - ETV 26
-------
*>* I UFNli I MCAI 10
TESi UAIE: 7-1-75 ^JAD i^sn ^
VEHICLE: El v/ P. 6 DKIVF.iX: LAnhi'
M A'l Eh I AL : G KM i •> A S F.L I ^ K i F. i> i t': I L E S : P. 9 2 2
COWMEMI'S! 6.095-3. 5 S0= P.« 545 = IP.. 23
OME STALL BAG OMF. APPhOX 90 SKC HI'.) IKS I
** »= nr.si DATA +*•*
'TFWF: 74 K (A'KD HH^S: 751- 7HS M>? Hi-. ChAHJ)
81 fr CDH'O '->7.0S5 V'M Hl-i (VAF'Jin
100 F '^5. •>^7i> 1>J. .M-.) CIsiLKI)
HH: 7.-i % 19.775 I^J. H'-^O (OUTL-'i)
INJKHTIA **r.t 4000 LBS BLOWKH SP.SKD: 3
FUEL: HO III Cf/HRv: .P!9«0
BLJWEH WJM (ACDJ 9P,b«521 BLOlvEH KPM (UAL): ^>UJ.7l>^
BAG) 1 BAli y
Aln tX Alh EX
TIME (SECS) 510.''' >'"^
PLO*KK REVS
CO (PP^I) i . nn /iis.fui Pi.no P.O. 00 P..OO 13f'-«00
HU (PPM C)
MJA (PPM)
COP, (*>
7--.:
1.00
18. 3 P.
O.OH
0.06
-k k t
RA(, 1
»0;J.
495.0U
1 S^U. HO
6b.OO
a. 51
C;AL.I:OLA j
13'.I31
2«oo yo. oo
13. ^P. P,6. 76
1. -.^3 1 6- 55
0.06 1.63
Vl) HFSULIS ^^fc
•V^f; «
71
P. • 0 (.)
14.7 6
o. yp
0 . 0 6
M,.^. 3
^IX (CP) P.013.P.6
DF 5.«liP.9 8.19791
CORRECTED CO MCM FRAT £ J ^J -3
Nj\)X (PPM> 6/J.-J4 15./17
HC (PFvi C) 140-00 14. .54
CO ( HP*1) 457«8P 17.16
(7) «.46. I«5r5
MASS EMISSIONS (
9.P.9
4. 6O
30.39
84. 39
3. 76
O.rfl
1 . -J/t
'P.H 1 4. 79
6. 3 1
1 . I') 5
">. 3d
P3f 5« '1'*
HC
Co
CO P.
WEIGHTED MASb »-MISSIOMS C«hAMS/MILE)
MOX l-sl
HC 0.45
co a-63
COP. 704.77
FOP.L
-------
* * ic rIVEu: L^I-.;JF. i EM >5ILE.>: 31'JO
COMMENTS! 6150-3670= 2480= 12.53MPG
BASEL I -4 E JEST OMF S I ALL HAH JMF.
*** 1ES1' DATA ***
6H F (VET)
86 F (Dhf) 3 1.8 2 4 MM
100 f ('4IX) 25.6375 I J
RH: 39 3t 19.'4P,5 I>J.
I-^EHTIA WT. : 4QOO LBS BLOVF* SPEED: 3
FOWL: HO III CF/HFV/: .3014
BLOfeER HPM (ACT): 9«H.P.^7 BLOwFH hPW (CAL):
HA'"i 1 r
1 • U/j
1 « 5^5
6.Oi£
51.
•JK.
l').
y.
37
«l
53
51
1 <
((^KAXS/M'Ui)
7.
4.
