Environmental Technology Verification
Test Report of Mobile Source Emission
Control Devices
PUREM North America, LLC
PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 Diesel Participate Filter
Prepared by
Southwest Research Institute RTI International
HRTI
INTERNATIONAL
Under a Cooperative Agreement with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
oEPA
EW ET
-------
THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
<>EPA
PROGRAM
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ET/
BRTI
INTERNATIONAL
ETV Joint Verification Statement
TECHNOLOGY TYPE:
APPLICATION:
MOBILE DIESEL ENGINE AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM MOBILE DIESEL
ENGINES IN HIGHWAY USE BY DIESEL OXIDATION
CATALYSTS AND DIESEL PARTICULATE FILTERS
TECHNOLOGY NAME: PMF GREENTEC 1004205.00.0
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
FAX:
WEB SITE:
E-MAIL:
PUREM NORTH AMERICA, LLC
13400 OUTER DRIVE WEST
DETROIT, MI 48239-4001
(313) 592-7602
(313) 592-5858
http://www.purem.com
larry.dimitrievski@purem.com
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative or improved environmental
technologies through performance verification and dissemination of information. The goal of the
ETV Program is to further environmental protection by accelerating the acceptance and use of
improved and cost-effective technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high-quality,
peer-reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in the design, distribution,
financing, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental technologies.
ETV works in partnership with recognized standards and testing organizations; stakeholder groups,
which consist of buyers, vendor organizations, permitters, and other interested parties; and with the
full participation of individual technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of
innovative technologies by developing test plans that are responsive to the needs of stakeholders,
conducting field or laboratory tests (as appropriate), collecting and analyzing data, and preparing
peer-reviewed reports. All evaluations are conducted in accordance with rigorous quality assurance
(QA) protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are generated and that the results
are defensible.
-------
The Air Pollution Control Technology Verification Center (APCT Center), one of six centers under
the ETV Program, is operated by RTI International (RTI), in cooperation with EPA's National Risk
Management Research Laboratory. The APCT Center has evaluated the performance of an emissions
control system consisting of a precious metal diesel oxidation catalyst and diesel particulate filter for
highway diesel engines.
ETV TEST DESCRIPTION
All tests were performed in accordance with the Test/QA Plan for the Verification Testing of Diesel
Exhaust Catalysts, PM Filters, and Engine Modification Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use
Diesel Engines and the Test-Specific Addendum to ETV Mobile Source Test/QA Plan for PUREM
North America LLCfor the PMF GreenTec system. These documents are written in accordance with
the applicable generic verification protocol and include requirements for quality management, QA,
procedures for product selection, auditing of the test laboratories, and test reporting format.
The mobile diesel engine air pollution control technology was tested at Southwest Research Institute.
The performance verified was the percentage emission reduction achieved by the technology for
particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOX), hydrocarbons (HC), and carbon monoxide (CO)
relative to the performance of the same baseline engine without the technology in place. Operating
conditions were documented and ancillary performance measurements were also made. A summary
description of the ETV test is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary Description of the ETV Test
Test type
Engine family
Engine make-model year
Service class
Engine rated power
Engine displacement
Technology
Technology description
Test cycle or mode
description
Test fuel description
Critical measurements
Ancillary measurements
Highway Transient Federal Test Procedure (FTP)
XNVXH07.3ANE
Navistar- 1999 model DT466-B250F
Highway, heavy-duty diesel engine
250 hp @ 2600 rpm
7.3 L, eight-cylinder
PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0
Precious metal oxidation catalyst plus a powdered metal particulate
matter filter.
One cold-start and three hot-start tests according to FTP test
Ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel with 15 ppm sulfur maximum
PM, NOX, HC, and CO
CO2, NO, NO2 (by calculation), soluble organic fraction (SOF) of PM,
exhaust backpressure, exhaust temperature, and fuel consumption
VERIFIED TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The PUREM PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 is a precious metal oxidation catalyst plus a powdered
metal particulate matter filter. This verification statement describes the performance of the tested
technology on the diesel engine and fuels identified in Table 1, and applies only to the use of the
PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 on highway engines fueled by ULSD (15 ppm or less) fuel.
-------
VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
The PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 achieved the reduction in tailpipe emissions shown in Table 2
compared to baseline operation without the PMF GreenTec system.
Table 2. Verified Emissions Reductions
Device
type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
Mean
Emissions Reduction (%)
PM
94
95
NOx
2.1
2.8
HC
97
93
CO
85
86
95% Confidence Limits
on the Emissions Reduction (%)
PM
91 to 97
92 to 98
NOx
a
1.1 to 4.4
HC
b
b
CO
73 to 97
74 to 98
The emission reduction cannot be distinguished from zero with 95% confidence.
b The emissions reduction could not be quantified or distinguished from 100% with 95% confidence.
