Environmental Technology Verification
Test Report of Mobile Source Emission
Control Devices
Johnson Matthey
PCRT2® 1000, Version 2, Filter + Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
Prepared by
Southwest Research Institute RTI International
HRTI
INTERNATIONAL
TM
Under a Cooperative Agreement with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA
ETV ET
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Statement
JMPCRT2 1000 v2
THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
PROGRAM
AEBV
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HRTI
INTERNATIONAL
ETV Joint Verification Statement
TECHNOLOGY TYPE: MOBILE DIESEL ENGINE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
APPLICATION:
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM MOBILE DIESEL ENGINES IN
HIGHWAY USE BY DIESEL OXIDATION CATALYSTS AND DIESEL
PARTICULATE FILTERS
TECHNOLOGY NAME:
PCRT2* 1000, VERSION 2, FILTER + DIESEL OXIDATION
CATALYST
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
FAX:
WEB SITE:
E-MAIL:
JOHNSON MATTHEY PLC
380 LAPP ROAD
MALVERN, PA 19355
(610) 254-5373
(610) 971-3116
http://www.jmusa.com
joshia@jmusa.com
J
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 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. The ETV Program 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.
The ETV Program 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 International1 in cooperation with EPA's National Risk Management Research
RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Statement
JMPCRT2 1000 v2
Laboratory. The APCT Center has evaluated the performance of an emission control system consisting of a flow-
through partial filter combined with a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC).
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 and Nonroad Use Diesel Engines and the
Test-Specific Addendum to ETV Mobile Source Test/QA Plan for Johnson Mattheyfor the PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System.
These documents are written in accordance with the applicable generic verification protocol and include
requirements for quality management and QA, procedures for product selection and auditing of the test laboratories,
and the test reporting format.
The mobile diesel engine air pollution control technology was tested August 2008 at Southwest Research Institute.
The performance verified was the percentage of emissions 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)
YCEXH0661MAH
Cummins - 2000 ISM350 ESP
Highway, heavy-duty diesel engine
350 hpat 1800 rpm
10.8 L, inline six cylinder
Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2
Flow-through partial filter combined with a DOC
One cold-start and multiple hot-start tests according to FTP test for baseline
engine, degreened, and aged systems
Ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel with 15 ppm sulfur maximum
PM, NOX, HC, and CO
CO2, NO, NO2 (by calculation), soluble organic fraction of PM,
backpressure, exhaust temperature, and fuel consumption
exhaust
hp = horsepower, rpm = revolutions per minute, CO2 = carbon dioxide, NO = nitric oxide, NO2 = nitrogen dioxide
VERIFIED TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system is a partial continuously regenerating technology (PCRT) system
that consists of a flow-through partial filter combined with a DOC. The system is designed for low temperature
exhaust resulting from intermittent loads from medium and heavy heavy-duty diesel on-highway non-urban bus
engines. 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 Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system on highway
engines fueled by ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) (15 ppm or less) fuel.
VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
The Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system achieved the reduction in tailpipe emissions shown in Table 2
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Statement
JMPCRT2 1000 v2
compared to baseline operation without the system.
Table 2. Verified Emissions Reductions
Device
Type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
Mean Emissions
Reduction (%)
PM
55
43
NOX
0.99
-0.24
HC
96
92
CO
74
68
95% Confidence Limits on the Emissions
Reduction (%)
PM
37 to 73
26 to 61
NOX
a
a
HC
b
86-97
CO
73-75
66-69
a The emissions reduction could not 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 quality manager 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. APCT Center
QA staff have conducted technical assessments of the test laboratory procedures 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 Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system
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 Johnson MattheyPCRT2®1000, v.2 system within the range of applicability
of the statement.
signed by Sally Gutierrez 03/20/09
Sally Gutierrez Date
Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
United States Environmental Protection Agency
signed by Jenia Tufts
Jenia Tufts
Director
APCT Center
RTI International
03/13/09
Date
NOTICE: ETV verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific, predetermined
criteria and the appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA and RTI make no express or implied warranties as to
the performance of the technology and do not certify that a technology will always operate as verified. The end user
is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable federal, state, and local requirements. Mention of
commercial product names does not imply endorsement.
