SRI/USEPA-GHG-QAP-36
December 2004
Test and Quality Assurance
Plan
New Condensator, Inc. -
The Condensator Diesel Engine Retrofit
Crankcase Ventilation System
Prepared by:
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
Southern Research Institute
Under a Cooperative Agreement With
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been peer and administratively reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
-------
SRI/USEPA-GHG-QAP-36
December 2004
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
A U.S. EPA Sponsored Environmental Technology Verification ( jj^) Organization
Test and Quality Assurance Plan
for
New Condensator, Inc. -
The Condensator Diesel Engine Retrofit
Crankcase Ventilation System
Prepared By:
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
Southern Research Institute
PO Box 13825
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 USA
Telephone: 919/806-3456
Reviewed By:
New Condensator, Inc.
Southwest Research Institute
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development
^ indicates comments are integrated into Test Plan
-------
(this page intentionally left blank)
-------
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
A U.S. EPA Sponsored Environmental Technology Verification ( £jy ) Organization
Test and Quality Assurance Plan
for
New Condensator, Inc. -
The Condensator Diesel Engine Retrofit
Crankcase Ventilation System
This Test and Quality Assurance Plan has been reviewed and approved by the Greenhouse Gas
Technology Center Project Manager and Center Director, the U.S. EPA APPCD Project Officer, and the
U.S. EPA APPCD Quality Assurance Manager.
Tim Hansen Date
Deputy Director
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
Southern Research Institute
David Kirchgessner
APPCD Project Officer
U.S. EPA
Date
William Chatterton Date
Project Manager
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
Southern Research Institute
Robert Wright Date
APPCD Quality Assurance Manager
U.S. EPA
Richard Adamson Date
Quality Assurance Manager
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
Southern Research Institute
Test Plan Final: December 2004
-------
(this page intentionally left blank)
-------
Distribution List
New Condensator, Inc.
Jim Brock
Ed Loughran
Richard Roberts
U.S. EPA
David Kirchgessner
Bob Wright
Southern Research Institute
Stephen Piccot
William Chatterton
Tim Hansen
Richard Adamson
Southwest Research Institute
Robert Fanick
Mike Van Hecke
-------
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADQ
APPCD
Bhp
BSFC
CFR
CH4
CO
C02
cov
CVS
DEER
DQIG
DQO
EPA-ORD
ETV
FS
FTP
GHG Center
GVP
NCI
NIST
NO2
NOX
PEA
PM
ppmv
QA/QC
QMP
QPP
QSM
SOF
SOP
SwRI
THC
TQAP
TSA
audit of data quality
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
brake horsepower
brake specific fuel consumption
Code of Federal Regulations
methane
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
coefficient of variation
constant volume sampling
Department of Engine and Emissions Research
data quality indicator goals
data quality objective
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development
Environmental Technology Verification
full scale
Federal Test Procedure
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center
ETV Generic Verification Protocol
New Condensator, Inc.
National Institute of Standards and Technology
nitrogen dioxide
blend of NO, NO2, and other oxides of nitrogen
performance evaluation audit
paniculate matter
parts per million by volume
quality assurance / quality control
quality management plan
quality policy and procedures
quality systems manual
soluble organic fraction
standard operating procedure
Southwest Research Institute
total non-methane hydrocarbons (as carbon)
test and quality assurance plan
technical systems audit
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 BACKGROUND 1
1.2 SwRI TESTING QUALIFICATIONS 2
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS TQAP 3
1.4 REFERENCED SwRI QUALITY DOCUMENTS 3
2.0 TEST DESCRIPTION AND TEST OBJECTIVES 5
2.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION 5
2.2 TEST DESCRIPTION 6
2.2.1 Overview 6
2.3 TEST ENGINE SELECTION AND SPECIFICATIONS 7
2.4 BASELINE ENGINE PREPARATION 8
2.4.1 Engine Inspection 8
2.4.2 Engine Oil Change 8
2.5 ENGINE MODIFICATION WITH THE CONDENSATOR TECHNOLOGY 9
2.6 ENGINE TESTING PROCEDURES 9
2.6.1 Break-in Period 9
2.6.2 Engine Mapping. 10
2.6.3 Test Cycle 10
2.6.4 Engine Preconditioning 11
2.6.5 Emissions and Fuel Consumption Testing 11
2.7 ADDITIONAL TEST CONSIDERATIONS 12
2.7.1 Test Fuel 12
2.7.2 Back-Pressure 12
2.7.3 Durability 12
2.8 TEST ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES 12
2.8.1 EPA 13
2.8.2 Southern Research Institute 14
2.8.3 SwRI 15
2.8.4 NCI 15
2.9 SCHEDULE AND MILESTONES 16
2.10 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS 16
3.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES 17
3.1 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES 17
4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 21
4.1 EXHAUST GAS SAMPLING SYSTEM 21
4.2 CRANKCASE BLOW-BY EXHAUST SAMPLING 22
4.3 FILTER WEIGHING 22
4.4 GASEOUS ANALYZERS 23
5.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY 23
6.0 DATA QUALITY INDICATOR GOALS AND QA/QC CHECKS 23
7.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY 27
8.0 DATA ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT 28
9.0 INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AUDITS 30
-------
9.1 TECHNICAL SYSTEMS AUDIT 30
9.2 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AUDITS 30
9.3 AUDIT OF DATA QUALITY 30
9.4 EXTERNAL ASSESSMENTS 31
9.5 INTERNAL ASSESSMENTS 31
10.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION 32
11.0 DATA REDUCTION, REVIEW, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING 32
12.0 REPORTING OF DATA QUALITY INDICATORS 32
13.0 DEVIATIONS FROM GVP 32
14.0 REFERENCED QUALITY DOCUMENTS 33
14.1 EPA-ETV 33
14.2 GHGTC 33
14.3 SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE 34
Appendix A: Test Log Forms and Checklists
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development (EPA-ORD) operates
the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program to facilitate the deployment of innovative
technologies through performance verification and information dissemination. The ETV program's goal
is to further environmental protection by substantially accelerating the acceptance and use of improved
and innovative environmental technologies. Congress funds ETV in response to the belief that there are
many viable environmental technologies that are not being used for the lack of credible third-party
performance data. The performance data developed under this program will allow technology buyers,
financiers, and permitters in the United States and abroad to make more informed decisions regarding
environmental technology purchase and use.
The Greenhouse Gas Technology Center (GHG Center) is one of six ETV organizations. EPA's partner
verification organization, Southern Research Institute (Southern), manages the GHG Center. The GHG
Center conducts verification testing of promising GHG mitigation and monitoring technologies. It
develops verification protocols, conducts field tests, collects and interprets field and other data, obtains
independent peer-review input, and reports findings. The GHG Center conducts performance evaluations
according to externally reviewed verification Test and Quality Assurance Plans (TQAPs) and established
protocols for quality assurance (QA).
Volunteer stakeholder groups guide the GHG Center's verification activities. These stakeholders advise
on specific technologies most appropriate for testing, help disseminate results, and review TQAPs and
technology Verification Reports. National and international environmental policy, technology, and
regulatory experts participate in the GHG Center's Executive Stakeholder Group. The group also
includes industry trade organizations, environmental technology finance groups, governmental
organizations, and other interested parties. Industry-specific stakeholders peer-review key documents
prepared by the GHG Center and provide verification testing strategy guidance in those areas related to
their expertise.
One sector of significant interest to GHG Center stakeholders is transportation - particularly technologies
that result in fuel economy improvements. The Department of Energy reports that in 2001, "other trucks"
(all trucks other than light-duty trucks) consuming diesel fuel emitted approximately 72.5 million metric
tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). These emissions increase to 107.5 million metric tons when considering all
diesel vehicles in the transportation sector. Small fuel efficiency or emission rate improvements are
expected to have a significant beneficial impact on nationwide greenhouse gas emissions.
New Condensator, Inc. (NCI) of Grass Valley, California owns the rights to a technology that is planned
for use as a retrofit device for existing light and heavy duty diesel engines. The Condensator technology
is applicable to diesel engines that have open crankcase ventilation systems. The Condensator is designed
to collect and filter the blow-by exhaust from the crankcase and re-route exhaust vapors back to the
engine air intake, essentially converting the engine to a closed crankcase system. NCI claims that
enhanced fuel economy, reduced opacity, and 100% containment of the blow-by gases are the benefits of
using this technology.
NCI wishes to verify performance of the Condensator technology for reductions in fuel consumption and
emissions as a retrofit modification to a heavy-duty open crankcase diesel engine. NCI is a suitable
-------
verification candidate considering its potentially significant beneficial environmental quality impacts and
ETV stakeholder interest in verified transportation sector emission reduction technologies.
This test will be conducted under the Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts,
Particulate Filters, and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway andNonroad Use Diesel
Engine because of the parameters to be measured. The document is an ETV Generic Verification
Protocol (GVP) developed by the Air Pollution Control Technology Verification Center. This GVP
makes use of the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) as listed in 40 CFR Part 86 for highway engines as a
standard test protocol. Performance will be assessed using the GVP test sequence by comparing the fuel
consumption and emission rates measured on a heavy-duty test engine before and after installation of the
NCI Condensator technology. Verification testing will be directed by the GHG Center. The tests will take
place at Southwest Research Institute's (SwRI) Department of Engine and Emissions Research (DEER) in
San Antonio, TX. The test program is described in the following sections. Any deviations from the
GVP are noted in Section 13 of this TQAP.