The APCT Center QA officer has reviewed the test results and quality control data and has concluded
that the data quality objectives given in the generic verification protocol and test/QA plan have been
attained. EPA and APCT Center QA staff have conducted technical assessments of the test
laboratory and of the data handling. These assessments confirm that the ETV tests were conducted in
accordance with the EPA-approved test/QA plan.
This verification statement verifies the emissions characteristics of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0
for the stated application. Extrapolation outside that range should be done with caution and an
understanding of the scientific principles that control the performance of the technology. This
verification focuses on emissions. Potential technology users may obtain other types of performance
information from the manufacturer.
In accordance with the generic verification protocol, this verification statement is valid, commencing
on the date below, indefinitely for application of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 within the range
of applicability of the statement.
Original signed by S. Gutierrez
4/4/07 Original signed by A. R. Trenholm 3/28/07
Sally Gutierrez Date
Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Andrew R. Trenholm
Director
Air Pollution Control Technology
Verification Center
Date
in
-------
Environmental Technology Verification
Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
PUREM North America, LLC
PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0
Precious Metal Diesel Oxidation Catalyst and
Diesel Participate Filter System
Prepared by
RTI International
Southwest Research Institute
EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR831911 -01 -1
EPA Project Manager:
Michael Kosusko
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
April 2007
-------
Notice
This document was prepared by RTI International (RTI) and its subcontractor, Southwest
Research Institute (SwRI), with partial funding from Cooperative Agreement No. CR83191101-1
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The document has been submitted to
RTFs and EPA's peer and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication.
Mention of corporation names, trade names, or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use of specific products.
11
-------
Foreword
The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program, established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is designed to accelerate the development and
commercialization of new or improved technologies through third-party verification and
reporting of performance. The goal of the ETV Program is to verify the performance of
commercially ready environmental technologies through the evaluation of objective and quality-
assured data in order to provide potential purchasers and permitters an independent, credible
assessment of the technology they are buying or permitting.
The Air Pollution Control Technology Verification Center (APCT Center) is part of the EPA's
ETV Program, and is operated as a partnership between RTI International (RTI) and EPA. The
APCT Center verifies the performance of commercially ready air pollution control technologies.
Verification tests use approved protocols, and verified performance is reported in verification
statements signed by EPA and RTI officials. RTI contracts with Southwest Research Institute
(SwRI) to perform verification tests on engine emission control technologies.
Retrofit air pollution control devices used to control emissions from mobile diesel engines are
among the technologies evaluated by the APCT Center. The APCT Center developed (and EPA
approved) the Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Particulate Filters,
and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use Diesel Engines to
provide guidance on the verification testing of specific products that are designed to control
emissions from diesel engines.
The following report reviews the performance of the PUREM North America, LLC, PMF
GreenTec 1004205.00.0 comprising a precious metal diesel oxidation catalyst and a diesel
particulate filter. ETV testing of this technology was conducted in September-October 2006 at
SwRI. All testing was performed in accordance with an approved test/QA plan that implements
the requirements of the generic verification protocol at the test laboratory.
in
-------
Availability of Report
Copies of this verification report are available from:
• RTI International
Engineering and Technology Unit
P.O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division (E343-02)
109 T. W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Web sites: http://www.epa.gov/etv/verifications/verification-index.html (pdf format)
http ://www. epa.gov/ncepihom/
IV
-------
Table of Contents
Section Page
Notice ii
Foreword iii
Availability of Report iv
List of Figures vi
List of Tables vi
Acronyms/Abbreviations vii
Acknowledgments ix
Section 1.0 Introduction 1
Section 2.0 Product Description 2
Section 3.0 Test Documentation 3
3.1 Engine Description 3
3.2 Engine Fuel Description 3
3.3 Summary of Emissions Measurement Procedures 5
3.4 Deviations from the Test/QAPlan 6
3.5 Documented Test Conditions 6
Section 4.0 Summary and Discussion of Emission Results 11
4.1 Quality Assurance 14
Section 5.0 References 15
-------
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1. Engine shown installed in emissions test cell with PUREM PMF GreenTec
1004205.00.0 shown left of engine 2
Figure 2. Schematic of emissions sampling system at SwRI 5
Figure 3. Torque map of 1999 Navistar B250F engine using ULSD fuel 7
Figure 4. Inlet Temperature Profile of Degreened PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 8
Figures. Inlet Temperature Profile of Aged PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 9
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1. Engine Identification Information 4
Table 2. Selected Fuel Properties and Specifications 4
TableS. Test Engine Baseline Emissions Requirement for 1999 Navistar B250 6
Table 4. Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Average Device Inlet/Outlet Temperature 8
Table 5. Particulate Characterization — Soluble Organic Fraction (SOF) from Each Test 9
Table 6. Brake-Specific Fuel Consumption (by Carbon Balance) 10
Table 7. Summary of Fuel Consumption Reductions 10
Table 8. Emissions Data 11
Table 9. Composite Weighted Emission Rates (U.S. Common Units) 12
Table 10. Composite Weighted Emission Rates (Metric Units) 13
Table 11. Summary of Verification Test Data (U.S. Common Units) 13
Table 12. Summary of Verification Test Data (Metric Units) 13
Table 13. Summary of Verification Test Emission Reductions 14
VI
-------
°F
APCT Center
ASTM
bhp
bhp-hr
BSFC
C-B
CFR
cm
CO
C02
CVS
DOC
DPF
EPA
ETV
FEL
ft
FTP
g
HC
HD
hp
in. Hg
in.
