Characterization of Emissions from Malfunctioning Vehicles
Fueled with Oxygenated Gasoline-Ethanol (E-10) Fuel —
Part III
Fred Stump, David Dropkin and Silvestre Tejada
National Exposure Research Laboratory
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA/600/R-01/053
Colleen Loomis and Christy Park
Clean Air Vehicle Technology Center, Inc.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
-------
Table of Contents
Abstract ii
List of Tables iii
List of Figures iv
Abbreviations and Symbols ix
INTRODUCTION 1
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS AND MATERIALS 2
Test Fuels 2
Test Fuels/Conditions 3
Test Vehicles 3
Test Facilities 4
Test Procedures 4
Tailpipe Emissions 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 29
Regulated Emissions 29
Toxic Emissions 31
Particulate Emissions 33
Alcohols 33
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 34
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 35
DISCLAIMER 35
REFERENCES 36
l
-------
ABSTRACT
Five vehicles (a 1987 Ford Taurus, a 1996 Chrysler Concord, a 2001 Ford Focus (Low
Emission Vehicle (LEV)), a 1993 Buick Regal, and a 2001 Dodge Intrepid (LEV)) were tested
using three different fuels: (1) winter grade (E-10) fuel containing 10% (vol.) 200 proof ethanol,
(2) winter grade (WG) fuel without any ethanol or oxygen containing compounds, and (3)
summer grade (SG) fuel without oxygenates. Vehicle emissions were characterized at test
temperatures of 75 ( SG fuel only), 40, 20, 0, and -20 °F. The vehicles were tested in the
conditions in which they were obtained from either a private individual or a vehicle rental
service. They were also tested in a simulated malfunction mode in which the oxygen sensor was
disconnected (02 mode). The vehicles were tested using the Urban Dynamometer Driving
Schedule (UDDS) of the Federal Test Procedure (FTP). Four IM240 test cycles were run after
each of the UDDS tests and the exhaust particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), from the four
IM240 driving cycles were collected on single filters. The gaseous emissions were collected and
analyzed for total hydrocarbons (THC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx),
speciated hydrocarbons, speciated aldehydes, ethanol, methanol, 2-propanol, methyltertiarybutyl
ether (MTBE), and ethyltertiarybutyl ether (ETBE).
Hydrocarbon emissions generally increased as test temperature decreased for all vehicles,
fuels, and test modes. The E-10 fuel generally reduced vehicular CO emissions. The trend for
carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen emissions showed a general increase in emission rates
as the testing temperatures decreased. When the 02 sensor was disabled (02 mode), the trend
showed increasing carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen emissions.
The emissions of such toxic compounds as benzene and 1,3-butadiene tended to increase
as the testing temperatures decreased. Disconnecting the 02 sensor generally increased the
emissions of these toxic compounds when compared with the no malfunction (NM) mode
emissions. The E-10 fuel generally reduced 1,3-butadiene emissions. The measured emissions
of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde from the test vehicles showed a general increase in emissions
as test temperature decreased, when operating in the malfunction mode, and when testing with E-
10 fuel.
The PM2.5 and PM10 particulate emission rates were comparable at all test conditions.
The particulate emissions from both vehicles followed the HC emission trend and increased as
the test temperature decreased. The E-10 fuel generally reduced particulate emissions from the
test vehicles. Disconnecting the oxygen sensor generally increased particulate emissions.
Generally, of the five vehicles tested, the LEV's had the lowest regulated, toxics, and
particulate emissions.
li
-------
List of Tables
Table 1 Characteristics of test fuels 2
Table 2 Test Schedule/Conditions for 1987 Ford Taurus, 1996 Chrysler Concord, 2001 Ford
Focus; Low Emission Vehicle (LEV), 1993 Buick Regal, and 2001 Dodge Intrepid
(LEV) 3
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehi
Vehicle
cles tested
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle UDDS
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
cle IM240
IM240
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
ailpipe
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
emission
rates at 75
rates at 75
rates at 75
rates at 40
rates at 40
rates at 40
rates at 20
rates at 20
rates at 20
rates at 0
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
'F .
F . .
rates at 0 °F . .
rates at 0 °F . .
rates at -20 °F
rates at -20
rates at -20
rates at 75
rates at 40
rates at 40
rates at 20
rates at 20
rates at 0 °F . .
rates at 0 °F . .
rates at -20 °F
rates at -20 °F
4
6
7
3F
3F
3F .
3F .
3F .
3F .
3F .
. 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
in
-------
37
37
37
37
37
37
38
38
38
38
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
41
41
41
41
41
41
42
42
42
42
42
42
43
43
43
43
List of Figures
Taurus, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode .
Taurus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode ....