dh«
^5;>4«
.5 ii
^•5
a1S/MILE)
NOX l«3d
HC 0.4S
C-J ^-"9
711. '-'J
-------
fc * * I ur.vl i I f 1 C'Xflv) s) ***
'I EST DA 1 K! L 7- 1 5- 7 5 >:0 AD i r.,S i : .g A
VEHICLE: F.l'V 26 Dhi v/K.i-.: LArthf
MATERIAL: GKX MOM^. I F.S 1 '"ULFo: 3076
COMMEMTS: 6255 - 3770 = 2485 = 12.51 MPH
B A S F.L I M E 0 ME SI A L L t * A Ci r J 25.55 IvJ. H20 ClNlL.r.n
RH: ^7 ?- 1-J.51P.5 i>Ji H20 (OUiLr. t)
» , w-r. . ^QOO LRS BLOU-Eh SHKf.D: 3
.: HO III Ch/KF.v: .3014
BLOWER HPM (AC1): 928.96H BLOWhJK »tP">1 (CAD
BAii 1 B-Ab
Aln KA AIn
.TIME (SECS) 5(o. 1 «6(->
bLOWFK hEVS 7H 1/i 13406 78/iP
CO (PpM) LOO ^i>J7.OO LOO 2.00 LOO 2.00
HC (PF^ C) 7.60 16K.56' 7« 80 26.16 7. 2H 35.76
:JOX (Pi-M) (>.'i^ >M.:>7 U.^l P.O. 7.5 0-77 57. OJ
0.05 2./J5 0-05 l.ftJ O.Of- 2. 3U
*** CALCULATED hhSULlS ***
1 BAH 2 BAli 3
VMIX (CK)
DF
COHnECTED -CO.>JCESf
NOX (PPM)
HC (PFiy: C)
CO ( PP"I )
C02 (S)
MASS EMISSIONS
MOX
HC
CO
co 2 a
WEIGHTED MASS EM
NOX
HC
CO
C02
2056.2^5 3527. H4 2063. ^-5
5. 3332^ H. 2S73 . 5. « 1 657
THATIOvS
K 1 . 57 20. 04 L>'r-» <;)S
1 62. 39 1^>. 30 2 •). 73
455.f';4 1 .04 1.07
2.41 1.58 2.^:i
ChhAWS/HAfi)'
9.08 3» £3 6* 30
5.45 I'll !• 00
30.90 0.1 a 0.07
583.70 2899. 5« 2421.78
ISSIO'viS (CihAMS/MILE)
1.51
O. 5/J
1 . 79
7 18.^0
J-iiFL KCONJOXY (^IL- :i
-------
****** CVS 682 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! H-13-75
VEHICLEt ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM MO ME
COMMEMTSl
BASELIME TEST
11. 57 MPG.
TOAD TEST! >JA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 3203
STOCK EVERYTHING
*** TEST DATA ***
TBMPt 54 F (WET)
73 F (DRY)
103 F (MIX)
RH: 25 X
INERTIA WT.t 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 926*339
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 739.9 MM HG (BARO)
20.815 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN* H20 (INLET)
19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .30O3
BLOWER RPM (CAL)t 928.605
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO, (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
506.3
7835
10-00 905.00
5.84 233.20
0. 7 1 103.00
0*04 2*71
BAG 2
AIR EX
t?68»6
13439
12.00 16.00
8.80 33.76
1.21 29.00
0*04 1.66
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2015* 12
4. 7 5452
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
CO2 (X)
102.44
228. 59
842.65
2.68
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 8
9.26
7.52
55.98
2814. 7 0
BAG 2
3456.44
8.04847
27.94
26*05
4.94
1.62
4.33
1.47
0-56
2929.06
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
1. 70
0. 75
.3*46
731* 66
BAG 3
AIR EX
507.3
7848
7.4O 43.00
6.92 56.00
0.92 86.60
0*04 3.28
BAG 3
2018.46
5.85235
85.84
50.26
34.68
2.25
7.77
1*66
2.31
2365*08
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG
11.96
-------
****** CVS 685 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE! 11-14-75
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIALS GEM NONE
ROAD TEST I NJA
DRIVER! MIKE K.
TEST MILES: 3316
COMMENTS:
STOCK EVERYTH 1Mb
BASELINE TEST 1 1.62
MP6.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 53 F
71 F
99 F
RH: 27 %
INERTIA WT.:
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S
(WET)
(DRY)
(MIX)
4000 LBS
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
CO2 (%)
928*522
BAG 1
AIR EX
506. 1
7633
7 .80 1213.00
6.36 285.20
0. 7 0 107*00
PRES: 743.485 MM HG (BARJ)
19.468 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.85 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.425 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3009
BLOWER RPM (CAL)I 928-534
BAG 2
AIR EX
869.2
13449
12.00 16.00
7.76 28.60
1.04 26*20
BAG 3
AIR EX
506. 4
7838
7-60 57.00
5. 68 66. 40
0*76 83.80
0.04
2.55 0.04
1.62 0.04
2.48
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2042.01
4.97622
CORRECTED COMCEMTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
106*44
280* 12
1136.70
2. 52
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRATIS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
9.75
9.34
76.53
2681.48
BAG 2
3506.06
8*24922
25.29
21.78
4*91
1.58
3.98
1.25
0.57
2897.76
BAG 3
2043.31
5.37717
83* 18
61.78
47. 65
2.45
7.63
2.06
3.21
2607.96
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
!• 67
0*86
4. 71
738.31
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG 11«79
-------
****** CVS 703 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-6-76
VEHICLE: ETV 25
MATERIAL: GEM 68-PF/FG
RUAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TtST MILES: 31
COMMENTS:
FIRST CATALYST TEST DUAL DIAPHRAGM EUR
ASHCROFT VALVE 1 STALL 3790 CC = 11.08 MPU,
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 52 F (WET)
70 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 25 %
INERTIA WT. : 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT):
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
928.425
BAG 1
AIR EX
5C5. 1
7817
3.40 627.00
11.84 172.80
0.41 40.30
0.04 2.86
PRES: 749.035 MM Hu
1 3. 765 MM iiu ( VAPOR )
24.7625 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3006
BLOWER RPM (CAD: 928.525
BAG 2
AIR EX
868
1 3431
5.20 6.00
13.24 30.76
0.65 11.40
0.05 1.70
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.6
7838
3.70 4.00
13.32 50.30
0.60 35.10
0.05 2.41
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2 BAG 3
VMIX
DF
(CF)
2048.57
4. 564
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
(PPM)
(Z)
39.