kW
kWh
L
Ib
Ib-ft
Acronyms/Abbreviations
degrees Celsius
degrees Fahrenheit
Air Pollution Control Technology Verification Center
American Society for Testing and Materials
brake horsepower
brake horsepower-hour
brake-specific fuel consumption
carbon balance
Code of Federal Regulations
centimeter(s)
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
constant volume sampler
diesel oxidation catalyst
diesel paniculate filter
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
environmental technology verification
family emission limits
foot (feet)
Federal Test Procedure
gram(s)
hydrocarbon(s)
heavy duty
horsepower
inch(es) mercury
inch(es)
kilowatt(s)
kilowatt hour(s)
liter(s)
pound(s)
pound foot (feet)
vn
-------
m
mm
N
N-m
NO
N02
NOX
OTAQ
Pa
PDF
PM
ppm
PUREM
QA
QC
rpm
RTI
SOF
SOP
SwRI
ULSD
meter(s)
millimeter(s)
newton(s)
newton-meter
nitric oxide
nitrogen dioxide
nitrogen oxides
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
pascal(s)
positive displacement pump
particulate matter
parts per million by volume
PUREM North America, LLC
quality assurance
quality control
revolutions per minute
RTI International
soluble organic fraction of the particulate matter
standard operating procedure
Southwest Research Institute
ultra-low sulfur diesel
Vlll
-------
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the support of all of those who helped plan and conduct the
verification activities. In particular, we would like to thank Michael Kosusko, project manager,
and Paul Groff, quality assurance manager, both of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA's) National Risk Management Research Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, NC. We
would also like to acknowledge the assistance and participation of all PUREM North America,
LLC, personnel who supported the test effort.
For more information on the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0, contact:
Mr. Larry Dimitrievski
PUREM North America, LLC
13400 Outer Drive West, Mailcode A16
Detroit, MI 48239-4001
Telephone: (313)592-5883
Fax: (313)592-5858
Email: larry.dimitrievski@purem.com
Web site: http://www.purem.com
For more information on verification testing of mobile sources air pollution control devices,
contact:
Ms. Jenni Elion
RTI International
P.O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
Telephone: (919) 541-6253
Email: jme@rti.org
ETV Web site: http://www.epa.gov/etv/
IX
-------
Section 1.0
Introduction
This report reviews the performance of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 diesel parti culate filter
(DPF) system comprising a precious metal diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) and a DPF submitted
for testing by PUREM North America, LLC (PUREM). Environmental technology verification
(ETV) testing of this technology was conducted during a series of tests in September-October
2006 by Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), under contract with the Air Pollution Control
Technology Verification Center (APCT Center). The APCT Center is operated by RTI
International (RTF/ in partnership with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ETV
program. The objective of the APCT Center and the ETV program is to verify, with high-quality
data, the performance of air pollution control technologies, including those designed to control
air emissions from diesel engines. With the assistance of a technical panel of experts assembled
for the purpose, RTI has established the APCT Center program area specifically to evaluate the
performance of diesel exhaust catalysts, parti culate filters, and engine modification control
technologies for mobile diesel engines. Based on the activities of this technical panel, the
Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Particulate Filters, and Engine
Modification Control Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use Diesel Engines1 was
developed. This protocol was chosen as the best guide to verify the immediate performance
effects of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0. To determine these effects, emissions results from a
heavy-duty highway diesel engine were compared to emissions results obtained operating the
same engine with the same fuel, but with the PMF GreenTec DPF technology installed. The
specific test/quality assurance (QA) plan addendum for the ETV test of the technology submitted
by PUREM was developed and approved in August 2006.2 The goal of the test was to measure
the emissions control performance of the PMF GreenTec DPF technology and its emissions
reduction relative to an uncontrolled engine.
A description of the PUREM technology is presented in Section 2. Section 3 documents the
procedures and methods used for the test and the conditions under which the test was conducted.
The results of the test are summarized and discussed in Section 4, and references are presented in
Section 5.
This report contains only summary data and the verification statement. Complete documentation
of the test results is provided in a separate test report3 and audit of data quality report.4 These
reports include the raw test data from product testing and supplemental testing, equipment
calibration results, and QA and quality control (QC) activities and results. Complete
documentation of QA/QC activities and results, raw test data, and equipment calibration results
are retained in SwRI's files for 7 years.