in
-------
Environmental Technology Verification
Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Johnson Matthey Pic
PCRT2® 1000, Version 2
Flow-Through Partial Filter and
Metal Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
Prepared by
RTI International
Southwest Research Institute
EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR831911-01-1
EPA Project Officer:
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
March 2009
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
Notice
This document was prepared by RTI International (RTI) and its subcontractor, Southwest Research
Institute, with partial funding from Cooperative Agreement No. CR831911-01-1 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.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
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 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, Paniculate Filters, and Engine Modification
Control Technologies for Highway and Nonroad 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 Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system,
comprising a flow-through partial filter and diesel oxidation catalyst. ETV testing of this technology was
conducted in August 2008 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
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
Availability of Report
Copies of this verification report are available from the following:
• 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/nrmrl/std/etv/vt-apc.html#msd (pdf format)
http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/
IV
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
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
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Product Description 2
3.0 Test Documentation 3
3.1 Engine Fuel Description 4
3.2 Summary of Emissions Measurement Procedures 5
3.3 Deviations from the Test/QA Plan 6
3.4 Documented Test Conditions 7
4.0 Summary and Discussion of Emissions Results 12
4.1 Quality Assurance 15
5.0 References 16
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1. The PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system installed for emissions tests 2
Figure 2. Identification labels for 2000 Cummins ISMS 50 engine and its electronic control module 4
Figure 3. Schematic of emissions sampling system at SwRI 6
Figure 4. Torque map of 2000 Cummins ISM350 engine using ULSD fuel 7
Figure 5. Inlet temperature profile of degreened PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system 9
Figure 6. Inlet temperature profile of aged PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system 9
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1. Engine Identification Information 3
Table 2. Selected Fuel Properties and Specifications 5
Table 3. Test Engine Baseline Emissions Requirement for 2000 Cummins ISM350 6
Table 4. Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Average Device Inlet/Outlet Temperature 8
Table 5. Particulate Characterization—Soluble Organic Fraction from Each Test 10
Table 6. Brake-Specific Fuel Consumption (by Carbon Balance) 11
Table 7. Summary of Fuel Consumption Reductions 11
Table 8. Emissions Data 12
Table 9. Composite Weighted Emissions Rates (U.S. Common Units) 13
Table 10. Composite Weighted Emissions Rates (Metric Units) 14
Table 11. Summary of Verification Test Data (U.S. Common Units) 14
Table 12. Summary of Verification Test Data (Metric Units) 14
Table 13. Summary of Verification Test Emissions Reductions 15
VI
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
JMPCRT2 1000 v2
Acronyms/Abbreviations
°C degrees Celsius
°F degrees Fahrenheit
APCT Center Air Pollution Control Technology Verification Center
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
bhp brake horsepower
bhp-hr brake horsepower-hour
BSFC brake-specific fuel consumption
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cm centimeter(s)
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
DOC diesel oxidation catalyst
DPF diesel particulate filter
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ETV environmental technology verification
g gram(s)
g/hp-hr grams per horsepower-hour
HC hydrocarbon(s)
hp horsepower
in. inch(es)
in. Hg inch(es) mercury
kg/kWh kilograms per kilowatt-hour
kPa kilopascals
kW kilowatt(s)
vn
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
kWh kilowatt hour(s)
L liter(s)
Ib pound(s)
Ib-ft pound foot (feet)
NO nitric oxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOX nitrogen oxides
PM participate matter
ppm parts per million
QA quality assurance
QC quality control
rpm revolutions per minute
RTI RTI International
SOF soluble organic fraction
SwRI Southwest Research Institute
ULSD ultra-low-sulfur diesel
Vlll
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report JMPCRT2 1000 v2
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 officer, and Paul Groff, quality
manager, both of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Risk Management Research
Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, NC. We would also like to acknowledge the assistance and
participation of all Johnson Matthey personnel who supported the test effort.