This TQAP specifies verification parameters and the rationale for their selection. It contains the
verification approach, data quality objectives (DQOs), and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
procedures. It will also guide test implementation, document creation, data analysis, and interpretation.
This TQAP has been peer-reviewed by NCI, SwRI, and the EPA-ETV QA Manager. The EPA-APPCD
Project Officer provided final approval of the TQAP. The TQAP meets the requirements of the GHG
Center's Quality Management Plan (QMP) once approved and signed by the responsible parties listed on
the front of this document. The TQAP is available on GHG Center internet site at www.sri-rtp.com and
the ETV program site at www.epa.gov/etv.
The GHG Center will prepare a verification report and verification statement upon field test completion.
The same organizations listed above will review the report and statement, followed by EPA-ORD
technical review. The GHG Center Director and EPA-ORD Laboratory Director will sign the verification
statement when this review is complete and the GHG Center will post the final documents as described
above.
1.2 SWRI TESTING QUALIFICATIONS
The GHG Center has selected SwRI to conduct the testing for this verification. The following describes
the accreditations and registrations of SwRI relevant to this TQAP.
The SwRI DEER is registered to International Organization for Standardization 9002 "Model for Quality
Assurance in Production and Installation." This independently assessed quality system provides the basis
for quality procedures that are applied to every project conducted in the DEER. DEER is accredited to
ISO/IEC Guide 25 "General Requirements for the Competency of Calibration and Testing Laboratories"
and EN 45001, "General Criteria for the Operation of Test Laboratories." The American Association for
Laboratory Accreditation Certificate Number 0702-01 accredits DEER to perform evaluations of
automotive fluids, fuel emissions, automotive components, engine and power-train performance and
durability using stationary engine dynamometer test stands (light-duty, non-road, and heavy-duty) and
vehicle dynamometer facilities, and automotive fleets (see http://www.a21a2.net/scopepdf/0702-01.pdf).
The certificate accredits DEER to use specific standards and procedures, including dynamometer
procedures for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and participate matter. DEER has
also: (1) achieved Ford Tier 1 status for providing engineering services, (2) received the Ford Ql Quality
Award and the Ford Customer-Driven Quality Award, and (3) maintains its status as a Caterpillar-
certified supplier.
-------
SwRI has conducted testing for a previous GHG Center technology verification program. Testing was
conducted on a light-duty gasoline-fueled vehicle. SwRI has also conducted the testing for several heavy-
duty diesel verification tests for another ETV Center. The EPA has reviewed the TQAP for these tests
and the DEER quality system and verified that the information conforms to the specific required elements
of the [EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/R-5J, the ETV QMP, and the
general requirements of the GVP.
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS TQAP
This TQAP addresses ETV technology testing at SwRI under the applicable GVP. It is deliberately
organized to parallel the structure of EPA QA/R-5. Since all laboratory data will be generated by SwRI,
much of this TQAP also parallels the SwRI Test/QA Plan for the Verification Testing of Diesel Exhaust
Catalysts, Paniculate Filters, and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway and Nonroad
Use Diesel Engines (Version 1.0, April 8, 2002; SwRI QPP ) which was developed based on the GVP.
The referenced SwRI QPP was developed for ETV testing under the current GVP and is posted on the
ETV website. Differences between the SwRI QPP and this TQAP reflect organizational differences and
the specific role of the GHG center as the verification organization on this test. This TQAP also contains
test-specific details of the NCI Condensator technology, its implementation, verification parameters,
schedule, and test design. These details are generally inserted in the appropriate sections of the main text
rather than in a test-specific attachment to the existing SwRI QPP.
This TQAP also describes testing under the framework of the GVP and the relevant FTP (from 40 CFR
86 Subpart N for highway engines), and both documents will be cited as applicable by reference where
such citation is clear. This TQAP also describes how the FTP will be specifically implemented for this
verification.
1.4 REFERENCED SWRI QUALITY DOCUMENTS
Several relevant internal SwRI documents will be incorporated by reference in this TQAP, including the
(1) DEER Quality System Manual (QSM), (2) Quality Policy and Procedures (QPPs), and (3) Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs). These internal quality documents, unlike the GVP and FTP references, are
considered proprietary to SwRI and are not publicly available. However, they will be made available for
review during the on-site assessment of the DEER technical and quality systems, and for test-specific on-
site audits by the GHG or EPA QA personnel. Several of the referenced SOPs were previously reviewed
by GHG Center staff as part of a previous verification test and found adequate by the GHG Center QA
manager as discussed in the TSA report for that test. Certain sections of this document reference specific
SwRI quality documents that describe DEER's conformance with specific QPP-required elements. These
references do not supersede the applicable GVP and FTP citations, but are included to document the
specific implementations of these directions by SwRI staff.
-------
-------
2.0
TEST DESCRIPTION AND TEST OBJECTIVES
2.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
Many on and off-road heavy duty diesel engines have an open crankcase and blow-by tube, especially on
older vehicles. On these engines, crankcase blow-by is emitted directly to the atmosphere through the
blow-by tube, resulting in emissions of particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons
(THC), and other pollutants. NCI's Condensator is designed to capture and filter these emissions. This
technology is applicable to light- to heavy-duty trucks, both on- and off-road, and is also available for
marine and generator applications. The Condensator is designed to collect and filter the blow-by exhaust
from the crankcase and re-route exhaust vapors back to the engine air intake. This removes particulate
from the blow-by exhaust and creates a closed crankcase system. NCI claims that enhanced fuel
economy, reduced opacity, reduced emissions, and containment of the blow-by gases are the benefits of
using this technology.
The NCI Condensator consists of a blow-by manifold, two Condensator containers, and associated tubing
to route filtered exhaust gases back to the engine intake. The two Condensator containers are arranged in
parallel and hold the collected waste/sludge. Each contains a silica bead separator system that filters the
crankcase exhaust. Rubber hoses are used to connect the Condensator to the air intake and blow-by tube.
Hose clamps keep the hoses in place. NCI requires the Condensator unit to be installed away from
extreme heat such as exhaust manifolds. NCI states that system efficiency typically increases as the
connecting hose length decreases. Figure 1-1 illustrates typical Condensator installations.
Caterpillar 3406
Detroit Diesel Series 60
Figure 1-1. NCI Condensator on Typical Heavy Duty Diesel Engines
According to NCI, crankcase exhaust comes in contact with silica bead separators in the Condensator,
resulting in a molecular separation process where large, heavier oil molecules condense and collect in the
Condensator containers. Water and acid present with the oil will also drop into the containers. Gaseous
emissions, including hydrocarbons, continue through the system and are vented back into the engine air
intake. Waste oil and condensate collected in the Condensator containers should be emptied during
-------
vehicle oil changes. This is done by unscrewing the container from the head and properly disposing of
the waste. The separators are cleaned periodically in a solvent to dislodge and remove any carbon or
sludge that may have attached to the silica beads.
By eliminating the blow-by emissions point, the environmental impact of the Condensator is immediate.
NCI claims that engine performance and exhaust emissions will further improve after a break-in period of
around 1800 miles. The technology was previously tested by Automotive Testing and Development
Services, Inc. (ATDS) in California in March-April, 2004 where it was demonstrated to reduce total
vehicle diesel emissions by 24% for CO and 20% for PM. Emissions of THC, NOX, and CO2 and fuel
consumption changed 1% or less (increase or decrease). According to NCI, several other tests have
shown fuel economy savings in the range of 15 to 25%. These tests were conducted according to the
provisions of 40 CFR 86 and/or California Title 13 for submission to California Air Resources Board
(CARB). In addition to this test, previous testing with the U.S. Department of the Navy indicated fuel
economy improvements in the range of 4% to 27%.
NCI states that this technology will provide the following benefits:
• Increase fuel efficiency in open crankcase diesel engines;
• Lower emissions in diesel engines, especially PM, CO and hydrocarbons;
• Save operating costs with lower fuel costs and increased vehicle mileage; and
• Be applicable to any diesel engines with open crankcase including light and heavy duty, on and
off road, and marine engines.
2.2 TEST DESCRIPTION
2.2.1 Overview
This TQAP describes testing of the Condensator technology under the GVP. The general test sequence
described in GVP Sections 5.2.2 and 5.4.2 is applicable to this test. Testing is being completed to verify
the performance of the NCI Condensator system in reducing exhaust emissions and improving fuel
economy of an open crankcase heavy-duty diesel engine. The exhaust from the engine will be analyzed
for emissions of NOX, PM, THC, CO, CO2, and CH4. For the baseline engine, this will include emissions
of PM and THC from the crankcase blow-by tube. Additional measurements and calculation procedures
will be used to determine fuel economy of the engine over specified test cycles. As a secondary
parameter, up to six collected PM samples will be analyzed for soluble organic fraction (SOF) to
demonstrate the amount of SOF captured by the Condensator. The testing after installation of the
Condensator will be conducted twice including once immediately after installation and preconditioning,
and again after a 45 hour break-in period.
The general sequence of test events follows. Detailed descriptions of each test phase are provided in
Sections 2.2 through 2.4:
1. Obtain a representative test engine and inspect the engine;
2. Change the engine oil and filter;
3. Map the baseline engine (develop torque curve);
4. Precondition the baseline engine;
5. Soak the baseline engine;
-------
6. Perform baseline engine testing for exhaust emissions, blow-by emission, and fuel consumption;
7. Install the NCI Condensator system;
8. Map the modified engine;
9. Precondition the modified engine;
10. Soak the modified engine;
11. Perform modified engine testing for exhaust emissions and fuel consumption;
12. Perform 45 hour modified engine break-in period;
13. Repeat the modified engine testing for exhaust emissions and fuel consumption;
14. Evaluate the test data for data quality; and
15. Complete additional testing as necessary to achieve data quality objectives.
The verification test generally requires operation of a test engine on an engine dynamometer. The engine
dynamometer simulates operating conditions of the engine by applying loads to the engine and measuring
the amount of power that the engine can produce against the load. The engine is operated on the
dynamometer over a simulated duty cycle that mimics a typical on-road heavy-duty vehicle. This is the
"transient" cycle heavy-duty FTP specified in 40 CFR 86.1333.