The verification statement applies only to the use of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 on
highway engines. It is applicable to engines fueled only by ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) (15
ppm or less) fuel.
RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute.
-------
Section 2.0
Product Description
The PUREM PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 is a precious metal oxidation catalyst plus a
powdered metal paniculate matter filter. Exhaust gases are routed through the oxidation catalyst
and then processed through a particulate matter (PM) filter to achieve emissions reductions.
PUREM provided a "degreened" PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 unit that had seen 100 hours of
service on a 1998 International/Navistar B175F engine installed on an engine dynamometer. The
100 hours were accumulated by repeating a 300-second cyclic operation that contained 42
stepwise engine condition ramping commands, developed by PUREM to simulate the school bus
duty cycle on an engine dynamometer. It had a February 2006 date of manufacture and was
designated serial number 104.
PUREM provided an "aged" PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 unit that had seen 1050 hours of
service on the same engine, also installed on an engine dynamometer. The 1050 hours were
accumulated by repeating the same 300-second cyclic operation as above. This unit had a
January 2006 date of manufacture and was designated serial number 053.
Both the degreened and aged DPF units were identical size, box-shaped housings, designed as
mufflers weighing nominally 100 pounds, with a 3 /^-inch (90.5 mm) diameter flange at each
opening. For evaluating emissions, each DPF in turn was mounted 80 inches (2 m) downstream
of the turbocharger in its "as received" condition.
Figure 1. Engine shown installed in emissions test cell with
PUREM PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 shown left of engine.
-------
Section 3.0
Test Documentation
The ETV testing took place during September-October 2006 at SwRI under contract to the
APCT Center. Testing was performed in accordance with:
• Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Particulate Filters, and Engine
Modification Control Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use Diesel Engines1
• Test/QA Plan for the Verification Testing of Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Paniculate Filters,
and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use Diesel
Engines5
• Test-Specific Addendum to ETV Mobile Source Test/QA Plan for PUREM North America,
LLCfor the PMF GreenTec Diesel Paniculate Filter2
The applicant reviewed the generic verification protocol and had an opportunity to review the
test/QA plan prior to testing.
3.1 Engine Description
The ETV testing was performed on an eight-cylinder, 7.3 L, 1999 model year Navistar highway
medium heavy-duty diesel engine (model B250F, SN: 0960428). The nameplate rating of this
model engine is 187 kW (250 bhp) in "prime" power service at 2600 rpm. SwRI supplied the
engine for verification testing. The test engine had 500 hours of operation accumulated on it.
Table 1 provides the engine identification details.
3.2 Engine Fuel Description
All emissions testing was conducted with ULSD fuel meeting the 40 CFR §86.1313-2007
specification for emissions certified fuel.6 Selected fuel properties from the supplier's analyses
are summarized in Table 2. All testing was conducted using fuel from a single batch, identified
as EM-5989-F.
-------
Table 1. Engine Identification Information
Engine serial number
Date of manufacture
Make
Model year
Model
Engine displacement and configuration
Service class
EPA engine family identification
Family emissions limits (g/hp-hr)
Rated power (nameplate)
Rated torque (calculated from nameplate power)
Certified emission control system
Aspiration
Fuel system
0960428
February 23, 1999
Navistar
1999
DT466-B250F
7.3 L, eight-cylinder
Highway, medium heavy-duty diesel engine
XNVXH07.3ANE
HC 1 .34/00 15.54/NOx4.05/PM
0.105
250 hp @ 2600 rpm
500lb-ft@1600rpm
Electronic control system
Turbochargerand air cooler
Direct injection
Table 2. Selected Fuel Properties and Specifications
Item
Cetane number
Cetane index
Distillation range:
Initial boiling point, °C (°F)
10% Point, °C(°F)
50% Point, °C (°F)
90% Point, °C (°F)
End point, °C (°F)
Gravity (American Petroleum Institute)
Specific gravity
Total sulfur, ppm
Hydrocarbon composition:
Aromatics (minimum), %
Paraffins, naphthenes, and olefins, %
Flash point (minimum), °C (°F)
Viscosity, centistokes @ 40 °C
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Specification3
ASTM
D613
D976
D86
D86
D86
D86
D86
D287
-
D2622
D5186
D5186
D93
D445
Type 2D
40-50
40-50
171-204(340-400)
204-238 (400-460)
243-282 (470-540)
293-332 (560-630)
321-366(610-690)
32-37
-
7-15
27
e
54 (1 30)
2.0-3.2
Test Fuel
EM-5989-F
44.4
n/a
192(377)
214(417)
260 (500)
31 1 (592)
337 (638)
35.2b
0.849b
10C
29.5d
70.5d
77(170)
2.5
a 40 CFR 86.1313-2007(b)(2) for the year 2007 and beyond for heavy-duty diesel engines.
b Measured per ASTM D4052.
c Measured per ASTM D5453. This method is an acceptable substitute for ASTM D2622.
d Measured per ASTM D1319.
e Remainder of the hydrocarbons
-------
3.3 Summary of Emissions Measurement Procedures
The ETV tests consisted of baseline uncontrolled tests and tests with the control technology
installed. Engine operation and emissions sampling adhered to techniques developed by EPA in
40 CFR, Part 86, SubpartN.7 Emissions were measured over triplicate runs of the highway
transient test cycle for the baseline, degreened DPF, and aged DPF exhaust configurations.