163.
584.
98
55
78
2.83
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3. o2
5. 47
39.50
3022.05
3519.81
7.86546
10.83
19.20
1 .25
1.66
1.69
1. 10
0. 15
3040.37
2054-07
5.5476
34.61
39.88
0. 77
2.37
3. 15
1.34
0.05
2537.68
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0. 67
0.56
2.29
77 1.51
(MILES/GAL)
11.34
-------
****** CVS 784 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-9-76
VEHICLE: ET7 26
MATERIAL: GEM 68-PF/PG
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: HIKE X
TEST MILES: 71
COMMENTS:
ASHCROFT VALVE ADJ. TO OPERATE AT
CHOKE LEANED OUT 10.62 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
10 INCH HG
TEMP:
53 F (VET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 22 %
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LB£
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.528
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRE5: 748.935 MM HG (BARO)
20.815 MM Hb (VAPOR)
24.85 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.6 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3007
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.516
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (%)
5C6.8
7842
5.10 228.00
23.40 105.60
0.55 46.80
0.04 2.94
BAG 2
AIR EX
867.9
13433
5. 10 6.00
23.68 45.20
0.77 11.40
0.05 1.82
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2055.24
4.50889
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 CO
46.37
37.39
209.54
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS ( GR/ttS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4. 21
2.93
14. 20
3117.74
BAG 2
3520.53
7.34208
10.73
24.75
1 .37
1 .78
.1.67
1 .42
0. 16
3262.14
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.6
7839
1.70 9.40
25.84 69.20
0.71 36-70
0.04 2.48
BAG 3
2054.45
5.38527
36. 12
48. 16
7. 5 1
2.45
3.23
1.62
0.51
2622.16
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
FUEL ECONOMY
EPAMPG
0. 7 1
0.48
0.87
812.99
(MILES/uAL)
10.89
-------
CVS 738
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-10-76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM 68 PF/PG
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER! MIKE K
TEST MILES: 82
COMMENTS:
MORE OR LESS A SET UP TEST TO SEE
WHATS-VHATS 3913CC = 10.73 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 59 F (VET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 28 X
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.543
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRES: 732.585
25.509
24.4125
19.1625
BLOWER SPEED:
CF/REV: .3008
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.605
MM HG (BARO)
MM HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IN. H20 (OUTLET)
3
TIME (SECS)
SLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (Z)
507. 1
7847
1.00 168.00
24.00 101.20
0.50 50.40
oAG 2
AIR EX
8o7.8
13431
1.00 2.00
28.76 49.20
0.83 11.30
BAG 3
AIR EX
506.5
7838
1.00 2.00
23.96 63.20
0.46 35.60
0.04
3.23
0.05
1.86
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
BAG 1 BAG 2
VMIX (CF)
DF
2011.91
4.11583
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (Z)
50.C2
83.03
155.28
3.20
3443.6
7. 18456
10.59
24.44
1.06
1.82
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4
2
10
3357
73
.73
30
17
1.
1.
0.
3262.
71
37
12
96
0.04
BAG 3
2009.6
5.30376
35.23
43. 76
1.03
2-49
3.33
1 .44
0.07
2606.96
2.52
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0. 75
0.45
0.61
825.67
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
tPAMPG 10• 64
-------
CVS 798 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2/18/76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM 63 PF/PG
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 136
COMMENTS:
SET UP TEST
WEIGHTED FUEL=ll.OMPG
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 6i F (WET)
79 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 34 %
INERTIA VT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.
612
PRES: 729.135 MM HG (BARO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.15 IN. H20 (INLET)
13.9875 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3005
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.649
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
BAG 1
AIR EX
508.2
7666
27.00 277.00
19.44 81.84
0.74 36.46
0-06 2.91
BAG 2
AIR EX
868
13434
5.00
27.40
0.67
0-06
6.00
39.32
.97
9.
1 .
79
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2005.94
4.55159
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX
HC
CO
C02
(PPM)
(PPM C)
( PPM )
(X)
35.
66.
237.
2.
88
57
60
86
BAG 2
3425.85
7.46724
9.39
1 5.59
1 .44
1 .74
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG-)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
3.
2.
15.
2995-
52
18
71
17
1.
0-
0.
3105.