Exhaust emissions from the engine are collected through a constant volume sampling (CVS) system and
then analyzed to determine emission concentrations. An adjustable-speed turbine blower in the CVS
dilutes the exhaust with ambient air while the vehicle operates on the dynamometer. This dilution
prevents the exhaust moisture from condensing and provides controllable sampling conditions. A sample
pump and a control system transfers diluted exhaust to emission analyzers, sample bags, or particulate
sampling systems (filters). Samples are collected at constant sampling rates.
For the baseline testing, blow-by emissions will also be quantified including THC and PM. The blow-by
emissions testing will be conducted following procedures developed by SwRI (SOP 07-043). These
procedures were specifically designed to measure PM and THC emissions from an open crankcase blow-
by tube. Total baseline engine PM and THC emissions will be the sum of the PM and THC emissions
measured from the engine exhaust and the blow-by tube. After installation of the Condensator, the blow-
by exhaust is eliminated.
2.3 TEST ENGINE SELECTION AND SPECIFICATIONS
The diesel engine used in this test program will be a Cummins N-14 370-HP (rurbocharged) engine
manufactured in 1997. This engine was selected for testing because it represents a large segment of
heavy-duty diesel engines currently on the road for which the Condensator technology is intended. The
Condensator will also be applicable to other types of heavy duty diesel engines. The test engine is located
at the SwRI facility and SwRI has verified that the engine has not been rebuilt or modified, and is
operating reasonably within original OEM specifications.
Cummins states that there were over 150,000 N-14 engines on the road in 2003. More than 100,000
additional units were supplied to the military for a variety of logistical and special-purpose equipment
applications. The engine has an advanced electric control module (ECM) that provides improved engine
controls. The specifications for a Cummins N-14 370 are provided in Table 2-1. The N-14 series of
engines includes engines in a 330 - 525 HP range. The specifications provided in Table 2-1 are for a
370-HP engine, but many of these parameters apply to the entire HP range of N-14 by Cummins engines.
-------
Table 2-1. Cummins N-14 370 HP Specifications
Parameter
Advertised HP
Peak Torque
Governed Speed
Clutch Engagement Torque
Number of Cylinders
Bore and Stroke
Engine Displacement
Compression Ratio
Operating Cycles
Oil System Capacity*
Coolant Capacity (engine only)
Net Weight with Standard
Accessories, Dry
Weight per Power
Value
(SI units)
370 Bhp
1255 Ib.-ft
1800/2100 rpm
900 Ib.-ft
6
5.5X6.0 in
855 cu. in.
18.5:1
4
11.0 U.S. gallons
20 U.S. qts.
2805 Ibs.
8.01 Ibs/HP
Value
(Metric units)
276 kW
2020 N-m
1800/2100 rpm
1220 N-m
6
(140 X 152 mm)
14 L
18.5:1
4
42 L
21 L
1272 kg
4.87 kg/kW
*with combination lube filter
2.4 BASELINE ENGINE PREPARATION
2.4.1 Engine Inspection
A Cummins representative will visually inspect the visible parts of the engine to ensure that:
• the engine is in good operating condition,
• there is not any excessive wear on visible parts,
• there are no damaged or broken parts, and
• there is not any excessive buildup on visible engine parts.
The Cummins representative will document any potential problems noted during the inspection and
present these to the GHG Center field team leader. The field team leader will determine whether the test
engine is acceptable, needs parts replaced, or should not be used for testing based on the results of the
inspection. The field team leader will also document the engine condition. All repairs to the baseline
engine will be documented by the Cummins representative and field team leader.
2.4.2 Engine Oil Change
The test engine's oil will be changed prior to baseline testing. Technicians will change the engine oil
using the standard manufacturer oil change procedure. This ensures that the engine oil will not impact the
performance of the engine from the baseline to modified engine test. A suitable grade of engine oil will be
used based on manufacturer specifications.
The technicians performing the engine oil change will document the oil change, including the quantity
and type of oil used. Documentation will be signed by the technicians and copies provided to the field
-------
team leader. The engine lubricant will not be changed again as significant wear of the lubricant will not
occur during the test period. Therefore, the same engine oil will be used throughout the entire test
(baseline and modified engine).
2.5 ENGINE MODIFICATION WITH THE CONDENSATOR TECHNOLOGY
The test engine will be modified by installing the NCI Condensator system after baseline engine testing is
complete. A Cummins technician will be on-site to perform all equipment installation and engine
mechanical work on the test engine. The GVP requires that NCI provide written descriptions of the
procedures for installation and post-installation engine adjustments required for optimum operation [GVP,
Section 2.2.3]. NCI personnel will be present for oversight and consultation during the installation of the
Condensator technology.
Installation of the Condensator is fairly straightforward and does not require major modifications to the
engine. The Condensator blow-by manifold is attached to the crankcase blow-by tube using rubber tubing
and hose clamps. The manifold directs the crankcase exhaust through the two Condensator vessels
arranged in series, and gases leaving the Condensator are directed to the engine air intake using additional
rubber tubing. No additional modifications or adjustments to the engine are needed.
NCI will approve the installation and modified engine testing will commence once installation and
adjustment is complete.
2.6 ENGINE TESTING PROCEDURES
The baseline engine will be installed on the engine dynamometer after engine preparations are completed,
engine installation is completed, and SOPs 07-001 (Power Validation for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines)
and 07-002 (Power Mapping for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines) are addressed. The engine test procedure
is described in the following sections.
2.6.1 Break-in Period
The baseline engine should go through a break-in period to ensure proper break-in of the new engine oil.
Break-in is completed by operating the engine at specified conditions for a specified time period. The
cycle operates at various engine conditions, including idle, peak torque, rated speed, and high idles. The
actual break-in time for the baseline tests will be documented by SwRI. This allows the engine to
stabilize and eliminates any effects of break-in on engine performance. The GVP (Section 5.2.6)
specifies a range of 25 -125 hours for equipment de-greening. Since only fresh oil is added to the engine
and no other mechanical changes will be performed on the baseline engine, a break-in period of 25 hours
is specified here.
NCI claims that engine performance is improved immediately after installation of the Condensator and
does not specify any required de-greening period. However, NCI also claims that performance of the
engine and Condensator will improve after around 1800 miles (or 45 hours) of operation. Therefore, two
sets of tests will be conducted on the modified engine. The first will be conducted with no break-in
period. The engine will be preconditioned and soaked (as described in Section 2.6.4), and then
immediately tested. Testing will then be repeated on the modified engine after a 45 hour Condensator
break-in period. The actual break-in time and operating conditions will be documented by SwRI.
-------
2.6.2 Engine Mapping
Engine mapping is a procedure that is completed to generate a torque curve for the test engine. It is
generated by running the engine at full throttle at increasing engine speed from curb idle through the
manufacturer's rated speed. The engine torque is measured at each speed. The torque curve is
subsequently used to generate data for the transient test cycle for that specific engine. The engine
mapping procedure follows the procedure specified at 40 CFR 86 Subpart N, Sections 86.1332 and 86-
1333.
Engine mapping will be completed after the break-in procedure is completed for both the baseline and
modified engine. The baseline engine map obtained will be compared to the manufacturer-specified
engine map. Significant differences identified between the two maps will lead to an investigation of the
cause of this discrepancy. Corrective actions will be reviewed once the cause is identified. The required
corrective action will be addressed and considered prior to accepting the engine for further testing. The
engine may be labeled as unacceptable for the test if fundamental problems with the engine are identified
based on the engine map. A new test engine would then be located.
In order to allow a fair comparison of engine performance with the baseline and modified engine, the
torque curve developed during the baseline mapping will be used to develop the FTP duty cycle for all
testing periods. Mapping results will be reported for both the baseline and modified engines only so that
potential users can see changes in engine performance that may have occurred due to the Condensator.
2.6.3 Test Cycle
The test engine is operated on the dynamometer over a transient driving cycle that simulates the operation
of a typical on-road heavy-duty vehicle. This test cycle is the heavy-duty FTP specified in 40 CFR
86.1333. It is typically used for emissions testing of heavy-duty on-road engines. The FTP cycle takes
into account the operation of a variety of heavy-duty trucks and buses, and includes simulation of traffic
on roads and expressways in and around cities. The average speed is about 30 km/h and the equivalent
distance traveled is 10.3 km. The cycle lasts 1200 s [dieselnet: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards
/cycles/ftp_trans.html].
The test cycle is specified as a normalized cycle. The data points specified in the FTP are the percent of
maximum torque and speed over time. The specific transient cycle for the test engine is calculated based
on these values and the engine mapping values for test engine torque vs. engine speed. One complete
FTP cycle consists of two test segments. The first is a "cold-start test" completed after the engine has
been "soaked" (not operating) for a specified time period (overnight). The second period is a "hot-start"
test. This is the same cycle as the cold start test, begun 20 minutes after the completion of the cold-start
test, while the engine is still "hot".
The specific FTP cycle used for both the baseline and modified engines will be calculated for this
verification test using the baseline engine mapping results even though engine mapping is completed for
both the baseline and modified engines.