The Navistar B250F engine was operated in an engine dynamometer test cell, with exhaust
sampled using full-flow dilution constant volume sampling (CVS) techniques to measure
regulated emissions of hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and
particulate matter (PM), plus nitric oxide (NO). The nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels are expressed
as the difference between measured NOx and NO levels for each run. In addition to results
presented in this report, raw data were gathered at the rate of one series of measurements per
second over each test to record the engine speed, torque value, concentration of selected
emissions, exhaust temperature, and various pressures. Figure 2 depicts the sampling system and
related components. The system is designed to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR, Part
86.7
NOX
Analyzer
HC
Analyzer
NO
Analyzer
Positive Displacement
Pump (PDF)
Dilution
Air
CO, C02, HC, and NOX
Background Bag
CO, C02
Sample Bag
Sample PM
Control Device (DPF+DOC)
Gas Meter I
Pump g
Bag Sample [
Gas Analyzer [f
Sample Line —
Heated Line +t+
90-mm PM Filters .
Figure 2. Schematic of emissions sampling system at SwRI.
The verification protocol requires that the emissions from engines used for verification testing
must not exceed 110% of the certification standards for that engine category.8 For this engine,
the family emission limits (FEL) supersede the certification standards. Also, the Office of
Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) assumes 5% emissions reduction due to the use of
ULSD fuel.
-------
Therefore, the criteria established to indicate that the test engine was acceptable and that the
verification testing could proceed were that the baseline emissions from the engine using ULSD
fuel could not exceed 110% of (FEL-5%), or (1.045 x FEL). Table 3 presents the required
baseline emission performance of the test engine. (Section 4.0 of this report contains the
emissions data that show the performance of the selected engine was acceptable.)
Table 3. Test Engine Baseline Emissions Requirement for 1999 Navistar B250
FELa
1. 045 x FEL
H
g/kWh
1.80
1.88
C
g/hp-hr
1.34
1.40
C
g/kWh
20.84
21.78
0
g/hp-hr
15.54
16.24
N(
g/kWh
5.43
5.68
3X
g/hp-hr
4.05
4.23
P
g/kWh
0.141
0.147
M
g/hp-hr
0.105
0.110
a FEL applies only to specific engine family.
3.4 Deviations from the Test/QA Plan
There were two deviations from the test/QA plan.
The statement of work called for use of a 1998 International B175 T444E heavy-duty diesel engine.
The 1998 engine was deemed unacceptable because its NOX level was uncharacteristically high,
at 5.3 g/hp-hr, compared to its regulatory limit of 4.0 g/hp-hr. With a substitute engine from the
same EPA highway engine family on-site, the 1998 engine was set aside. The substituted 1999
Navistar B250F engine clearly met the model year FEL. Engine performance was stable over the
multiple days of testing, as transient cycle operation consistently met or "passed" the required
performance and statistical criteria.
The other deviation occurred when a Vi-inch plug, which is typically located in the exterior wall
of the DPF, was found on the floor following tests on the degreened DPF. The plug is designed
as a temperature or pressure tap. That leak was repaired, and the degreened DPF was tested
again on a subsequent day. Comparing those two sets of results suggests that the plug most
likely became dislodged near the end of its first day of testing. However, because of the leak, the
first set of emissions data was not used in calculating emissions reduction of the technology.
3.5 Documented Test Conditions
Engine Performance
Figure 3 shows torque map information measured on the 1999 Navistar B250F engine using the
ULSD fuel.
-------
Torque - - - - Power
600
I
o
Q.
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Engine Speed, rpm
3000
Figure 3. Torque map of 1999 Navistar B250F engine using ULSD fuel.
Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Exhaust Temperature
The engine backpressure for the 1999 Navistar B250F engine was set to 3.4 in. Hg ± 0.2 in. Hg
(11.5 kPa ± 0. kPa) in accordance with the engine manufacturer specifications for the baseline
configuration. The backpressure was adjusted to the same specification after installation of the
degreened and aged devices. Maximum backpressure observed during testing, reported in Table
4, did not exceed the manufacturer's specifications.
Temperature measurements were made in the exhaust system of the Navistar engine at the inlet
and outlet of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0. Average inlet and outlet temperatures over the
transient test cycle were 454 °F (235 °C) and 460 °F (238 °C), respectively.