57
37
16
14
BAG 3
AIP. EX
505.9
7829
1.00 10.00
23.88 50.92
0.47 30.47
0.05 2.48
3Ab 3
1996.5
5.39011
30.09
31 .47
8.51
2.44
2.94
1 .03
0.57
2539.72
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.64
0.32
0.97
778. 76
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 11.35
-------
****** C7S 802 ******
*** IDc-UTIFIGrtTION ***
TEST DATE: 2-19-76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM 68-PF/PG
ROAD Tr.ST: NA
DRI'/ER: I1IXE K
TEST MILES: 14
COMMENTS:
RAN TEST TO SEE WERE CARS. VAS AT
11.13 KPG.
*** TEST DATA ***
TEMP: 57 F (WET)
79 F (DRY>
100 F (MIX)
RH: 22 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM CACT): 928.495
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 737.885 MM HG (BriRO)
25.509 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IN. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOVER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .3006
BLOWER RPM (GAL): 928.587
BAG 2
AIR EX
505.9
7829
1.00 135.00
9.08 70.00
0.48 42.60
0 . 04 2.90
867.7
13427
1.00 2.00
10.68 25.36
0.70 10.60
0.04 1.75
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF>
DF
BAG 1
2021.05
4.58224
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
42.22
62.90
172.58
2.S7
MASS EMISSIONS ( GRAllS/BAb)
NOX
HC
CO
COS
3.86
2.C3
I1.5C
3023.57
BAG 2
3466*16
7.64523
9.99
16.08
1.06
1.72
1 .57
0.91
0. 12
3100.46
LiaG 3
alR EX
505.7
7826
1.00 11.00
13.36 38.08
0.57 28.30
0.04 2.43
HAG 3
2020.27
5.50342
27.83
27.15
9.59
2.40
2-55
0.90
0.64
2525.70
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0.62
0.31
0.^2
778.70
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG
11.35
-------
****** UVS 811 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-25-76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM 63-PF/PG
ROAD TEST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE E
TEST MILES: 177
COMMENTS:
TEST IS ONLY TOO CHECK OUT NEW CARB.
SOLID ANEROID GARB. NO. 7045202 11.80 MPG
*** TEST DATA ***
F (WET)
F (DRY)
F (MIX)
TEMP: 56
75
100
RH: 27 %
INERTIA WT.
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)
PRES: 747.935 MM HG (BARO)
22.243 MM HG (VAPOR)
4000 LBS
H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
TII1E (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
928.422
BAG 1
AIR EX
504.5
7305
1.00 352.00
8.08 77.60
0.54 29.60
0.04 2.75
25.025 IN.
19.775 IN.
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/FEV: .3012
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.481
bAG 2
AIR EX
863.4
13439
1.20 2.00
10.04 23.72
0.&4 12.00
0.04 1.54
BAG 3
AIR EX
505.9
7828
1.00 . 4-90
11.64 33-23
0-52 26-20
0.04 2.35
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VtllX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2045.46
4.80151
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (%)
29. 17
71.20
329.51
2. 72
BAG 2
3521.96
8.68683
11.43
14.34
0.87
1 .50
BAG 3
2051.48
5.69294
£5. 77
23.68
3-32
2.32
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2. 72
2.33
22.22
2899.66
1 .84
0.85
0. 10
2763.51
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0
0
1
723.
58
31
31
1 1
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 12.03
2.41
0.79
0.26
2478.37
-------
****** CVS 815 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: 2-27-76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: GEM 68PF/PG
ROAD TEST: HA
DRIVER: MIKE K
TEST MILES: 210
COMMENTS:
SECOND TEST TO VERIFY FIRST TEST WHICH
SHOWED INCREASED FUEL ECONOMY 3645CC=11
*** TEST DATA ***
53 MPG
TEMP:
57 F (WET)
77 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 26 X
INERTIA WT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.483
=i
BAG 1
AIR EX
TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO ( PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 746.985 MM HG (BAPO)
23.756 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.5 IH. H20 (INLET)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEED: 3
CF/REV: .2999
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.587
BAG 2
AIR EX
BAG 3
AIR EX
5C6.8
7842
1.00 284.00
12.08 87.08
0.46 30.15
0.05 2.95
367.2
13421
2. 40 3.00
18.56 32-00
0.60 10.57
0*05 1.61
506. 1
7331
3.10 1 10-00
18.56 41.72
0.49 20.73
0.06 2.40
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2046. 15
4.48873
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (i)
29.^9
77.o9
264.72
2.91
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAKS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
2. 79
2.60
17.86
3106.25
BAG 2
3501.83
8.30499
10.04
15.67
0. 79
1.57
1.61
0.90
0.09
2859.87
BAG 3
2043.28
5.54964
20.33
26.50
101.47
2.35
1..90
0.3-5
o.84
2504.95
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
«'C02
t
FUEL ECONOMY
£PA1IPG
0.52
0.34
1.56
749 • 79
(MILLS/GAL)
11.55
-------
******
865 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATE: A-3-76
V&ilCLE: ET\7 26
MATERIAL: GEM NONE
ROAD T~ST: NA
DRIVER: MIKE 1C
TEST MILES: 35025
COMMENTS:
BASELINE Tj-ST NEW CARB.