For more information on the Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system, contact the following:
Mr. Ajay Joshi
Johnson Matthey Pic
380 Lapp Road
Malvern, PA 19355
Telephone: (610) 254-5373
Fax:(610)971-3116
Email: joshia@jmusa.com
Web site: http://www.jmusa.com
For more information on verification testing of mobile sources air pollution control devices, contact the
following:
Ms. Jenia Tufts
RTI International
P.O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
Telephone: (919) 485-2698
Email: jtufts@rti.org
ETV Web site: http://www.epa.gov/etv/
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report reviews the performance of the Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system, comprising a
flow-through partial filter and a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) submitted for testing by Johnson Matthey
Pic. Environmental technology verification (ETV) testing of this technology was conducted during a
series of tests in August 2008 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 (RTI)* 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, particulate 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 and Nonroad
Use Diesel Engines1 was developed. This protocol was chosen as the best guide to verify the immediate
performance effects of the PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system. 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 PCRT2® 1000, v.2 technology installed. The specific test/quality
assurance (QA) plan addendum for the ETV test of the technology submitted by Johnson Matthey was
developed and approved in April 2008.2 The goal of the test was to measure the emissions control
performance of the PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system and its emissions reduction relative to an uncontrolled
engine.
A description of the technology is presented in Section 2.0. Section 3.0 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 4.0, and references are presented in Section 5.0.
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 PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system 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.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
2.0 PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
The Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system, shown installed in Figure 1, is a partial continuously
regenerating technology (PCRT) system that consists of a flow-through partial filter combined with a
DOC. Exhaust gases are routed through the oxidation catalyst and then processed through a particulate
matter (PM) filter to achieve emissions reductions. The system is designed for low temperature exhaust
resulting from intermittent loads from medium and heavy heavy-duty diesel on-highway non-urban bus
engines. 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 Johnson Matthey PCRT2® 1000,
v.2 system on highway engines fueled by ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) (15 ppm or less) fuel.
Johnson Matthey provided a new PCRT2® 1000, v.2 unit that had never been used before. The DOC had
serial number C269057, and the filter had serial number PFT0138. The unit had a February 2006 date of
manufacture. The unit was preconditioned in accordance with the requirements in Title 13, California
Code of Regulations, Section 2706(a)(4) for a total of 28 hours.
Johnson Matthey provided an "aged" PCRT2® 1000, v.2 unit that had seen 1,503 hours of service on a
1988 Caterpillar 3208T engine installed in a 1989 Expediter truck. This unit had a June 2006 date of
manufacture, the DOC had serial number C6110188-8, and the filter had serial number PFT0079.
Figure 1. The PCRT2 1000, v.2 system installed for emissions tests.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
3.0 TEST DOCUMENTATION
The ETV testing took place during August 2008 at SwRI under contract to the APCT Center. Testing was
performed in accordance with the following:
• Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Paniculate 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 Johnson Matthey for the PCRT2®
1000, V.2System2
The applicant reviewed the generic verification protocol and had an opportunity to review the test/QA
plan prior to testing.
The ETV testing was performed on a six-cylinder, 10.8 L, 2000 model year Cummins ISM350 highway
heavy heavy-duty diesel engine (SN: 35010881) borrowed from EPA. The nameplate rating of this model
engine is 260 kW [350 brake horsepower (bhp)] in "prime" power service at 1,800 revolutions per minute
(rpm). The test engine had about 215 hours of operation accumulated on it before arriving at SwRI.
Table 1 provides the engine identification details, and Figure 2 shows the identification plates from the
engine and its electronic control module.
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
Certification standards (g/hp-hr)
Rated power (nameplate)
Rated torque (nameplate)
Certified emission control system
Aspiration
Fuel system
35010881
June 2000
Cummins
2000
ISM350 ESP
10.8 L, inline six cylinder
Highway heavy heavy-duty diesel engine
YCEXH0661MAH
HC 1.30/CO 15.50/NOX 4.00/PM 0.100
350 hp at 1800 rpm
1350lb-ftat1200rpm
Typical exhaust
Turbo charged
Electronically controlled fuel injection
HC = hydrocarbons, hp = horsepower
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
£ 35010881 |**"<-w
,YCEXH0661MAH
83. ISM 350ESP " I
J" 06/00
-.«.•«*. 600-aoo
'* SW RESEARCH igM350
£U«*> 350/4
£<"-«» I350/T
*£****•*'*•«.
S^fiF« =OT4
i* .025 LASH
Figure 2. Identification labels for 2000 Cummins ISM350 engine and its electronic control module.