Testing of each engine configuration will consist of a single cold-start test, followed by the required 20-
minute soak period, and a minimum of three hot-start tests. A 20-minute soak period is required between
each hot-start test.
10
-------
2.6.4 Engine Preconditioning
The test engine will be preconditioned after engine mapping is completed. Preconditioning is completed
by running the engine through the FTP test cycle that it will be seeing for the actual test procedure. Both
the baseline and modified engine will be preconditioned for this test by running the engine through the
transient FTP cycle three times. The transient cycles, each 20 minutes long, are run concurrently without
any soak period. Once the preconditioning runs are completed, the engine is turned off and allowed to
"soak" overnight. The length of the soak period between the end of preconditioning and beginning of test
runs will be approximately the same for both the baseline and modified test engine.
2.6.5 Emissions and Fuel Consumption Testing
The emissions and fuel consumption tests will be completed after the overnight soak following the
preconditioning runs, and again after the 45 hour break-in period. The test runs will consist of operating
the test engine over the specified FTP test cycle for one cold-start test, and a minimum of three hot-start
tests for both the baseline and modified engine. Additional hot-start tests may be added depending on the
data quality of the initial test runs as well as reaching agreement between all parties and funding agencies
involved in the test campaign. Total minimum test duration is two hours and twenty minutes, consisting
of one cold-start test, three hot-start tests, and three soak periods, each twenty minutes long.
The brake -specific fuel consumption (BSFC) evaluated during the test is a measure of engine efficiency
and is a primary verification parameter for this test series during the FTP transient cycles. BSFC is the
ratio of the engine fuel consumption to the engine power output and has units of grams of fuel per
kilowatt-hour (g/kWh) or pounds mass of fuel per brake horsepower-hour (Ib/Bhp-hr). The calculation of
BSFC is shown at 40 CFR 86.1342-90. The equation and supporting parameters are:
where: BSFC = brake-specific fuel consumption in pounds of fuel per brake horsepower-hour,
Ibs/Bhp-hr
M c = mass of fuel used by the engine during the cold start test, Ibs
M h = mass of fuel used by the engine during the hot start test, Ibs
Bhp-hrc = total brake horsepower-hours (brake horsepower integrated with respect to
time) for the cold start test
Bhp-hrh = total brake horsepower-hours (brake horsepower integrated with respect to
time) for the hot start test
The Bhp-hr values for each test are calculated using the engine torque and speed data measured on the
dynamometer. The mass of fuel, M, used during each test is calculated via a carbon balance method
using the emission rates and fuel properties determined during testing. These rather complex calculations
are specified in 40 CFR 86.1342-90 and not repeated here. Generally, the calculations rely on the
measured engine exhaust mass emissions of THC, CO, and CO2 and the measured test fuel carbon weight
fraction, specific gravity, and net heating value. These fuel properties are cited on the fuel certificate of
analyses and are determined using the following methods:
• Specific gravity -ASTMD1298
• Carbon weight fraction - ASTM D3343
• Net heating value - ASTM D3348
11
-------
Exhaust emissions will be analyzed for NOX, PM, THC, CO, CO2, and CH4 during the test period. Blow-
by emissions of PM and THC will also be determined during the baseline testing. Engine and
dynamometer operating conditions will be recorded. Sampling system, emission analyzer, and test cell
operations will also be monitored. At the conclusion of testing, up to six of the collected PM samples
(three from the blow-by tube and three from the exhaust) will be analyzed for SOF. This secondary
verification parameter will provide an indication of how much of the SOF emissions are captured by the
Condensator technology.
Each test run will be followed by evaluation of data quality in accordance with the requirements of
Section 3. Achievement of all data quality indicator goals and FTP requirements will allow the field team
leader to declare a run valid. A test run where required data quality indicator goals are not met will cause
the test run to be invalidated and repeated immediately (if a hot-start).
2.7 ADDITIONAL TEST CONSIDERATIONS
2.7.1 Test Fuel
Testing will use standard diesel test fuel (40 CFR 86.1313-98) with sulfur in the range of 300-500 ppm.
The GHG Center will review fuel analyses and verify the fuel to be within specifications before the start
of engine testing. The reference for test fuel requirements in the GVP is Section 5.2.10.
2.7.2 Back-Pressure
Baseline engine back-pressure will be set to the value required by the applicable FTP (highway or
nonroad) within the test cell. The back-pressure of the retrofit control technology may be greater than
the FTP requirement once it has been installed for the ETV test. The ETV test would then be conducted
without adding additional back-pressure; if not, the test cell will be adjusted to meet the FTP
requirements. Back-pressure of a retrofit control technology may affect the performance of an engine, so
the ETV test will measure and report back-pressure with the control device at full load and rated speed.
Back-pressure will be measured and reported for both the baseline engine (as set for the FTP test without
the technology installed) and the engine with the Condensator installed.
2.7.3 Durability
The aged technology test described in the GVP will not be part of this verification test due to time and
budgetary constraints [GVP, Section 5.2.9]. Durability testing may be completed in a subsequent testing
phase if this verification test program is successful. This is mentioned in Section 13 as a deviation from
the GVP.
2.8 TEST ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The EPA has overall responsibility for the ETV Program for the GHG Center. Southern is EPA's
verification partner in this effort. SwRI is the testing organization selected for this test. Management and
testing are performed in accordance with procedures and protocols defined by a series of quality
management documents. These include (see Section 14.0) in order of precedence:
12
-------
• EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5);
• EPA's Quality and Management Plan for the overall ETV program (EPA QMP);
• QMP for the GHG Center;
• SwRI's Quality System Manual - 2000 (QSM);
• DEER's Quality System Manual (QSM);
• The GVP for Verification Testing of Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Particulate Filters, and Engine
Modification Control Technologies for Highway and Nonroad Use Diesel Engines; and
• This TQAP.
SwRI will conduct field verification and analyze data. Southern will prepare a verification report and
statement. The various management and QA responsibilities are divided between EPA, Southern, and
SwRI key project personnel as defined below. The lines of authority between key personnel for this
project are shown on the project organization chart in Figure 2-1. Project management responsibilities are
divided among the EPA, Southern, and SwRI staff as described below.
Robert Wright
US EPA APPCD
QA Manager
David Kirchgessner
US EPA
APPCD Project
Officer
Timothy Hansen
GHG Center
Deputy Director
Bill Chatterton
GHG Center
Project Manager
and Field Team
Leader
Robert Fanick
SwRI Project
Manager
Richard Adamson
GHG Center QA
Manager
Bret Christiansen
White Sands
Mike Van Hecke
SwRI QA Manager
Figure 2-1. Project Organization
2.8.1 EPA
2.8.1.1 Project Management
The EPA Project Manager, David Kirchgessner, has overall EPA responsibility for the GHG Center. He is
responsible for obtaining EPA's final approval of project TQAPs and reports.
2.8.1.2 Quality Manager
The EPA Quality Manager for the GHG Center is Robert Wright of EPA's Air Pollution Prevention and
Control Division (APPCD). His responsibilities include:
• Communicate quality systems requirements, quality procedures, and quality issues to the EPA
Project Manager and the GHG Project Manager;
13
-------
• Review and approve GHG Center quality systems documents to verify conformance with the
quality provisions of the ETV quality systems documents;
• Conduct performance evaluations of verification tests, as appropriate;
• Provide assistance to GHG Center personnel in resolving QA issues;
• Review and approve this TQAP;
• Review and approve the verification report and statement for each technology tested under this
TQAP; and
2.8.2 Southern Research Institute
2.8.2.1 GHG Center Deputy Director
Southern's GHG Center has overall planning responsibility and will ensure successful verification test
implementation. The GHG Center will:
• coordinate all activities;
• develop, monitor, and manage schedules; and
• ensure the achievement of high-quality independent testing and reporting.
Mr. Timothy Hansen is the GHG Center Deputy Director. He will ensure that staff and resources are
sufficient and available to complete this verification. He will review the TQAP to ensure consistency
with ETV operating principles. He will oversee GHG Center staff activities and provide management
support where needed. Mr. Hansen will sign the verification statement along with the EPA-ORD
Laboratory Director.
2.8.2.2 GHG Center Project Manager
Mr. Bill Chatterton will serve as the Project Manager for the GHG Center. His responsibilities include:
• drafting the TQAP and verification report;
• overseeing the field team leader's data collection activities, and
• ensuring data quality objectives (DQOs) are met prior to completion of testing.
The project manager will have full authority to suspend testing should a situation arise that could affect
the health or safety of any personnel. He will also have the authority to suspend testing if the DQIGs
described in Section 3.0 are not being met. He may resume testing when problems are resolved in both
cases. He will be responsible for maintaining communication with NCI, SwRI, EPA, and stakeholders..
2.8.2.3 GHG Center Field Team Leader
Mr. Chatterton will also serve as the Field Team Leader. He will supervise all SwRI testing activities to
ensure conformance with the TQAP. Mr. Chatterton will assess test data quality and will have the
authority to repeat tests as determined necessary to ensure achievement of data quality goals. He will
perform on-site activities required for data quality audits under the direction of the GHG Center QA
Manager and perform other QA/QC procedures as described in Section 3.0. He will also communicate
with the SwRI Program and Quality Managers to coordinate the internal audit activities of the SwRI
Quality Manager with those of the GHG Center. Mr. Chatterton will communicate test results to the
deputy director at the completion of each test run. The field team leader and deputy director will then
determine if sufficient test runs have been conducted to report statistically valid fuel economy
improvements.