3567 CC = 1 1.77 MPG.
*** Tt-ST DATA ***
TEMP: 55 F (VET)
7C F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 36 %
INERTIA UT.: 4000 LBS
FUEL: HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.576
BAG 1
AIP EX
'TIME (SECS)
BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
NOX (PPM)
C02 (X)
PRES: 747.235
13.765
23.7125
18.8125
ELOUEP. SPEED:
CF/REV: .2932
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.71
MM HG (BARO)
MM .HG (VAPOR)
IN. H20 (INLET)
IK. H20 (OUTLET)
3
BAG 2
AIR EX
505.4
78^3
5.30 3500.00
7.28 257.36
0.31 50.96
0.04 2.51
867.1
13419
25.20 1156.00
11.00 160.68
0.76 19.30
0.07 1.42
*** CALCULATED RESULTS-***
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG 1
2034. 67
4. 6 7 754
BAG 2
3490.12
0.66101
BAG 3
AIP. EX
506.7
7841
18.40 2900.00
9.52 229.83
0.63 .34.3G
0.04 2.03
BAG 3
2039.35
5.75531
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (i)
50. 72
251- 64
3236.07
2.43
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/BAG)
WOX
HC
CO
C02
4. 79
8. 36
220.44
2629-94
18.63
150.95
108G.93
1.36
3.02
8.60
125.30
2471.34
WEIGHTED MASS'HUSSIONS (GRAMS/MILt)
NOX
HC
CO
CO 2
0.92
2. 19
43- 34
641. 77
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GriL)
EPAMPG 12. 1 1
33.86
222.01
2737-93
2.00
3.21
7.39
184.09
2123.80
-------
****** CVS 8*8
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
TEST DATES 4-6-
VEHICLES ETV 26
MATERIALS GEM NONE
ROAD TESTS NA
DRIVERS HIKE K
TEST MILES* NOT WORKING
COMMENTS<
3 RD BASELINE TEST - NO CAT
GOOD STARTS 3659CC
*** TEST DATA ***
11*48 M.P.Q.
TEMPS 56 F (WET)
70 F CDRY)
100 F (MIX)
RHs 40 X
INERTIA VT.S 4000 LBS
FUELS HO III
BLOWER RPM (ACT)S 928.628
BAG 1
AIR EX
PRESS 743.085 MM HG (BARO)
18.765 MM HG (VAPOR)
24.0625 IN* H20 (INLET)
18.9875 IN* H20 (OUTLET)
BLOWER SPEEDt 3
CF/REVS .2993
BLOVER RPM (CAL)S 928.657
TIME (SECS)
BLOVER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C>
NOX (PPM)
C02 (*)
506.4
7340
17*00 3950*00
5*52 258.20
0*35 48*54
0*05 2*53
BAG 2
AXR EX
868.1
13433
46.60 1190.00
10.12 159*28
1*10 18*30
0.07 1.39
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF>
DF
BAG I
2032.24
4.57888
CORRECTED CONCENTRATIONS
NOX (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
CO (PPM)
C02 (X)
48*27
253.89
3693.48
2*49
MASS EMISSION S ( G RAMS/BAG)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
4*64
8*43
247*47
2639.90
BAG 2
3482.02
8*81459
17.32
150.31
1102.00
1.33
2*86
8*55
126*51
2411.37
WEIGHTED MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX
HC
CO
C02
0*90
2. 18
45*85
•36*25
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GA.)
EPAMPG 12.05
BAG 3
AIR EX
505*5
7824
29.40 3100*00
10.04 228*16
0.58 35*21
0*07 2*09
BAG 3
2028.09
5*56863
34.73
219.92
2911.42
2.03
3.34
7.28
194.68
2149*74
-------
JJA 1 -:: 7- 1- '/'->
VEHlCLh.: K'l v
MAiKKIAL: LiR*'
c.):-r-iFM rs:
it \r-
•I: * k I
100 F (MIX)
HH: 7>f- 7.
IMKnilA *r.:^OUU LBS
h UEL t HO I I I
j J . .)'/
1 C''<1 I I >j
')n I ^ '-~,i : LAnn x
VSS1' ;'i 1 L ;-.h: y
s. ^ ?•-.- ^i. 1 1 s= i . 760 = i
i-nhS: 7S1.77S f^V Hfi CJsAisn
>>i.7^S7 I\i. H'-MJ (IMLh.
1-y.SlPS I.g. H«0 (OHiL
iiLUl'. Kh .SKKhiLi: 3
J^L.J-^K hPM (GAL): 9««.1^JH
•
-------
•Ir It 4, < k * --J '•• J. =; 1 >i .) . 1 I I ^ ***•**•*
**< I Ui-lAli I MCAl 10 N! ***
UATL: 7- 16-75 HO AD i i;.s MIA
VEHICLK: EIV «6 DHI vHi\: LAi5 = !'/.««
BA.SFLIMK leST
+ t=* iF.S'i DAiA *-k**
« F fvF.D HHRS: 7S0.98S v,,v, H(; (HAh'.n
Hf? f (UUY) a4.«603 I.xJ. HHO CIML*-!)