3.1 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-6539-F.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
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), %
Olefins, saturates %
Flash point (minimum), °C (°F)
Viscosity, centistokes at 40°C
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Specification3
ASTM
D613
D976
D86
D86
D86
D86
D86
D287
D4052
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
0.865-0.840
7-15
27
NAf
54(130)
2.0-3.2
Test Fuel
EM-6539-F
43.9
n/ab
176(348)
219(427)
267(513)
317(603)
347 (657)
33.7C
0.857C
8d
30.3e
69.7e
66(151)
2.9
40 CFR 86.1313-2007(b)(2) for the year 2007 and beyond for heavy-duty diesel engines
n/a=not applicable
Measured per American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D4052
Measured per ASTM D5453; this method is an acceptable substitute for ASTM D2622
Measured per ASTM D1319
Remainder of the hydrocarbons
3.2 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,
Subpart N.7 Emissions were measured over triplicate runs of the highway transient test cycle for the
baseline, degreened diesel particulate filter (DPF), and aged DPF exhaust configurations.
The 2000 Cummins ISM350 engine was operated in an engine dynamometer test cell, with exhaust
sampled using full-flow dilution constant volume sampling techniques to measure regulated emissions of
hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and 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 3 depicts the sampling system and
related components. The system is designed to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR, Part 86.7
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
NOx
Analyzer
HC
Analyzer
Positive Displacement
Pump(POP)
CO, C02, HC, and NOx
Background Bag
Gas Meter
Pump
Bag Sample
Gas Analyzer
Sample Line
Heated Line
90mm PM Filters
Figure 3. 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 1998-2003 nonurban bus
engines, the certification standards are defined in EPA's on-highway engine family box OH-10.8
Furthermore, the Office of Transportation and Air Quality assumes 5% reduction in PM emissions 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 OH-10 (1.1 x OH-10) forHC, CO, andNOx, and also could not exceed 110% of [(OH-10)-5%],
or (1.045 x OH-10) for PM. Table 3 presents the required emissions performance of the test engine, as
well as the certification standards and baseline results for comparison.
Table 3. Test Engine Baseline Emissions Requirement for 2000 Cummins ISM350
OH-10
Acceptance criteria
Baseline results
HC
g/kWh
1.74
1.92
0.39
g/hp-hr
1.30a
1.43
0.29
CO
g/kWh
20.79
22.86
1.414
g/hp-hr
15.50a
17.05
1.055
NOX
g/kWh
5.36
5.90
5.41
g/hp-hr
4.00 a
4.40
4.03
PM
g/kWh
0.130
0.140
0.116
g/hp-hr
0.100a
0.105
0.087
a Certification standards for EPA highway engine family box OH-10 for 1998-2003 nonurban bus engines
3.3 Deviations from the Test/QA Plan
There were no deviations from the test/QA plan.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
3.4 Documented Test Conditions
Engine Performance
Figure 4 shows torque map information measured on the 2000 Cummins ISMS 50 engine using the ULSD
fuel.
I/I no
-Q
Z
o
6(
/
~ -/
t
*
s
If
+
* *
*
*
)0 800 1000
^^^— Torque - - - - Power
-»'""""
v^ ^ * J ^V_
s ,' ^
^
#
*
1200 1400
Engine Speed(rpni)
V
*
^^
v;
V
\
\
1600 1800 20
Qcn
&
6
150^
00
Figure 4. Torque map of 2000 Cummins ISM350 engine using ULSD fuel.
Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Exhaust Temperature
The engine backpressure for the 2000 Cummins ISM350 engine was set in accordance with the engine
manufacturer's specifications of 2.4" Hg for the baseline configuration. The backpressure was adjusted to
the same specification after installation of the degreened and aged devices. Maximum exhaust
backpressure levels for transient Federal Test Procedure tests on the PCRT2® 1000, v.2 systems are given
in Table 4. The degreened and aged PCRT2® 1000, v.2 systems significantly increased exhaust
backpressure over the transient test cycle, exceeding the manufacturer's maximum specification of 3" Hg.
Higher exhaust backpressure levels were noted from the engine power validation data.