14
-------
2.8.2.4 GHG Center Quality Manager
Southern's QA Manager, Dr. Richard Adamson, is responsible for ensuring that all verification tests are
performed in compliance with the QA requirements of the GHG Center QMP, GVPs, and TQAP. He has
review this TQAP. He has reviewed the applicable elements of the SwRI Quality System and approved
the quality requirements for implementation by SwRI technical and quality staff on this test. He will also
review the verification test results and ensure that applicable internal assessments are conducted as
described in Section 9.5. He will reconcile the DQOs and MQOs at the conclusion of testing and will
conduct or supervise the ADQ. In addition, the QA manager will review the results of the PEA that is
administered by the field team leader. Dr. Adamson will report all internal reviews, DQO reconciliation,
the ADQ, the PEA, and any corrective action results directly to the GHG Center Deputy Director who
will provide copies to the project manager for corrective action as applicable and citation in the final
verification report. He will review and approve the final verification report and statement. He is
administratively independent from the GHG Center Deputy Director.
2.8.3 SwRI
2.8.3.1 SwRI Program Manager
Mr. Bob Fanick is the SwRI Program Manager for this test program. He will be the primary contact for
SwRI and will be responsible for set-up and testing of the vehicle. He will also review the TQAP and
report.
2.8.3.2 SwRI Quality Manager
Mr. Mike Van Hecke plays a central role in the introduction, implementation, and consistent application
of continuous quality improvement at the DEER. He fulfills the role as quality management
representative for SwRI and conducts audits of all pertinent quality standards to ensure compliance. He is
administratively independent of the unit generating the data and conducts QA activities as specified in
SwRI's internal SOPs. He will conduct these internal QA activities on this test as described in Section 9
and report results to the GHG Center QA Manager. However, these activities do not replace or eliminate
the need for the GHG Center internal QA reviews and activities outlined in Section 2.8.2.4 above.
2.8.3.3 Support Personnel
All persons supporting the project will be qualified as prescribed by SwRI QPP 10 (Training and
Motivation).
2.8.4 NCI
Mr. James Brock will serve as NCI's primary contact person. Mr. Brock will provide technical support in
accurately representing the Condensator technology. Mr. Brock will review the TQAP and report and
provide written comments. Mr. Brock will be present during the verification testing to ensure proper
installation and operation of the Condensator.
15
-------
2.9 SCHEDULE AND MILESTONES
The tentative schedule of activities for testing the Condensator technology is as follows:
Verification Test Plan Development
GHG Center Internal Draft Development
NCI Review/Revision
Industry Peer-Review/Revision
EPA TQAP Review
Final TQAP Revision and EPA Approval
Final Document Posted
Verification Testing and Analysis
Preliminary Teleconference and Project Review
Testing
Data Validation and Analysis
Verification Report Development
GHG Center Internal Draft Development
NCI Review and Report Revision
EPA and Industry Peer-Review
Final Report Revision and EPA Approval
Final Report Posted
Dates
September 15, - 30, 2004
October 4- 18,2004
October 25 - November 1, 2004
November 8 - 26, 2004
November 26 - December 6, 2004
December 30, 2004
Dates
Late December, 2004
January, 2005 (exact dates to be
determined)
January, 2005
Dates
January 312005
February 1-15, 2005
February 18-28,2005
March 2005
March 31,2005
2.10 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS
Test-specific documentation and records generated by SwRI will be processed as specified in:
• SwRI QPP 03 (Document Preparation and Control);
• SwRI QPP 07 (Testing and Sample Analysis); and
• SwRI QPP 14 (Quality Records).
Copies of results and supporting data will be transferred to the GHG Center and managed according to the
GHG Center QMP. See Section 8 for details of test data acquisition and management. SwRI, in
accordance with Part A, Sections 5.1 and 5.3 of EPA's QMP, will retain all test-specific documentation
and records for seven years after the final payment of the agreement between SwRI and the GHG ETV
Center. Southern will retain all verification reports and statements for seven years after final payment of
the agreement between Southern and EPA.
16
-------
3.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
3.1 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
DQOs are statements about the planned overall accuracy of the verification parameters. Three documents
provide the basis for this subsection: (1) the [GVP], (2) the Test and Quality Assurance Plan—
ConocoPMlips Fuel-Efficient High-Performance SAE 75W90 Rear Axle Gear Lubricant (SRI/USEPA-
GHG-TQAP-28), and (3) the Test and Quality Assurance Plan—Universal Cams, LLC Dynamic Cam
Diesel Engine Retrofit System (SRI/USEPA-GHG-TQAP-31). An abbreviated discussion of DQO
development is presented here.
The primary verification parameters for this technology are reduction in BSFC and PM emissions.
Improvement in these parameters will be expressed as the mean change, or delta (A), between results
from the baseline and modified engine tests. Based on tests previously conducted by NCI, decreases of
up to 10 to 20 percent are possible for both parameters. Therefore, the DQO for these parameters is to
demonstrate a statistically significant delta of 10 percent or greater. This section provides a brief
description of the data analysis and statistical procedures used here to demonstrate if this DQO is met.
More detailed presentations of the statistical analyses that will be used are presented in the reference
materials cited above.
This verification also includes determination of NOX, CO, and THC, emissions as secondary verification
parameters. These emissions tend to be much lower than any applicable standards, and their higher
measurement variability (because of low absolute values) lead to large A determination errors. Therefore,
this verification will not adopt explicit engine emission DQOs analogous to the BSFC and PM DQO. The
implicit DQOs will be that all emissions tests will conform to the specified reference methods. Each of
the reference methods include numerous QA/QC checks and data quality indicators (DQIs) that, if met,
ensure that the tests were properly performed. Section 6.0 summarizes these checks. Although explicit
DQOs are not specified for these emission parameters, the analysis described in Section 3.1.1 for
determination of statistical significance in changes in BSFC will also be used to evaluate if changes in
emissions are significant.
3.1.1 Determination of Statistical Significance
The mean BSFC and PM deltas cannot be deemed statistically significant if they are equal to or smaller
than the 95 percent confidence intervals for each parameter. For each parameter, the confidence interval
(e) is a function of the sample standard deviation (sn_i) and the number of test runs conducted during the
test campaign. The coefficient of variation (COV), or the sample standard deviation normalized against
the sample mean (for each test condition), combined with the number of test runs will therefore serve as
the DQI that links the width of the confidence interval with the DQO. The mean delta for BSFC and PM
emissions must be greater than e. If it is not, the 95 percent confidence interval is wider than the change
itself, and it cannot be deemed statistically significant.
Data collected during several similar ETV verifications show that, when the test methods are properly
applied, COVs of 0.7 and 2.2 percent is achievable for BSFC and PM emissions, respectively. The data
evaluated to develop these COVs includes nine test series for similar diesel engine retrofit technology
engine dynamometer tests. Each test series consisted of three test runs (n=3). By conducting at least
three baseline and modified engine test runs and achieving the 0.7 and 2.2 percent COVs, this verification
17
-------
will be able to demonstrate statistically significant BSFC and PM deltas of 2 and 5 percent, respectively.
If changes in these parameters are statistically significant, the GHG Center will calculate the difference's
confidence interval. After the 3rd test run, and after each following run (up to the 6th), analysts will
calculate a test statistic, ttest, and compare it with the Student's T distribution value with (ni + n2 - 2)
degrees of freedom as follows:
Equation 2
Equation 3
Where:
Xi = mean BSFC or PM with baseline engine
X2 = mean BSFC or PM with Condensator
l^i - \\.2 = zero (H0 hypothesizes that there is no difference between the population means)
ni = number of repeated test runs with baseline engine
n2 = number of repeated test runs with Condensator
Si2 = sample standard deviation with baseline engine, squared
s22 = sample standard deviation with Condensator, squared
sp2 = pooled standard deviation, squared
Selected T-distribution values at a 95-percent confidence coefficient (t0 025, DF) appear in the following
table.
Table 3-1. Selected T-distribution Values
ni
3
4
5
6
n2
3
4
5
6
Degrees of
Freedom,
DF (n!+n2-
2)
4
6
8
10
to.025, DF
2.776
2.447
2.306
2.228
If ttest > t0 025.DF, then it is concluded that the data shows a statistically significant difference in the
verification parameter. Otherwise, it will be concluded that a significant change did not occur. If
significant, the differences and their confidence intervals will be reported.
18
-------
Use of equations 2 and 3 requires the assumption that the baseline and modified engine test run results
have similar variance. The ratio of the sample variances (sample standard deviation squared) between the
two test series is a measure of this similarity. Analysts will calculate an Ftest statistic according to
Equation 4 and compare the results to the values in Table 3-1 to determine the degree of similarity
between the sample variances.
test
S max
Equation 4
Where:
Ftest = F-test statistic
s2max = larger of the sample standard deviations, squared
s2mm = smaller of the sample standard deviations, squared
Table 3-2 presents selected F005 distribution values for the expected number of test runs and the
acceptable uncertainty (a; 0.05).
Table 3-2. Selected F0.os Distribution Values
s2min number of
runs
3
4
5
6
s2max number
of runs
Degrees of
Freedom
2
3
4
5
3
2
19.00
9.55
6.94
5.79
4
3
19.16
9.28
6.59
5.41
5
4
19.25
9.12
6.39
5.19
6
5
19.30
9.01
6.26
5.05
If the F-test statistic is less than the corresponding value in Table 3-2, then analysts will conclude that the
sample variances are substantially the same and the statistical significance evaluation and confidence
interval calculations are valid approaches. If a statistically significant difference in either parameter is
observed, the 95-percent confidence interval will be calculated. The half width (e) of the 95 percent
confidence interval is:
1 1
Equation 5
Reported results for improvement in BSFC and PM emissions will include the 95 percent confidence
interval, if the results are statistically significant.