100 F (MIX) 1^.^875 1:>J. H:^U COdiLKi)
HH: 4i
cu a C5t) o. (;;< 3. r-
CALCULATED hFSULlS >**
VMIX (OF)' 3101. R5
DF 3-6'"31<3
^fiASS EMISSIO'Mb (HriAys/M
HC 0. 120
CO .0.011
COP 56^.051
FUEL ECOMi)Mi (WILKS/GAL)
EPAMPG 15.61
-------
*•* H'ApET \J'J« 1O4 ******
*** I DK.-J i 1FICAI ION) ***
DATE: 7- 1 5- 75 HOAIJ i ESI : MA
VEHICLE: ETV 26 DKIWKh:LAHKY
MAIEHIAL: GEM .\IOME 1 ES I MILES: 3087
S: 6000 - /-»3«5 = 167^> = 17.1
B A S ^L I ^ E GO 0 D h IN
*** 1ES1 DATA ***«<
67 F (WET) PRES: 751-455 MM HK (BAKU)
84 F (DM') «/4. 597S 1^- HHO (IMLF.'l)
100 F (MIX) 19.075 IM. H»0 (UDTLKD
HH: 40 7 ' HLO'VKrt SPEEDt 3
IMFHTIA WT-I4000 LPS MLJWKR KPM (CAL): ^.e-S'S
HIIELiHO III . MLOM->.-hf^ (ACT): 92B-11.3
RAG
TIME CSF.CS> 766. a
BLOWER HEVS . 1 1H5P.
.co (PPM) i-oo a- oo
HC (PPM C) 7-0'J JO. 60
CO 2 ( 5O 0. 05 3« S8
.**.* cALci'LAiED HF:SULTS ***
^
UMIX (CF) 3108. 59
DF 3-73963
MASS EM I SS 10 vl-S ( GUAM b/*i i LF.)
HC o.iy.6.
CO . 0.011
557-
FUEL ECO MOM i (M ILES/«AL)
EPAMPG 15.^0
-------
****** HWFET NO* 134 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE: 11-12- 75 ROAD TEST:MA
VEHICLES ETV 26 DRIVER: MIKE K
MATERIALS GEM NOME TEST MILESS 1012
COMMENTS! BASELINE - STOCK EVERYTHING THIS IS ALSO A PREP.
FORA CVS ON 11-13-75 2391 CC= 16.19 MPG.
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMPS 61 F (WET) PRESS 738.185 MM HG CBAKO)
78 F (DRY) 24.4287 IN. H20 (INLET)
100 F (MIX) 19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RHS 34 t BLOWER SPEEDS 3
INERTIA WT.S4000 LBS BLOWER RPM (CAL)s 928*594
FUELSHO III BLOWER RPM (ACT)* 939*424
CF/REVI .3005
BAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 756*4
BLOWER REVS 11843
CO (PPM> 19*50 26*40
HC CPPM C) 8*80 32*72
CO2 (%) 0*04 3*58
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF) 3059* 56
DF 3* 7 3707
MASS EMISSIONS (G RAMS/MILE)
HC 0* 128
CO 0.100
C02 549*968
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/ GAL)
EPAMPG 16*12
-------
****** HWFET NO. 1JJ6 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATEl 11/14/75 ROADTESTiNA
VEHICLE! ETV 26 DRIVER:MIKE K
MATERIAL! GEM NONE TEST MILESt3203
COMMENTS! STO CK EVERYTHING
BASELINE TEST FUEL 2338CC
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMPI. 54 F (WET) PRES: 739.185 MM HG (BARO)
73 F (DRY) 24.7657 IN. H20 (INLET)
103 F (MIX) 19.075 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
RHI 25 % BLOWER SPEED! 3
INERTIA WT. 14000 LBS BLOWER RPM (CAL)* 928.578
FUEL!HO III . BLOWER RPM (ACT)! 928.383
CF/REV! . 3007
BAG
AIR EX
TIME (SECS) 766.3
BLOWER REVS .1857
CO (PPM) 10.00 20.00
HC (PPM C) 7 .00 31.72
CO2 (X) 0.03 3.49
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
VMIX (CF) 3050*25
DF 3.83403
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC 0. 129
CO 0. 1 10
CO 2 534.926
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 16*57
RUNNING TIME! 1.6 UNITS
READY
-------
riWFET NO. 167 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE:2-6-76
VEHICLEI ETV
MATERIAL: GEM
COMMENTS*
26
68
PF/PC
ROAD TEST:NA
DRIVERtNA
TEST MILES:53
CHECK TEST 2399CC = 16.13 M.P.G.