Temperature measurements were made in the exhaust system of the Cummins engine at the inlet and
outlet of the DOC within 1 in. (2.54 cm) of the flange openings. Average inlet and outlet temperatures
over the transient test cycle, shown in Table 4, were 483°F (251°C) and 552°F (289°C), respectively.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Table 4. Engine Exhaust Backpressure and Average Device Inlet/Outlet Temperature
Test
Number
Test Type
Test Date
Maximum Exhaust
Backpressure3
kPa
in. Hg
Average
DOC Inlet
Temperature
°C
°F
Average
DOC Exhaust
Temperature
°C
°F
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-C1
BASE-H1
BASE-H2
BASE-H3
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
08/07/08
08/07/08
08/07/08
08/07/08
Average
8.2
8.4
8.5
8.5
8.4
2.42
2.49
2.50
2.50
2.48
Not measured (no device in place)
Degreened PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-C1
0138-H1
0138-H2
0138-H3
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
08/08/08
08/08/08
08/08/08
08/08/08
Average
14.4
14.7
14.9
15.0
14.8
4.24
4.34
4.41
4.43
4.36
238.6
250.4
250.7
251.7
247.9
461.5
482.6
483.3
485.1
478.1
265.8
292.4
293.4
294.9
286.6
510.5
558.3
560.2
562.8
548.0
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-C2
0079-H4
0079-H5
0079-H6
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
08/14/08
08/14/08
08/14/08
08/14/08
Average
17.0
17.4
17.6
17.7
17.4
5.01
5.13
5.20
5.24
5.15
243.8
255.7
256.4
256.8
253.2
470.9
492.3
493.4
494.2
487.7
271.9
296.9
298.2
298.8
291.5
521.4
566.5
568.7
569.8
556.6
Exhaust backpressure set with exhaust stack damper for baseline tests
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Figure 5 shows the inlet temperature over time for the degreened device, and Figure 6 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.
450
400
350 -
300 -
250 -
200
150 -
100 -
50 -
Cold Start
Hot Start (avg. of 3)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Time (seconds)
Figure 5. Inlet temperature profile of degreened PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system.
Cold Start
Hot Start (avg. of 3)
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Time (seconds)
800
900
1000
1100 1200
Figure 6. Inlet temperature profile of aged PCRT2®1000, v.2 system.
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Soluble Organic Fraction
On each test, the participate material was tested for soluble organic fraction (SOF). Table 5 reports the
results.
Table 5. Particulate Characterization—Soluble Organic Fraction from Each Test
Test Number
Test Type
PM
g
% SOF
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-C1
BASE-H1
BASE-H2
BASE-H3
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
1.83
2.02
2.03
2.33
34.0
30.0
28.0
24.0
Degreened PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a
2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-C1
0138-H1
0138-H2
0138-H3
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
0.793
0.881
0.956
1.01
15.0
15.0
12.0
2.00
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a
2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-C2
0079-H4
0079-H5
0079-H6
Cold Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
1.05
1.15
1.22
1.21
9.00
4.00
0.00
3.00
Brake-Specific Fuel Consumption
The fuel consumption was not measured directly during the engine testing. Rather, a calculated "carbon-
balance" fuel consumption rate was determined based on the measured exhaust flow rate and the carbon
content [i.e., the CO and the carbon dioxide (CO2)] in the exhaust gas analysis. The weighted brake-
specific fuel consumption (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 PCRT2® 1000, v.2 units installed.
10
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
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 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-C1
BASE-H1
Cold Start
Hot Start
8/7/2008
8/7/2008
0.405
0.392
0.246
0.238
0.394
0.239
BASE-H2
Hot Start
8/7/2008
0.390
0.237
0.392
0.238
BASE-H3
Hot Start
8/7/2008
0.389
0.237
0.392
0.238
Degreened PCRT2 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-C1
0138-H1
Cold Start
Hot Start
8/8/2008
8/8/2008
0.409
0.394
0.249
0.240
0.396
0.241
0138-H2
Hot Start
8/8/2008
0.391
0.238
0.394
0.240
0138-H3
Hot Start
8/8/2008
0.392
0.238
0.394
0.240
Mean
0.395
0.240
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-C2
0079-H4
Cold Start
Hot Start
8/14/2008
8/14/2008
0.410
0.398
0.249
0.242
0.400
0.243
0079-H5
Hot Start
8/14/2008
0.396
0.241
0.398
0.242
0079-H6
Hot Start
8/14/2008
0.399
0.243
0.400
0.243
Mean
0.399
0.243
Table 7. Summary of Fuel Consumption Reductions
Device type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
%
Reduction
-0.60
-1.7
95% Confidence
Limits
a
a
a The fuel consumption reduction cannot be distinguished from zero with
95% confidence.