19
-------
20
-------
4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The sampling system is comprised primarily of the exhaust sampling system to which continuous
measurement devices and particulate filters are attached.
4.1 EXHAUST GAS SAMPLING SYSTEM
The exhaust gas sampling system conforms to 40 CFR 86.1310 and 89.308, respectively. The system that
will be used at SwRI is depicted in Figure 4-1.
Optional for
Particulate
Background Reading
Zero Ait
HC Span Gas
Integrator
l>
Merit
nlet
'
1
11
Read Background Bag^ — •/
1 Dillution Tunnel J
s — B Heated Probe "^
f f— paniculate Probe — _ZA
| Mixing Orifice Ny
1 1 Vehicle Exhaust Inlet ^
LEGEND
Flow Control Valve
Selection Valve
Paniculate Fitter
Pump
Flowmeter
Pressure Gauge
|nnignj Recorder
E^I Temperature Sensor
Primary Filter (Phase 1 and 3)
Back-up Filter (Phase 1 and 3)
Note: Three filter holders
(one for each phase)
are also acceptable.
V
o
Q
To Outside Venl
I "I
;order I I
>5 Heat Exchan*
Supply Air
Counters
Heated I to Background Sample Bag
FID I ^ 1
Primary Filter (Phase 2)
Back-up FilferfPhase 2)
r.To Pump Rotometer
and Gas Meter
as Diagramed
Immediately
Below
Gas^ Discharge
Meter/
To Formaldehyde
Sample Collection
*• To Methanoi Sample
Collection
Manometer
Revolution Counter
Pick Up
Manometer
r\ Discharge
Figure 4-1. SwRI Gaseous and Particulate Emissions Sampling System (PDP-CVS)
The exhaust gas measurement system conforms to 40 CFR 86.1310 and 40 CFR 89.309. Table 4-2 lists
the major equipment to be used during the test campaign, expected values, and instrument spans. Typical
manufacturers and model numbers are listed for reference only.
21
-------
Table 4-2. Exhaust Gas Measurement System Specifications
Parameter or
Subsystem
Dynamometer speed
Dynamometer load
CVS pressure
CVS temperature
CVS volumetric
flow rate
CO
CO2
CH4
NOX
THC
PM
Expected
Operating Range
0-2100RPM
0 - 368 hp,
0 - 1350 Ib.ft
950 - 1050 millibar
Oto 191 °C
2000 ft3 / min
(nominal)
0 - 300 ppmv
0 - 10000 ppmv
0-10 ppmv
0-100 ppm
0 - 300 ppmv
0 - 100 ppmv
0 - 5 mg
Manufacturer,
Model / Operating
Principle
Varies with test cell
Varies with test cell
SwRI-built constant
volume sampler
HoribaOPE-135/
NDIR
HoribaOPE-135/
NDIR
GC/FID
Rosemount 955 /
Chemiluminescence
Rosemount 402 /
HFID
Gravimetric
Span
Varies with test cell
up to 6000 RPM
Varies; up to 600 hp,
2600 Ib.ft
0 - 1500 millibar
0 - 200 °C
1800-2200 ft3 /min;
Varies with test cell
0 - 1000 ppmv
0 - 10000 ppmv
10 ppmv
100 ppmv
0 - 300 ppmv
0 - 100 ppmv
0 - 1000 mg
Measurement
Frequency
10 Hz (10/s)
10 Hz (10/s)
10 Hz (10/s)
1 analysis per bag, 2
bags (1 dilute
exhaust, 1 ambient
air) per each cold-
start. Similar set of
2 bags for each hot-
start
10 Hz (10/s) (Note:
online gas analysis
through sampling
probe)
1 per each cold- and
hot-start
4.2 CRANKCASE BLOW-BY EXHAUST SAMPLING
Since no EPA standard method is available to measure blow-by PM and THC emissions, SwRI developed
SOP 07-043 based on a modification of the standard method used for exhaust measurements. For PM
emissions, the sampling system consists of a vacuum breaker, a filter holder, and a pump. The vacuum
breaker maintains the blow-by exit pressure near ambient pressure for different engine speeds and loads
while blow-by sampling is performed. This is done to prevent the sampling system from causing engine
backpressure changes, affecting engine performance. The pressure control is done by allowing excess
ambient air to be entrained with the blow-by flow during sampling. The pump draws the blow-by flow
and ambient excess air through a filter holder to PM collection. For THC emissions, a heated sample line
will be attached to the blow-by exhaust and gases will be directed to the THC analyzer for quantification.
Instrument specifications and DQIGs for the blow-by sampling are the same as those for the exhaust gas
sampling.
4.3 FILTER WEIGHING
Particulate filters are stored, conditioned, and weighed in a dedicated facility which conforms to 40 CFR
86.1312. The chamber in which the particulate filters are conditioned and weighed conforms to 40 CFR
86.112 without deviation. After the filter weighing is completed, up to three samples from the blow-by
tube and three from the exhaust will be randomly selected for determination of SOF. SwRI follows an in-
house SOP for determination of SOF where samples are extracted with toluene/ethanol, and analyzed for
organic compounds using gas chromatography.
22
-------
4.4 GASEOUS ANALYZERS
Gaseous analyzers conform to §86.309, §86.1311, and §89, Subpart D, App B, Figure 1 without
deviation. Their operation is specified in SwRI SOP# 07-009, which conforms to required elements B4
(Analytical Methods), B5 (Quality Control), and B6 (Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, and
Maintenance) of EPA QA/R-5.
5.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY
Only particulate matter (PM) filter measurements and bag samples involve manual handling, since
gaseous emission measurements are made and recorded by the computer-controlled data system
associated with the continuous sampling system.
The PM filters are prepared and processed according to SwRI SOP# 07-020 which specifies a method of
conditioning and weighing filters used to collect particulate samples during exhaust emission testing. This
SwRI SOP conforms to required element B3 (Sample Handling and Custody) of EPA QA/R-5.
Samples are handled according to SwRI SOP 07-023. This SOP conforms to required element B3
(Sample Handling and Custody) of EPA QA/R-5.
6.0 DATA QUALITY INDICATOR GOALS AND QA/QC CHECKS
Test measurements that contribute to a verification parameter's determination have specific data quality
indicator goals (DQIGs) that, if met, imply achievement of the parameter's DQOs. For this test,
completion of the QA/QC checks and achievement of the DQIGs ensures that the specified test methods
have been completed in accordance with the TQAP and CFR test method requirements. Based on
historical data, when testing is properly completed, the specified DQOs should be achievable.
Tables 6-1 through 6-5 list the individual analyzer and system DQIGs in terms of accuracy. A variety of
calibrations, QA/QC checks, and other procedures ensure the achievement of each DQIG. The table
summarizes those QA/QC checks for each of the major test systems.
23
-------
Table 6-1. CVS System Data Quality Indicators and QA/QC Checks
Parameter
Pressure
Temperature
Volumetric
flow rate
Data Quality Indicators Goals
Accuracy
+ 2.0% of
reading
+ 2.0% of
reading
+ 0.5% of
reading
How Verified
Calibration of
sensors with
NIST-traceable
standard
Calibration of
sensors with
NIST-traceable
standard
CVS and propane
critical orifice
calibration
Frequency
At initial
installation,
annually, or
after major
repairs
QA/QC Checks
Description
Inspect
calibration
certificates
Inspect
calibration
certificates
Inspect
calibration data
Propane
composition
verification via
analysis with
FID
Propane
injection check
Sample bag leak
check
Flow rate
verification
Dilution air
temperature
Frequency
Prior to test
Prior to test
Prior to test
Prior to
placing new
propane tank
in service
Weekly
Before each
test run
Before each
test run
During each
test run
Allowable Result
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
< 0.35 % difference
from previously
used and verified
tank
Difference between
injected and
recovered propane <
+ 2.0%
Maintain 10" Hg for
10 seconds
< + 5 cfm of
nominal test point
Between 20 and 30
°C
24
-------
Table 6-2. Instrumental Analyzers Data Quality Indicators and QA/QC Checks
Parameter
CO
C02
NOX
THC
CO2 only
NOX only
Data Quality Indicators Goals
Accuracy
+ 1.0%FS
or + 2.0%
for each
calibration
gas
How Verified
11-point
calibration
(including zero)
with gas divider;
protocol
calibration gases
Frequency
Monthly
QA/QC Checks
Description
Review and
verify analyzer
calibration
Gas divider
linearity
verification
Calibration gas
certification or
naming
Zero gas
verification
Analyzer zero
and span
Analyzer drift
Wet CO2
interference
check
CO2 Quench
Check
Converter
Efficiency Check
Frequency
Once during
test and upon
completion of
new calibration
monthly
Prior to service
Prior to service
Before and
after each test
run
For each bag
analysis
Monthly
Annually
Monthly
Allowable Result
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
All points within + 2.0%
of linear fit; FS within +
0.5 % of known value
Average concentration of
three readings must be
within + 1 % for
calibration gas and NIST-
traceable reference
material
HC < 1 ppmv
CO < 1 ppmv
CO2 < 400 ppmv
NOX<0.1 ppmv
O2 between 18 and 21 %
All values within + 2.0 %
of point of +1.0% of FS;
zero point within + 0.2 %
ofFS
Post-test zero or span drift
shall not exceed + 2.0 %
FS
CO (0 to 300 ppmv)
interference < 3 ppmv;
CO (> 300 ppmv)
interference < 1 % FS
NOX quench < 3.0 %
Converter Efficiency
>90%
25
-------
Table 6-3. Particulate Matter Analysis Data Quality Indicators and QA/QC Checks
Data Quality Indicators Goals
Accuracy
+ 1.0ug
How Verified
NIST-traceable scale
calibration, weighing
room controls, filter
weight control
Frequency
Daily
QA/QC Checks
Description
NIST-traceable calibration
weight cross-check
Weight room temperature
Weight room relative
humidity
Reference filter weight
change
Frequency
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Allowable
Result
Weight change
<1.0ug
Between 19 and
25 °C
Between 35 and
53% RH
Weight change
<20ug
Table 6-4. Supplementary Instruments and Additional QA/QC Checks
Description
Test cell Wet/dry bulb thermometer
calibration
Test cell Barometer calibration
Test cell temperature
Test fuel analysis
Frequency
Monthly
Weekly
Each test run
Prior to testing
Allowable Result
Within + 1.0 °F NIST-traceable standard
Within + 0.1" Hg of NIST-traceable
standard
Between 68 and 86 °F
Conforms to 40 CFR §86.1313
specifications (See Appendix A-2)
Table 6-5. Dynamometer Data Quality Indicators and QA/QC Checks
Parameter
Speed
Load
(Torque
Sensor)
Data Quality Indicators Goals
Accuracy
+ 2.0%
+0.5%
How Verified
60-tooth wheel
combined with
frequency counter
NIST-traceable
weights and
torque arm
Frequency
At initial
installation,
annually, or
after major
repairs
Weekly
QA/QC Checks
Description
Inspect
calibration
certificate
Inspect
calibration
certificate
Torque trace
acceptance test
Frequency
Prior to test
Prior to test
and after new
calibration
Each test run
Allowable Result
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
Current calibration
meeting DQI goal
+ 2. 5 Ib.ft for values
< 550 Ib.ft,
+ 5.0 Ib.ft for values
< 1050 Ib.ft,
+ 10 Ib.ft for values
< 1550 Ib.ft
26
-------
7.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY
The calibration schedule for major instruments is included with other QC activities in Table 6-1 above. 40
CFR 86.1316-86.1326 completely specifies the methods, frequency, and requirements of these
calibrations. The general reference is QPP 05 - Measurement and Test Equipment. Records of all
calibration activities are retained at SwRI and will be inspected by the GHG Field Team Leader and/or
QA Manager.