Maximum values for exhaust backpressure and average values for device inlet and outlet
temperatures are shown in Table 4. The inlet and outlet temperatures were measured within 1
inch (2.54 cm) of the flange openings. Figure 4 shows the inlet temperature over time for the
degreened device and Figure 5 shows the inlet temperature over time for the aged device. In
both figures, the hot-start profile is the average of the three hot-start tests.
-------
Table 4. Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Average Device Inlet/Outlet Temperature
Test Number
Test
Type
Test Date
Maximum
Exhaust
Backpressure
kPa
in. Hg
Average
Device Inlet
Temperature
°C
°F
Average
Device Outlet
Temperature
°C
°F
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
B250BL-C-3
B250BL-H-2
B250BL-H-3
B250BL-H-4
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
1 0/04/06
10/04/06
10/04/06
10/04/06
9.5
9.4
9.4
9.4
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Degreened PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
08W06/104-C2
08W06/104-H4
08W06/104-H5
08W06/104-H6
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
1 0/06/06
1 0/06/06
1 0/06/06
1 0/06/06
8.4
9.2
9.6
9.9
2.5
2.7
2.8
2.9
223.1
238.0
240.3
239.6
433.6
460.4
464.5
463.3
197.7
248.8
251.0
251.7
387.9
479.8
483.8
485.1
Aged PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
01W06/053-C1
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
1 0/1 0/06
1 0/1 0/06
1 0/1 0/06
1 0/1 0/06
8.8
9.1
9.4
9.6
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.8
221.2
234.7
237.0
242.4
430.2
454.5
458.6
468.3
195.6
248.6
251.0
256.9
384.1
479.5
483.8
494.4
Cold Start
Hot Start (avg. of 3)
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Time (seconds)
800
900 1000 1100 1200
Figure 4. Inlet Temperature Profile of Degreened PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0.
-------
450
400 -
350 -
Cold Start
-HotStart(avg.ofS)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Figure 5. Inlet Temperature Profile of Aged PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0.
On each test, the particulate material was tested for soluble organic fraction (SOF). Table 5
reports the results.
Table 5. Particulate Characterization — Soluble Organic Fraction (SOF) from Each Test
Test Description
Baseline
Without DPF
With Degreened PMF
GreenTec DPF
With Aged PMF
GreenTec DPF
Test Number
B250BL-C3
B250BL-H2
B250BL-H3
B250BL-H4
08W06/104-C2
08W06/104-H4
08W06/104-H5
08W06/104-H6
01W06/053-C1
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
PM, g/hp-hr
0.105
0.096
0.099
0.097
0.014
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.009
0.005
0.004
0.005
SOF, % of PM
45
28
31
32
28
91
55
89
39
89
90
93
The fuel consumption was not measured directly during the engine testing. Rather, a calculated
"carbon-balance" (C-B) fuel consumption rate was determined based on the measured exhaust
flow rate and the carbon content (i.e., the CO and the CO2) in the exhaust gas analysis. The
weighted BSFC calculations are similar to the weighted emissions calculations explained in
Section 4.0. Table 6 shows the weighted BSFC calculations. Table 7 summarizes the results of
-------
these calculations and compares the fuel consumption during the baseline runs with that
measured during the tests with the PMF GreenTec DPF units installed.
Table 6. Brake-Specific Fuel Consumption (by Carbon Balance)
Test Number
Test Type
Test Date
BSFC
Ib/bhp-hr
kg/kWh
Weighted BSFC
Ib/bhp-hr
kg/kWh
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
B250BL-C-3
B250BL-H-2
B250BL-H-3
B250BL-H-4
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Mean
10/4/2006
10/4/2006
10/4/2006
10/4/2006
0.474
0.457
0.450
0.454
0.288
0.278
0.274
0.276
0.459
0.453
0.457
0.456
0.279
0.276
0.278
0.277
Degreened PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
08W06/1 04-C2
08W06/1 04-H4
08W06/1 04-H5
08W06/1 04-H6
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Mean
10/6/2006
10/6/2006
10/6/2006
10/6/2006
0.471
0.452
0.448
0.453
0.286
0.275
0.272
0.275
0.454
0.451
0.456
0.454
0.276
0.274
0.277
0.276
Aged PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
01W06/053-C1
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Mffan
10/10/2006
10/10/2006
10/10/2006
10/10/2006
0.439
0.460
0.440
0.442
0.267
0.280
0.268
0.269
0.457
0.440
0.446
n 447
0.278
0.267
0.271
n 979
Table 7. Summary of Fuel Consumption Reductions
Device type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
% Reduction
0.56
2.0
95% Confidence
Limits
a
a
' The fuel consumption reduction cannot be distinguished from zero with 95% confidence.
10
-------
Section 4.0
Summary and Discussion of Emission Results
Table 8 reports the emissions from the tests that were conducted: baseline, with a degreened
PMF GreenTec DPF installed, and with an aged PMF GreenTec DPF installed. The
concentration measurements were converted to units of total grams per test for all species. The
"bhp from work" (the integrated measured power during each test period) values are also shown
in these tables.