Taurus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Taurus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Taurus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
iv
-------
43
43
44
44
44
44
44
44
45
45
45
45
45
45
46
46
46
46
46
46
47
47
47
47
47
47
48
48
48
48
48
48
49
49
49
49
49
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
Concord, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode .
Concord, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode .
Concord, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode .
Concord, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode .
Concord, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode .
Concord, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Concord, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode .
Concord, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Concord, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Concord, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Focus, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Focus, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Focus, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Focus, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Focus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Focus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Focus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode . .
Focus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode . . .
v
-------
Figure 85 Focus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 51
Figure 86 Focus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 51
Figure 87 Focus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 51
Figure 88 Focus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 51
Figure 89 Focus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 51
Figure 90 Focus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 51
Figure 91 Focus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 52
Figure 92 Focus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 52
Figure 93 Focus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 52
Figure 94 Focus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 52
Figure 95 Focus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 52
Figure 96 Focus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 52
Figure 97 Focus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 53
Figure 98 Focus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 53
Figure 99 Focus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 53
Figure 100 Focus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 53
Figure 101 Focus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 53
Figure 102 Focus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 53
Figure 103 Focus, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 54
Figure 104 Focus, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 54
Figure 105 Focus, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 54
Figure 106 Focus, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 54
Figure 107 Focus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 54
Figure 108 Focus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 54
Figure 109 Focus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 55
Figure 110 Focus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 55
Figure 111 Focus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 55
Figure 112 Focus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 55
Figure 113 Focus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 55
Figure 114 Focus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 55
Figure 115 Regal, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 56
Figure 116 Regal, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 56
Figure 117 Regal, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 56
Figure 118 Regal, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 56
Figure 119 Regal, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 56
Figure 120 Regal, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 56
Figure 121 Regal, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 57
Figure 122 Regal, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 57
Figure 123 Regal, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 57
Figure 124 Regal, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 57
Figure 125 Regal, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 57
Figure 126 Regal, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 57
Figure 127 Regal, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 58
Figure 128 Regal, 1,3-Butadiende, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 58
vi
-------
Figure 129 Regal, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 58
Figure 130 Regal, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 58
Figure 131 Regal, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 58
Figure 132 Regal, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 58
Figure 133 Regal, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 59
Figure 134 Regal, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 59
Figure 135 Regal, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 59
Figure 136 Regal, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 59
Figure 137 Regal, PM2.2, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 59
Figure 138 Regal, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 59
Figure 139 Regal, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 60
Figure 140 Regal, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 60
Figure 141 Regal, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 60
Figure 142 Regal, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 60
Figure 143 Regal, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 60
Figure 144 Regal, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 60
Figure 145 Regal, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 61
Figure 146 Regal, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 61
Figure 147 Regal, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 61
Figure 148 Regal, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 61
Figure 149 Regal, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 61
Figure 150 Regal, PM2.5, Im240 Cycle, 02 mode 61
Figure 151 Regal, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 62
Figure 152 Regal, PmlO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 62
Figure 153 Intrepid, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 62
Figure 154 Intrepid, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 62
Figure 155 Intrepid, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 62
Figure 156 Intrepid, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 62
Figure 157 Intrepid, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 63
Figure 158 Intrepid, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 63
Figure 159 Intrepid, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 63
Figure 160 Intrepid, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 63
Figure 161 Intrepid, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 63
Figure 162 Intrepid, Acetaldehyde,UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 63
Figure 163 Intrepid, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 64
Figure 164 Intrepid, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 64
Figure 165 Intrepid, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 64
Figure 166 Intrepid, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 64
Figure 167 Intrepid, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 64
Figure 168 Intrepid, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 64
Figure 169 Intrepid, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 65
Figure 170 Intrepid, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 65
Figure 171 Intrepid, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 65
Figure 172 Intrepid, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 65
vii
-------
Figure 173 Intrepid, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 65
Figure 174 Intrepid, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 65
Figure 175 Intrepid, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 66
Figure 176 Intrepid, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 66
Figure 177 Intrepid, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode 66
Figure 178 Intrepid, PM 10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode 66
Figure 179 Intrepid, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 66
Figure 180 Intrepid, THC, IM240 Cycle 02 mode 66
Figure 181 Intrepid, CO, IM240 Cycle NM mode 67
Figure 182 Intrepid, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 67
Figure 183 Intrepid, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 67
Figure 184 Intrepid, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 67
Figure 185 Intrepid, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 67
Figure 186 Intrepid, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 67
Figure 187 Intrepid, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle,NM mode 68
Figure 188 Intrepid, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 68
Figure 189 Intrepid, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode 68
Figure 190 Intrepid, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode 68
Figure 191 PM2.5 vs PM10, All vehicles at all test conditions 68
Figure 192 THC vs PM2.5, All vehicles at all test conditions 68
viii
-------
Abbreviations and Symbols
°F
degrees Fahrenheit
CFR
Code of Federal Regulation
CO
Carbon monoxide
CVS
Constant Volume Sampler
E-10
10 % ethanol, 90 % gasoline blend (v/v)
EGR
Exhaust Gas Recirculation
ETBE
Ethy lterti arybuty 1 ether
g/cm3
grams per cubic centimeter
HC
Hydrocarbon
i.d.