27
-------
8.0 DATA ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT
This section describes the generation and processing of test data at SwRI and the flow and disposition of
these data from origin to the GHG Center reporting and archiving. Data acquisition and data management
at SwRI are performed according to QPP 08 - Data Processing and Reduction, which conforms to
required element BIO (Data Management) of EPA QA/R-5. The planned data streams, with
responsibilities of the project manager and QA Manager, are depicted in Figure 8-1. The project manager
is operationally responsible for all aspects of a test. The QA Manager is operationally responsible for all
data quality aspects of a test with primary, but not exclusive, focus on the areas indicated in the figure.
Qualitative data regarding the technology to be tested, per 40 CFR 86.1344 and 89.405, are manually
recorded on the data sheets specified in SwRI #SOP 07-003. Operating and emissions data are captured
by the data system described schematically in Figure 8-1.
SwRI will submit copies of initial raw and intermediate data at the end of each test sequence (setup,
baseline, control) and attest completion. These data include:
• documents describing the engine, inspection, and setup activities;
• tracking forms for daily test activities and QC check results;
• external documents such as test fuel lot analyses and NIST-traceable calibration gas certificates;
• test cell data system printouts showing run summary instrument results for test cell system (dyno,
CVS, direct and bag cart analysis instruments, etc.); and
• QC check summary printouts (zero, span drift, etc.).
SwRI will prepare and submit a letter report in printed and electronic (Microsoft Word) format to the
GHG Center after completion of the field activities. The report will describe the test conditions,
document all QA/QC procedures, summarize intermediate data, and present the verification test results.
The SwRI QAO will also submit a QA report documenting the internal data assessment activities of the
test as described in Section 9 below.
The GHG Center Project Manager will incorporate the SwRI material into the final verification report and
statement and submit for review according to the GHG Center QMP and ETV Program guidance
documents. The GHG Center QA Manager will incorporate the SwRI QA material into the GHG Center's
internal assessment documentation for the test, along with assessment activities of the Center. These will
include the supplemental TSA, performance audit, and ADQ described in Section 14.
28
-------
Test Manager: Test Oversight and Data Production
QA Officer: Quality System and Data Integrity 1
Engine
Information from —
Manufacturer
Pre-test Filter
Weights
Post-test Filter
Weights *******
\
' 1
Assemble
Data
t
Calculations
& Data
Analysis
Technology
— Information from
Supplier
_ Test Cell I
""" Instrument Data 1
_ QC Data |
r
T
QA Review 1
j
Report
NOTE: 1
QAO role focused on indicated areas with regular review of other data sources 1
Figure 8-1. ETV Data Management System
29
-------
9.0 INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AUDITS
Several assessments are specified for this verification in accordance with the GHG Center QMP and the
ETV Program QMP.
9.1 TECHNICAL SYSTEMS AUDIT
The GHG Center staff has previously conducted a quality and technical systems audits (TSA) of the SwRI
DEER on an earlier related ETV test involving fuel economy and emissions performance on a light-duty
vehicles. That TSA addressed major test components including documentation and adherence to standard
procedures for testing, instrument calibration and QC checks, data processing, audits, and reporting. It
also included review of some of the documentation of elements of the SwRI/DEER quality system. In
view of the positive findings of that TSA and the similarity between the previous verification and the
upcoming test, a second TSA on this technology class is not proposed for the upcoming test.
A tracking checklist of calibrations and QC activities was used as part of the TSA on the previous project.
A version of that checklist will be adapted to the experimental details of the upcoming test. The field
team leader will verify during the test that the equipment, SOPs, and calibrations are as described in this
TQAP. The field team leader will complete the items on this checklist during his observation of the test
and return the form to the GHG Center QA manager as part of the QC documentation of the test. He will
incorporate this material into the ADQ described below.
9.2 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AUDITS
The GHG Center specifies internal Performance Evaluation Audits (PEAs), as applicable, on critical
measurements of every verification test. The Center will use the SwRI quality infrastructure for an
internal PEA for this test. SwRI maintains a set of NIST-certified gas standard mixtures in the
concentration ranges applicable to these measurements. The monthly calibration procedure requires that
the DEER challenge the analytical instruments with these standards as a performance check independent
of the calibration gas standards. The GHG Center will use this internal check in lieu of a blind PEA. The
standard mixture challenge from that time will be used as a PEA if a monthly analyzer calibration under
SOP 6-012 has been performed within a week of testing on the test cell used for this study. A separate
challenge, according to the applicable portion of the SOP, will otherwise be conducted during the period
of the test.
9.3 AUDIT OF DATA QUALITY
The GHG Center QA Manager will oversee an audit of data quality (ADQ) of at least 10% of all of the
verification data in accordance with Table 9-1 of the ETV QMP. The ADQ will be conducted in
accordance with EPA's [Guidance on Technical Audits and Related Assessments for Environmental Data
Operations}. The ADQ will include (1) verification of input data and outputs reported by test cell
instrumentation, (2) checks of intermediate calculations, and (3) a review of study statistics. The ADQ
will also draw conclusions about the quality of the data from the project and their fitness for their
intended use. Effort on this audit will be assigned as follows. The SwRI QAO, in this case, will conduct
an internal ADQ of results generated by SwRI covering the areas described above and submit the audit
report to the GHG Center QA Manager. The GHG Center QA Manager will review and incorporate this
into an overall ADQ report, including documentation of subcontractor oversight and review of the final
processing and reporting of the results.
30
-------
9.4 EXTERNAL ASSESSMENTS
SwRI and GHG Center staff will cooperate with any external assessments by EPA. EPA personnel may
conduct optional assessments (TSA, PEA, or ADQ) during this or any subsequent test. The external
assessments will be conducted as described in EPA QA/G-7.
9.5 INTERNAL ASSESSMENTS
Internal assessment reports will be reviewed by the SwRI QAO and GHG Center QA Manager and they
will respond as noted in Section 11. The written report of the ADQ will be reviewed by the GHG Center
QA Manager and incorporated into or submitted as separate addenda to the verification report.
31
-------
10.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION
A corrective action must occur when the result of an audit or quality control measurement is shown to be
unsatisfactory as defined by the DQOs or by the measurement objectives for each task. The corrective
action process involves the GHG Center project and QA staff as well as subcontractor personnel. A
written corrective action report is required on major corrective actions that deviate from the TQAP.
Corrective action is performed at SwRI according to QPP 11 - Nonconformance and Corrective Action,
which conforms to required elements B5 (Quality Control) and Cl (Assessments and Response Actions)
of EPA QA/R-5. Situations requiring corrective action will be communicated to the GHG Center field
team leader who will, under direction of the GHG Center project manager, assess the incident and take
and document appropriate action on behalf of the center. The project manager is responsible for and is
authorized to halt work if it is determined that a serious problem exists.
11.0 DATA REDUCTION, REVIEW, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING
The field team leader's primary on-site function will be to monitor SwRI's activities. He will be able to
review, verify, and validate certain data (test cell file data, QA/QC check results) during testing. The
GHG Center project manager will incorporate the SwRI material into the final verification report and
statement and submit this information for review according to the GHG Center QMP and ETV program
guidance documents. The GHG Center QA Manager will incorporate the SwRI QA material into the
GHG Center's internal assessment documentation for the test along with assessment activities of the
Center. These will include the performance audit and ADQ described in Section 9.0.