Table 8. Emissions Data
Test Number
Test Type
PM
NOX
NO
N02a
g
NO2/NOX
%
HC
g
CO
g
CO2
kg
Work
kWh
(bhp-hr)
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
B250BL-C-3
B250BL-H-2
B250BL-H-3
B250BL-H-4
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
1.63
1.53
1.56
1.51
66.3
60.1
60.7
60.1
62.3
58.3
57.0
56.5
3.98
1.80
3.64
3.60
6.00
3.00
6.00
6.00
2.99
1.09
1.20
1.57
26.5
18.8
18.7
20.5
10.5
10.4
10.2
10.1
11.6
(15.5)
11.8
(15.9)
11.7
(15.7)
11.6
(15.6)
Degreened PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
08W06/104-C2
08W06/104-H4
08W06/104-H5
08W06/104-H6
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
0.224
0.0770
0.0700
0.0850
63.1
60.2
58.8
59.2
48.0
39.8
39.4
39.7
15.2
20.5
19.4
19.5
24.0
34.0
33.0
33.0
0.373
0.000
0.000
0.000
7.75
2.79
2.02
2.28
10.6
10.2
10.2
10.2
11.7
(15.7)
11.7
(15.7)
11.8
(15.8)
11.7
(15.7)
Aged PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
01W06/053-C1
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
Cold-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
Hot-start
0.137
0.0840
0.0570
0.0770
62.8
58.9
58.4
58.9
47.7
39.5
39.1
38.9
15.1
19.4
19.3
20.0
24.0
33.0
33.0
34.0
0.696
0.000
0.000
0.000
9.25
1.82
1.71
1.82
9.80
10.3
9.88
10.1
11.6
(15.6)
11.7
(15.6)
11.7
(15.6)
11.8
(15.8)
a NO2 calculated as NOX - NO.
For each pollutant/hot-start test combination, the transient composite-weighted emissions per
work (bhp-hr) were then calculated following the fractional calculation for highway engines as
follows:
11
-------
— • ECOLD -\— • (EHOT)H
2 7 v '
1 TT, 6
— • WCOLD -\— '
(Eq. 1)
where ECOMP = composite emissions rate, g/bhp-hr
m = one, two, or three hot-start tests
ECOLD = cold-start mass emissions level, g
EHOT = hot-start mass emissions level, g
cold-start brake horsepower hour, bhp-hr
hot-start brake horsepower hour, bhp-hr.
These composite-weighted emissions rates are shown in Tables 9 and 10 and were used to
calculate the mean and standard deviations for the baseline and controlled emissions rates. These
data were in turn used to calculate mean emissions reductions and 95% confidence limits. These
calculations are based on the generic verification protocol1 and test/QA plan.2
Table 9. Composite Weighted Emission Rates (U.S. Common Units)
Test Number
Exhaust
PM
NOX
NO
N02a
g/bhp-hr
N02/NOX
%
HC
CO
C02
g/bhp-hr
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
B250BL-H-2
B250BL-H-3
B250BL-H-4
0.0976
0.0998
0.0979
3.86
3.91
3.91
3.73
3.68
3.68
0.134
0.235
0.235
3.47
6.00
6.00
0.0862
0.0928
0.114
1.26
1.26
1.37
658
650
654
Degreened PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
08W06/104-H4
08W06/104-H5
08W06/104-H6
0.00624
0.00582
0.00670
3.86
3.76
3.82
2.61
2.57
2.61
1.26
1.19
1.21
32.5
31.6
31.6
0.00339
0.00337
0.00340
0.223
0.179
0.196
653
649
655
Aged PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
0.00587
0.00438
0.00543
3.81
3.78
3.78
2.60
2.58
2.55
1.21
1.20
1.23
31.6
31.6
32.5
0.00637
0.00637
0.00631
0.185
0.179
0.183
656
632
640
NO? calculated as NOX - NO.
12
-------
Table 10. Composite Weighted Emission Rates (Metric Units)
Test Number
Exhaust
PM
NOX
NO
N02a
g/kWh
N02/NOX
%
HC
CO
C02
g/kWh
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
B250BL-H-2
B250BL-H-3
B250BL-H-4
0.131
0.134
0.131
5.17
5.24
5.24
5.000
4.933
4.93
0.180
0.315
0.315
3.47
6.00
6.00
0.116
0.124
0.153
1.69
1.69
1.84
882
871
877
Degreened PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
08W06/104-H4
08W06/104-H5
08W06/104-H6
0.00836
0.00780
0.00898
5.17
5.04
5.12
3.50
3.45
3.50
1.69
1.60
1.62
32.5
31.6
31.6
0.00454
0.00452
0.00456
0.299
0.240
0.263
875
870
878
Aged PMF GreenTec DPF with ULSD Fuel on a 1999 Navistar B250F Engine
01W06/053-H1
01W06/053-H2
01W06/053-H3
0.00787
0.00587
0.00728
5.11
5.07
5.07
3.49
3.46
3.42
1.62
1.61
1.65
31.6
31.6
32.5
0.00854
0.00854
0.00846
0.248
0.240
0.245
879
847
858
NO? calculated as NOX - NO.