11
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
4.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF EMISSIONS RESULTS
Table 8 reports the emissions from the tests that were conducted: baseline, with a degreened PCRT2®
1000, v.2 system installed and with an aged PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system installed. The concentration
measurements were converted to units of total grams per test for all species. The "bhp from work" (i.e.,
the integrated measured power during each test period) values are also shown in these tables.
Table 8. Emissions Data
Test
Number
Test
Type
PM
g
%
SOF
NOX
NO
NO2a
g
NO2/
NOX
%
HC
CO
g
CO2
kg
Work
kWh
(bhp-hr)
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-C1
BASE-H1
BASE-H2
BASE-H3
Cold
Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
1.83
2.02
2.03
2.33
34.0
30.0
28.0
24.0
109
95.4
94.8
94.2
94.4
82.2
81.5
80.8
15.0
13.2
13.2
13.4
13.7
13.9
14.0
14.2
5.81
6.99
7.16
7.37
29.8
24.7
24.4
24.7
13.9
13.5
13.5
13.4
17.8
(23.9)
17.9
(24.0)
17.9
(24.0)
17.9
(24.0)
Degreened PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-C1
0138-H1
0138-H2
0138-H3
Cold
Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
0.793
0.881
0.956
1.01
15.0
15.0
12.0
2.00
110
93.4
92.6
92.8
60.7
45.5
45.4
45.8
49.4
47.9
47.2
47.0
44.9
51.3
51.0
50.6
0.467
0.414
0.166
0.267
9.97
5.62
6.48
5.63
14.0
13.6
13.5
13.5
17.7
(23.7)
17.9
(23.9)
17.8
(23.9)
17.8
(23.9)
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-C2
0079-H4
0079-H5
0079-H6
Cold
Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
Hot Start
1.05
1.15
1.22
1.21
9.00
4.00
0.00
3.00
107
95.0
94.6
94.5
72.5
60.5
59.9
60.1
34.6
34.6
34.6
34.4
32.3
36.4
36.6
36.4
0.764
0.589
0.520
0.549
11.4
7.65
7.58
7.68
14.0
13.7
13.6
13.8
17.6
(23.6)
17.8
(23.9)
17.8
(23.9)
17.8
(23.9)
NO2 calculated as NOX-NO
12
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
For each pollutant/hot-start test combination, the transient composite-weighted emissions per work brake
horsepower-hour (bhp-hr) were then calculated following the fractional calculation for highway engines
as follows:
— • ECOLD -\ • (EHOT)
/ \ 1 -7 V /m
(EcOMP)m =1 2
(1)
— • We OLD H
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
WCOLD = cold-start bhp-hr
WHOT= hot-start bhp-hr
These composite-weighted emissions rates are shown in Table 9 and Table 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 Emissions Rates (U.S. Common Units)
Test
Number
Exhaust
PM
NOX
NO
N02a
g/bhp-hr
NO2/NOX
%
HC
CO
CO2
g/bhp-hr
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-H1
BASE-H2
BASE-H3
0.0832
0.0834
0.0940
4.06
4.03
4.01
3.50
3.47
3.45
0.561
0.561
0.567
13.8
13.9
14.1
0.284
0.290
0.298
1.06
1.05
1.06
565
564
562
Degreened PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-H1
0138-H2
0138-H3
0.0363
0.0391
0.0409
4.01
3.99
3.99
1.99
1.99
2.01
2.01
1.99
1.98
50.2
50.0
49.7
0.0176
0.00876
0.0124
0.261
0.292
0.262
571
568
569
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-H4
0079-H5
0079-H6
0.0478
0.0500
0.0496
4.06
4.04
4.03
2.61
2.59
2.59
1.45
1.45
1.44
35.7
35.9
35.7
0.0258
0.0233
0.0243
0.343
0.341
0.344
577
573
577
NO2 calculated as NOX-NO
13
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Table 10. Composite Weighted Emissions Rates (Metric Units)
Test
Number
Exhaust
PM
NOX
NO
N02a
g/kWh
NO2/NOX
%
HC
CO
CO2
g/kWh
Baseline with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
BASE-H1
BASE-H2
BASE-H3
0.112
0.112
0.126
5.44
5.40
5.38
4.694
4.653
4.627
0.752
0.752
0.760
13.8
13.9
14.1
0.381
0.389
0.400
1.42
1.41
1.42
758