FIRST UWFET IN CATALYST CALIBRATION
TEMPs 53 F (VET)
73 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 22 X
INERTIA WT.14000 LBS
FUEL tHO 111
*** TEST DATA ****
PRES: 748.935
24.4287
19.6 IN.
BLOWER SPEED:
MM KG (BARO)
IN. H20 (INLET)
H20 (OUTLET)
3
BLOWER RPM (CAL): 928.559
BLOWER RPM (ACT): 928.471
CF/REV: .3001
,TIME (SECS)
'BLOWER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (*)
VI1IX (CF)
DF
BAG
AIR EX
765
11838
5. 70 6.00
15.40 33.44
0*04 3.51
*** CALCULATED RESULTS ***
3101.6
3-81343
MASS EMISSIONS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
0. 109
0.014
546.500
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/uAL)
EPAMPG 16.23
RUNNING TIMES 1-6 UNITS
READY
BYE
-------
****** HWFET i\iO» 173 ******
*** IDENTIFICATION ***
DATE: 2-25-76
VEHICLE: ETV 26
MATERIAL: G EM 63 PF/PG
ROAD TLST:WA
DRIVER:MIKE E
TEST MILES:199
COMMENTS:
MPG
ONLY CHANGE IS A NEW CARBURETOR - SET OP SAME
AS OTHERS - SOLID ANEROID CARS #7045202 2450 CC
= IS. 30
*** TEST DATA ****
TEMP: 57 F (VET)
78 F (DRY)
100 F (MIX)
RH: 24 2
INERTIA WT.:4000 LBS
FUEL:HO III
PRES: 746.585 MM HU (BAF.O)
24.3445 IN. H20 ( irJLLT)
19.25 IN. H20 (OUTLET)
bLuVER SPEED: 3
tjLO 1,'LR RPM ( C AL ) : 928-603
BLOVEP RPM (ACT): 928.414
CF/R£V: .2997
TIME (SECS)
BLOUER REVS
CO (PPM)
HC (PPM C)
C02 (£)
VMIX (CF)
DF
BAG
AIR EX
764.4
11828
7.00 3-00
21.20 29-43
0.04 3.63
*** GALCULATiiB RESULTS ***
3035.45
3.63772
MASS LMISSI01JS (GRAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
C02
0.069
0.023
562.454
FUEL ECONOMY (MILES/GAL)
EPAMPG 15.77
RUNNING TIME! 1.6 UNITS
READY
-------
APPENDIX 5
CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK
-------
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK Pa8e 1 of 4
CONTRACT 68-03-2161
The contractor shall provide all of the necessary personnel,
facilities and equipment to perform the following tasks.
Task I Vehicle Selection, Procurement and Initial Testing
The contractor shall procure three nominally identical
vehicles for the purposes of modification and testing. The
vehicle type shall be a 5-6 passenger domestic sedan in the
3000 to 4000 pound inertia weight class range. The project
officer must approve the vehicle selection prior to vehicle
procurement. The vehicle selection and procurement part of
this task is expected to be completed quickly, since a dis-
cussion of the candidate vehicles, reasons for 'their selection,
and an indication of how the vehicle type selected and proposed
by the bidder will interface with the proposed system must be
a part of the proposal.
After procurement the contractor shall conduct tests to
verify that the vehicles are set up and operating correctly
and that no vehicle is defective.
The contractor shall also run baseline emission and
fuel economy tests on the new vehicles, tuned to manufacturers
specification. Three 1975 FTP tests (w/o evap) and three non-
metropolitan ("highway") tests on each vehicle shall be run.
Task 2 Vehicle Modification
The contractor shall modify the vehicles by installing
the emission control system as described in the proposal.
This task is expected to be able to be done in an efficient
and rapid manner, since the bidders must show in the proposal
that they understand exactly what system will be installed,
what parts and components will be used and also must show that
the componentry is readily available or is on hand already.
Delays in the build-up of the vehicles due to parts avail-
ability are not desirable.
»
The vehicles shall also be modified in such a way that
continuous traces of HC, CO, CO2' and NOX can be generated
corresponding to concentrations at significant physical -Loca-
tions for these sampling points and recommendations for the
locations and the number of sampling points should be included
in the proposal.
-------
Scope of Work
Page 2 of 4
Task 3 Vehicle Calibration/Optimization
The contractor, after system installation, shall calibrate
the vehicles to the optimum for the purposes of running dur-
ability. This for example would involve, exhaust CO/O2 ratio
setting, spark timing and advance, fuel enrichment metering,
air injection rates and control, EGR flowrate and control, etc.
The agency considers that this task should be also capable of
being conduc-ed in an efficient manner, because the contractor
must have demonstrated capability to do this type of system
optimization in the proposal, and, indeed must show that he
understands v;hat (within reasonable tolerances) he wants the
calibration to be.
At the completion of the calibration, the contractor
shall run three 1975 FTP tests (w/evap) and three "highway"
cycles on each vehicle. These will be considered as the
"zero mile" data.