inside diameter
IBP
Initial Boiling Point
IM240
Inspection and Maintenance test cycle, 240 seconds
L/min
Liters per minute
mg/mi
milligrams per mile
MTBE
Methy lteri arybuty 1 ether
NC
North Carolina
NM
Normal Mode
NOx
Oxides of nitrogen
02
Oxygen
02 S
Oxygen sensor
PM10
Particulate matter <=10 mm
PM2.5
Particulate matter <= 2.5 mm
R2
Correlation coefficient
RVP
Reid Vapor Pressure
SFI
Sequential Fuel Injection
SG
Summer grade fuel
THC
Total Hydrocarbon
TWC
Three Way Catalyst
UDDS
Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule
WG
Winter grade fuel
IX
-------
INTRODUCTION
Motor vehicles emit large quantities of hydrocarbons (HCs), carbon monoxide (CO), and
oxides of nitrogen (NOx). These emissions react in the atmospheric photochemical processes to
form ozone and other oxidants. Motor vehicles also emit compounds such as formaldehyde,
acetaldehyde, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), all of which
are of major health concern. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment specifies a reduction in these
toxic emissions.1 This study characterized the emissions from five light duty gasoline powered
vehicles tested at ambient temperatures of 75, 40, 20, 0, and -20 °F. The test vehicles were
operated on commercially available winter grade fuels (with and without ethanol) and on a
commercially available summer grade fuel. The winter and summer grade fuels were purchased
without any oxygenate (MTBE or ethanol) content. A portion of the winter fuel was blended
with 200 proof ethanol to contain 10% ethanol by volume. In addition, the vehicles were tested
using the different fuels at temperatures of 75 (summer grade fuel only), 40, 20, 0, and -20 °F
(winter grade and the ethanol blended winter grade fuels). The vehicles were tested "as
received" (no engine tuning, etc.) only the belts, hoses, and fluids were checked and replaced if
necessary. The vehicles were then tested in a simulated malfunction mode (the oxygen sensor
was disconnected).
Particulate emissions from vehicles are becoming of major concern due to their adverse
effects on materials, visibility reduction, atmospheric reactivity, and human health. Recent
epidemiological studies have indicated health concerns for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of 10 jjm or less.2'3 In this study, individual PM2.5 and PM10 filters were
taken from each of the UDDS tests. After the completion of each UDDS test, the particulate
emissions from four IM240 driving cycles were collected on individual PM2.5 and PM10 filters.
Currently there is little information regarding particulate emission rates from newer in-use light-
duty gasoline vehicles 4 and very few studies done on vehicles tested at malfunction conditions
(oxygen sensor disconnected), at ambient temperatures.
1
-------
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS AND MATERIALS
The test fuels, vehicles, facilities, and procedures are described in this section.
Test Fuels
The fuels used in this study were a summer grade fuel (SG) and two winter grade fuels
(WG-01 and WG-02) containing no ethanol. Portions of the winter grade fuels were mixed with
ethanol to produce a 10 % ethanol by volume (E-10) fuel. The WG-01 was used in the Taurus,
Concord, Regal, and Focus, and the WG-02 fuel was used only in the Intrepid. The WG-01 fuel
was purchased in sufficient quantity to test the four scheduled vehicles. A delay in physically
moving the test equipment to the New EPA Campus testing facilities allowed time to test a fifth
vehicle (Intrepid); thus a second winter grade fuel (WG-02) was purchased. Fuels were
purchased locally and are representative of the fuels used by consumers. The characteristics of
the test fuels are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Characteristics of test fuels.3
Fuel Property
Summer
WG-01
WG-01-E10
WG-02
WG-02-E-10
Specific gravity,
g/cm3
0.75
0.72
0.75
0.74
NA
RVPa
8.30
10.33
11.14
12.28
13.30
Distillation, °F
IBPb
93.20
86.00
95.00
87.80
82.40
10%
138.20
113.00
118.40
111.20
109.40
50%
223.70
205.70
167.00
212.00
163.40
90%
311.90
327.20
320.90
338.90
333.50
End Point
410.00
410.00
402.80
417.20
420.80
Paraffins, %
54.07
50.34
45.31
51.32
46.19
Olefins, %
6.95
12.71
11.44
12.11
10.90
Aromatics, %
38.62
36.61
32.95
36.15
32.54
Benzene, %
1.20
1.27
1.14
1.72
1.55
Ethanol, %
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
1 Rcid vapor pressure.
b Initial Boiling Point.