756
754
Degreened PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0138-H1
0138-H2
0138-H3
0.0487
0.0524
0.0548
5.38
5.35
5.35
2.669
2.669
2.695
2.70
2.67
2.66
50.2
50.0
49.7
0.0236
0.0117
0.0166
0.350
0.392
0.351
766
762
763
Aged PCRT2® 1000, V.2 System with ULSD Fuel on a 2000 Cummins ISM350 Engine
0079-H4
0079-H5
0079-H6
0.0641
0.0671
0.0665
5.44
5.42
5.40
3.500
3.473
3.473
1.94
1.94
1.93
35.7
35.9
35.7
0.0346
0.0312
0.0326
0.460
0.457
0.461
774
768
774
a NO2 calculated as NOX-NO
The mean composite weighted emissions rates from Table 11 and Table 12 are the key values for the
verification test.. 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 Emissions Value
PM
NOX
HC
CO
CO2
g/bhp-hr
0.0868
0.0388
0.0491
4.03
3.99
4.04
0.290
0.0129
0.0244
1.05
0.272
0.343
564
569
576
Table 12. Summary of Verification Test Data (Metric Units)
Device type
Baseline
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
ULSD
Mean Composite Weighted Emissions Value
PM
NOX
HC
CO
CO2
g/kWh
0.116
0.0520
0.0659
5.41
5.36
5.42
0.390
0.0173
0.0328
1.41
0.364
0.459
756
763
772
14
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report
Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
Table 13 summarizes the emissions reductions that were achieved by the use of the PCRT2® 1000, v.2
system. These are the "verified emissions reductions" reported in Table 2 of the ETV Joint Verification
Statement.
Table 13. Summary of Verification Test Emissions Reductions
Device
Type
Degreened
Aged
Fuel
ULSD
ULSD
Mean Emissions
Reduction (%)
PM
55
43
NOX
0.99
-0.24
HC
96
92
CO
74
68
95% Confidence Limits on the Emissions
Reduction (%)
PM
37-73
26-61
NOX
a
a
HC
b
86-97
CO
73-75
66-69
3 The emissions reduction could not be distinguished from zero with 95% confidence.
b The emissions reduction could not be quantified or distinguished from 100% with 95% confidence.
4.1 Quality Assurance
The ETV of the PCRT2® 1000, v.2 system 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, 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 at that time. The equipment was appropriate for the verification testing, and it was
operating satisfactorily.
15
-------
Environmental Technology Verification Report Mobile Source Emission Control Devices
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 at:
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/etv/pubs/05 vp devrev.pdf (accessed January 7, 2009).
2. RTI International. 2008. Test-Specific Addendum to ETVMobile Source Test/QA Plan for Johnson
Mattheyfor the PCRT2 1000 System. Research Triangle Park, NC, August 9.
3. Southwest Research Institute. 2008. Environmental Technology Verification of PCRT2 1000. Final
Report. San Antonio, TX, November.
4. Southwest Research Institute. 2008. Audit of Data Quality for Environmental Technology Verification
ofPCRT2 1000. 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 at:
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/etv/pubs/05 tp diesel.pdf (accessed January 7, 2009).
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 at:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr 2003/iulqtr/pdf/40cfr86.1313-2007.pdf (accessed January 7, 2009).
7. 40 CFR, Part 86 (Protection of Environment: Control of Emissions from New and In-Use Highway
Vehicles and Engines), Subpart N. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/420b98002.pdf
(accessed January 7, 2009).
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 at:
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/05 vp emissions.pdf (accessed January 7, 2009).
16
------- |