The mean composite weighted emission rates from Tables 11 and 12 are the key values for the
verification test. Table 13 summarizes that information. The first line shows the baseline engine
results; the emissions in all categories are below the Table 3 threshold.
Table 11. Summary of Verification Test Data (U.S. Common Units)
Device type
Baseline
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
ULSD
Mean Composite Weighted Emission Rate
PM
NOx
HC
CO
CO2
g/bhp-hr
0.0984
0.00625
0.00523
3.90
3.81
3.79
0.0976
0.00339
0.00635
1.30
0.199
0.182
654
653
643
Table 12. Summary of Verification Test Data (Metric Units)
Device type
Baseline
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
ULSD
Mean Composite Weighted Emission Rate
PM
NOx
HC
CO
C02
g/kWh
0.132
0.00839
0.00711
5.22
5.11
5.15
0.131
0.00455
0.00864
1.74
0.267
0.248
877
875
875
Table 13 summarizes the emissions reductions that were achieved by the use of the PMF
GreenTec DPF. These are the "verified emissions reductions" reported in Table 2 of the ETV
Joint Verification Statement.
13
-------
Table 13. Summary of Verification Test Emission Reductions
Device
type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
Mean
Emissions Reduction (%)
PM
94
95
NOx
2.1
2.8
HC
97
93
CO
85
86
95% Confidence Limits
on the Emissions Reduction (%)
PM
91 to 97
92 to 98
NOx
a
1.1 to 4.4
HC
b
b
CO
73 to 97
74 to 98
The emission reduction cannot be distinguished from zero with 95% confidence.
' The emissions reduction could not be quantified or distinguished from 100% with 95% confidence.
4.1 Quality Assurance
The environmental technology verification of the PMF GreenTec 1004205.00.0 with ULSD fuel
for heavy-duty highway diesel engines was performed in accordance with the approved test/QA
plan and the test-specific addendum.2 An audit of data quality included the review of equipment,
personnel qualifications, procedures, record keeping, data validation, analysis, and reporting.
Preliminary, in-process, and final inspections, and a review of 10% of the data showed that the
requirements stipulated in the test/QA plan5 were achieved. The SwRI, APCT Center, and EPA
quality managers reviewed the test results and the QC data and concluded that the data quality
objectives given in the generic verification protocol were attained. EPA and RTI QA staff
conducted audits of SwRI's technical and quality systems in April 2002 and found no
deficiencies that would adversely impact the quality of results. The equipment was appropriate
for the verification testing, and it was operating satisfactorily. SwRI's technical staff was well
qualified to perform the testing and conducted themselves in a professional manner.
14
-------
Section 5.0
References
1. RTI International. 2002. Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts,
Particulate Filters, and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway and
Nonroad Use Diesel Engines. Research Triangle Park, NC, January. Available:
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pdfs/vp/05_vp_devrev.pdf
2. RTI International. 2006. Test-Specific Addendum to ETV Mobile Source Test/QA Plan for
PUREMNorth America, LLCfor the PMF GreenTec Diesel Particulate Filter. Research
Triangle Park, NC, August 9.
3. Southwest Research Institute. 2006. Environmental Technology Verification of PMF
GreenTec Diesel Particulate Filter. Final Report. San Antonio, TX, November.
4. Southwest Research Institute. 2006. Audit of Data Quality for Environmental Technology
Verification of PMF GreenTec Diesel Particulate Filter. San Antonio, TX, November.
5. RTI International. 2002. Test/QA Plan for the Verification Testing of Diesel Exhaust
Catalysts, Particulate Filters, and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway
and Nonroad Use Diesel Engines. Research Triangle Park, NC, April. Available:
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pdfs/vp/05_tp_diesel.pdf.
6. 40 CFR §86.1313-2007 (Protection of Environment: Control of Emissions from New and
In-Use Highway Vehicles and Engines, Fuel Specifications), Table N07-2. Available:
http://www.epa.gov/epahome/cfr40.htm (updated September 6, 2006).
7. 40 CFR, Part 86 (Protection of Environment: Control of Emissions from New and In-Use
Highway Vehicles and Engines), Subpart N.
8. RTI International. 2003. Generic Verification Protocol for Determination of Emissions
Reductions from Selective Catalytic Reduction Control Technologies for Highway,
Nonroad, and Stationary Use Diesel Engines. Research Triangle Park, NC, September.
Available: http://www.epa.gov/etv/pdfs/vp/05_vp_emissions.pdf.
15
------- |