Task 4 Durability Testing
Based on the results of Task 3, the contractor shall
modify as necessary, subject to project officer approval,
the durability test plan described in the proposal. This
durability test plan submitted with the proposal shall include
a description of the test facilities to be used, the location
of the facilities, and their availability for the testing.
Also included shall be estimates of the fuel used, its avail-
ability and composition, the spare parts that will be on hand
and the estimated type and frequency of maintenance to be
performed as "scheduled" Maintenance items and spare parts
estimates are important. The agency does not want vehicles
delayed for lack of parts and maintenance items. The con-
tractor shall endeavor to have adequate supplies on hand.
Previous durability experience with similar systems, is of
course desirable, because projections of items like air purr.ps,
for example, can be made based on experience.
After modification of the durability test plan the con-
tractor shall conduct durability testing on the vehicles as
described in the Federal Register, the so called AMA durability
test schedule.
-------
Scope of Work
Page 3 of 4
The contractor shall run two 1975 FTP tests (w/evap)
at each 5000 mile interval. Additionally two "highv.'ay" tests
vill also be performed at each test point with the project
officer reserving the right to delete the "highway" testing
during the mileage accumulation if the contractor suggests
it and no more important data are being generated.
The contractor shall complete 50,000 miles ©f durability
testing on each vehicle unless directed to do otherwise by
the project officer. The vehicles may be tested at the EPA
laboratory at selected mileage intervals, for example at
25,000 miles and/or 50,000 miles. This confirmatory testing
vill depend on the location of the contractors test facilities
and the test results. These tests will be conducted at the pro-
ject officer's discretion, and test plans in the proposals
shall reflect the cost and time for these tests as a separate
item.
The contractor shall complete a detailed log book for
each vehicle. This log book shall include a detailed des-
cription of the test vehicle and its history during the pro-
gram. These log books, which shall be included as appendixes
to the final report shall include everything that was done
to each vehicle. All fuel, oil, v.'ater, etc. shall be logged
in along with all maintenance items, including those done
to the vehicle that may not be thought to affect durability.
Examples would be replacing tires, lights, brake pads, etc.
The agency warts to have a record of everything that was done
to each vehicle. A proposed format for the log book shall be
included in the proposal.
The agency realizes that durability tests of this nature
are not without problems, especially with respect to unscheduled
maintenance. However, any maintenance to be done to the emission
control systen other than that in the durability test plan
must be approved by the project officer.
After conpletion of the durability testing the contractor
shall compute deterioration factors for HC, CO and HOX for
each vehicle. These shall be included along with a listing
of every emission measurement. 1975 FTP test, diagnostic test,
continuous test, and "highway" test, for each vehicle as
appendixes in the final report.
-------
Scope of Work
Page 4 of A
Task 5 Plans and Recommendations for Future Work
Based on the results of the testing, the contractor shall
prepare a plan for future v.-ork (if any) needed to resolve
any problems discovered during this contract or to further
improve the NOx emission control and/or fuel economy of systems
employing catalytic control of
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before complt ting)
REPORT NO.
EPA-460/3-77-002
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Catalytic Control of NOx Demonstration Program,
Base Metal Catalyst Evaluation
5. REPORT DATE
February, 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
AUTHOR(S)
R. Richard Steiner
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Gould Inc.,
New Business Division
540 East 105th Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44108
1O. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2161
2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protecrion Agency
2562 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
6. ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of a program that was intended to demonstrate the
emission control benefits of catalytic reduction of NOx. The program objectives in-
cluded the outfitting of three vehicles with catalytic systems and the accumulation
of 50,000 miles of durability operation. The system selected was the Gould dual
catalyst system. This system included a base metal (Ni-Cr alloy) reduction catalyst,
a conventional noble metal oxidation catalyst, programmed secondary air injection,
modified carburetion and revised spark timing. This system was installed in three
1975 Chevrolet Novas. Prior to the start of testing, it was discovered that the base
metal catalyst formulation was susceptible to chemical attack and depletion by sulfur
impurities present i.i typical pump gasoline. The program was held in abeyance while
Gould attempted to develop a sulfur resistant formulation. Gould succeeded in devel-
oping a formulation with increased resistance to the sulfur impurities in fuel; how-
ever, a corresponding reduction in catalytic activity prevented the achievement of
the 0.4 NOx emission level. The decision was then made to terminate the contract and
prepare a final report which would present the work accomplished under the contract.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Exhaust Emissions
Catalysts
Fuel Consumption
Motor Vehicles
Nitrogen Oxides
Base Metal Catalysts
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (Tl
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R.x. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall cany * date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., date of issue, date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8, PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented'at conference of,
To be published in. Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 voords or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY DWORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COS ATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application^) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote reliability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example 'Release Unlimited. Cite any availability to
the public, with address ana price.
19. ft 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES J _, . .. .,
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Form 2220-1
------- |