12.0 REPORTING OF DATA QUALITY INDICATORS
The SwRI staff will collect and tabulate the DQIG values specified in Table 6-1 as part of the data
processing steps described above. These will be reviewed both internally and by the GHG Center project
manager and QA Manager in the preparation of their verification report and assessment reports. These
reports, as specified in the GHG Center QMP, are submitted to both the EPA project officer and QA
Manager.
13.0 DEVIATIONS FROM GVP
The technical aspects of this TQAP were constructed to be consistent with the technical requirements and
philosophy of the GVP. The only planned deviations from the GVP are the omission of the durability
test with an aged technology, and the omission of the additional GVP test runs at maximum power and
torque. No other deviations from the GVP or this document are anticipated. If any such deviations are
identified in the course of implementing this test, SwRI staff will consult with GHG Center staff as soon
as possible to resolve the issues. Section 2.7 of EPA/QA R-5 states that the EPA will be notified of any
significant deviations and the QAO will revise this document and submit it to EPA for review and
approval.
32
-------
14.0 REFERENCED QUALITY DOCUMENTS
14.1 EPA-ETV
EPA QA/R-5
EPA ETV QMP
EPA QA/G-5
EPA QA/G-7
GVP
EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/R-5, Office of
Environmental Information, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/240/B-
01/003, March 2001.
Environmental Technology Verification Program Quality and Management Plan
for the Pilot Period (1995-2000), National Risk Management Research
Laboratory, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-98/064, May
1998 (or current version).
Guidance on Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5, Office of
Environmental Information, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-
98/018, February 1998.
Guidance on Technical Audits and Related Assessments, EPA QA/G-7, Office of
Environmental Information, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-
99/080, January 2000.
Generic Verification Protocol for Diesel Exhaust Catalysts, Particulate Filters,
and Engine Modification Control Technologies for Highway and Nonroad Use
Diesel Engines (Draft), EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR826152-01-3,
January 2002.
14.2 GHGTC
GHGTC QMP
SRI/USEPA-GHG-
QAP-28
Greenhouse Gas Technology Center Quality Management Plan, Version 1.4,
March, 2003.
Test and Quality Assurance Plan—ConocoPhillips Fuel-Efficient
High-Performance SAE 75W90 Rear Axle Gear Lubricant, SRI/USEPA-GHG-
QAP-28, March 2003.
33
-------
14.3 SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
SwRIQAPP 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 (Version 1.0 April 8, 2002).
Quality Policy and Procedures (QPPs)
QSM Quality System Manual - 2000, April 2001
QPP-03 Document Preparation and Control
QPP-05 Measurement and Test Equipment
QPP-07 Testing and Sample Analysis
QPP-07-003 Transient Test for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
QPP-08 Data Processing and Reduction
QPP-09 Analysis and Reporting
QPP-10 Training and Motivation
QPP-11 Nonconformance and Corrective Actions
QPP-12 Internal Audits
QPP-14 Quality Records
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
SOP-06-003 Linearity Verification of Gas Dividers
SOP-06-002 NOX Converter Efficiency Determination
SOP-06-012 Monthly Calibration of Analyzers for Continuous Dilute Gaseous Exhaust
SOP-06-016 Wet CO2 Interference Check for CO Analyzers
SOP-06-021 FID Response for Methane
SOP-06-025 NOX Analyzer and System Response Checks
SOP-06-041 NOx Analyzer CO2 Quench Check
SOP-06-044 Hydrocarbon Analyzer Optimization
SOP-07-001 Power Validation for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
SOP-07-002 Power Mapping for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
SOP-07-009 Emissions Testing During Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Transient Cycle
SOP-07-020 Particulate Filter Conditioning and Weighing
SOP-07-023 Operation of Bag Cart
SOP-12-001 Quality Audits
SOP-07-043 Blow-by Emissions Measurement of Heavy Duty Diesel Engines
34
-------
Appendix A
35
-------
Appendix A-l. Test Results Summary and DQO Checks
Complete after each hot start test run is complete.
After the third hot start test (and any additional tests), calculate the mean, sample standard deviation, and coefficient of
variation (COV) for each parameter. COV is the sample standard deviation divided by the mean, as a percentage.
Verify that the Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) are met for each parameter.
Signature:
Table A-la: Baseline Test Results & DQO Check
Reported Value,
g/Bhp-hr*
The value is the weighted value of the single cold start FTP test with the hot start FTP test for each run. See the TQAP for detailed calculations.
Table A-lb: Candidate Test Results & DQO Check
Reported Value,
g/Bhp-hr*
-------
Appendix A-2. Test Fuel Verification
Obtain a copy of the test fuel lot analysis.
Review all analysis results and test method documentation.
Properties and test methods must conform to the specifications given in the
following table.
Audit Date:
Fuel Lot ID:
Signature:
Date Received:
Table A-2. Test Fuel Specifications
Description
Cetane Number
Cetane Index
Distillation Range:
IBP
10 % point
50 % point
90 % point
Endpoint
Sulfur
Viscosity
Flashpoint
Hydrocarbons:
Olefms
Aromatics
Specific Gravity
ASTM Test
Method No.
D613
D976
D86
D2622
D445
D93
D1319
D5186
D287
Specified
Value
40-50
40-50
340 - 400 °F
400 - 460 °F
470 - 540 °F
560 - 630 °F
610- 690 °F
0.03 - 0.05 %
2.0-3.2
130 °F min.
Balance
27%
32-37 °API
Analysis
Value
Mfg. Certified
Value
Meets
Spec.?
Notes:
-------
Appendix A-3
QA/QC Checks
Signature:
Table A3-1: QA/QC Checks
QA/QC
Check
Description
Frequency
Allowable Result
Date Check
Completed
(SwRI)
Date Audit
Completed
(GHG
Center)
OK?
Audit Data
Source
Dynamometer
Dynamometer
Calibration
Certificates
Review
Torque trace
acceptance
test
Prior to
test
Each test
run
Sensor accuracies (speed and load)
meet Table 6-1 specifications
+ 2.5 Ib.ft for values < 550 Ib.ft,
+ 5.0 Ib.ft for values < 1050 Ib.ft,
+ 10 Ib.ft for values < 1550 Ib.ft
CVS System
CVS System
Calibration
Certificates
Review
Propane tank
composition
verification
Propane
injection
check
Sample bag
leak check
Flow rate
verification
Dilution air
temperature
verification
Prior to
test
Prior to
placing
new
propane
tank in
service
Weekly
Before
each test
run
Before
each test
run
During
each test
run
Sensor accuracies (P, T, Q) meet
Table 6-1 specifications
< 0.35 % difference from
previously used and verified tank
Difference between injected and
recovered propane < + 2.0 %
Maintain 10" Hg for 10 seconds
< + 5 cfm of nominal test point
Between 20 and 30 °C
Emission Analyzers
Analyzer
calibrations
review
Gas divider
linearity
verification
Once
during test
and upon
completion
of new
calibration
monthly
All values within + 2.0 % of point
of +1.0% of FS;
All points within + 2.0 % of linear
fit; FS within + 0.5 % of known
value
-------
Table A3-1: QA/QC Checks
QA/QC
Check
Description
Calibration
gas
certification or
naming
Zero gas
verification
Analyzer zero
and span
Analyzer drift
Wet CO2
interference
check
CO2 Quench
Check
Converter
Efficiency
Check
Frequency
Prior to
service
Prior to
service
Before and
after each
test run
For each
bag
analysis
Monthly
Annually
Monthly
Allowable Result
Average concentration of three
readings must be within + 1 % for
calibration gas and NIST-traceable
reference material
HC < 1 ppmv
CO < 1 ppmv
CO2 < 400 ppmv
NOX < 0. 1 ppmv
O2 between 18 and 21%
All values within + 2.0 % of point
of + 1.0 % of FS; zero point
within + 0.2% of FS
Post-test zero or span drift shall
not exceed + 2.0 % FS
CO (0 to 300 ppmv) interference <
3 ppmv;
CO (> 300 ppmv) interference < 1
%FS
NOX quench < 3.0%
Converter Efficiency >90 %
Date Check
Completed
(SwRI)
Date Audit
Completed
(GHG
Center)
OK?
Audit Data
Source
Particulate Measurement
NIST-
traceable
calibration
weight cross-
check
Weight room
temperature
Weight room
relative
humidity
Reference
filter weight
change
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Weight change < 10 ug
Between 19 and 25 °C
Between 35 and 53 % RH
Weight change < 20 ug
Ambient Monitoring
Test cell
Wet/dry bulb
thermometer
calibration
Monthly
+ 1.0 °F NIST-traceable standard
-------
Table A3-1: QA/QC Checks
QA/QC
Check
Description
Test cell
Barometer
calibration
Test cell
temperature
Frequency
Weekly
Each test
run
Allowable Result
Within + 0.1" Hg of NIST-
traceable standard
Between 68 and 86 °F
Date Check
Completed
(SwRI)
Date Audit
Completed
(GHG
Center)
OK?
Audit Data
Source
-------
Appendix A-4. Corrective Action Report
Verification Title:
Verification Description:
Description of Problem:
Originator:
Investigation and Results:
Date:
Investigator:
Corrective Action Taken:
Date:
Originator:
Approver:
Carbon copy: GHG Center Project Manager, GHG Center Director,
Date:
Date:
SRI QA Manager, APPCD Project Officer
------- |