NA-Data not available.
2
-------
Test Schedule/Conditions
A single UDDS test was performed on each vehicle at 75 °F. Duplicate UDDS tests
were performed on each vehicle at each of the four lower test temperatures and test conditions
(Table 2). The vehicles were conditioned using the LA-4 cycle (bagl and bag 2 of the UDDS
driving cycle) with each test fuel, at each test condition, before actually testing the vehicle for
data collection.
Table 2. Test Schedule/Conditions for 1987 Ford Taurus, 1996 Chrysler Concord, 2001 Ford
Focus Low Emission Vehicle (LEV), 1993 Buick Regal, and 2001 Dodge Intrepid (LEV).
Description
Summer Test Conditions
Winter Test Conditions
Driving Cycles:
UDDS + 4 IM240's
UDDS + 4 IM240's
Test Temperatures:
75 (+/- 3)°F
40, 20, 0, -20 (+/- 3)°F
Duplicate Runs:
Single test only
Duplicate runs
Fuel Type:
Summer Fuel
Winter Fuel
Ethanol:
No Ethanol
With/Without Ethanol
Malfunction Mode:
02 Sensor Disconnected
02 Sensor Disconnected
Emissions Measured:
Gaseous Emissions
Particles Measured
PM2.5 and PM10
Gaseous Emissions
Particles Measured
PM2.5 and PM10
3
-------
Test Vehicles
The vehicles used in this study are described below.
Table 2a. Vehicles tested.a
Vehicle
Cyl.
Vehicle
Miles
Displaced
Liters
Fuel
System
Emission
System a
1987 Ford Taurus
6
110,331
3.0
MFI
TWC/02S
1996 Chrysler Concord
6
38,934
3.3
SFI
EGR/TWC/02S
2001 Ford Focus
4
8,832
2.0
SFI
EGR/TWC/02S
1993 Buick Regal
6
141,881
3.8
TPI
EGR/TWC/02S
2001 Dodge Intrepid
6
23,495
2.7
SFI
EGR/TWC/02S
a MFI=Multipoint Fuel Injection
EGR=Exhaust Gas Recirculation
TWC=Three Way Catalyst
02S=0xygen Sensor
SFI= Sequential Fuel Injection
TPI=Tuned Port Injection
Test Facilities
Vehicle road simulations were conducted on a Horiba Model CDC800/DMA915
computerized DC electric chassis dynamometer. The dynamometer was housed in a temperature
controlled chamber capable of maintaining vehicle test temperatures from -20 to 110 °F (+/- 3
°F). Vehicle emissions were transferred from the vehicle tailpipe to a constant volume
sampling (CVS) system through a 7.62-cm i.d. (3 inch) section of flexible stainless steel tubing
heated to 230 °F. The CVS system, which dilutes the tailpipe emissions with charcoal-filtered
room air, has been described previously.5 A heater has been added behind the dilution air filter
to raise the tunnel dilution air temperature to 150 °F to prevent formaldehyde and other
compound losses in the system.6
Test Procedures
Testing was conducted as described in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 407
using the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule of the Federal Test Procedure (FTP). The
Inspection/Maintenance (IM240) test was designed to detect malfunctioning vehicles with
advanced (computer-controlled) emission systems. The test was patterned after the first two
major accelerations and decelerations of the FTP and has a maximum speed of 56.7 miles per
hour and test duration of 240 seconds. At the beginning of the test week, the vehicle to be tested
4
-------
was pre-conditioned by driving the vehicle over the UDDS cycle with the test fuel, in the test
mode, and at the test temperature to be used for data collection. The daily UDDS test served (as
duplicates were run at all temperatures except 75 °F) as the pre-conditioning for the following
days test. During the test week when the vehicle, fuel, temperature, or mode were to be changed,
the vehicle would be conditioned in the afternoon after the daily test was over, by running a LA-
4 cycle at the test conditions to be used the following day. After each UDDS test cycle was
run, four IM240s were run and the PM2.5 and PM10 particles and the gaseous emissions were
collected. All four IM240 cycle particulate emissions were collected on single filters using both
PM2.5 and PM10 cyclones (University Research Glassware, Carrboro, NC) system. Vehicle
emissions were measured at 75, 40, 20, 0, and -20 °F for each of the UDDS driving cycles and
IM240 cycles. The gaseous regulated emissions and particle data shown (Tables 8-12a) for the
IM240 cycles are an average of the four tests.
An integrated emissions sample was collected from the CVS system in a Tedlar bag for
each UDDS test phase, which included an initial 124 second sample. Also, a background air
sample was taken after the charcoal dilution air filter. The regulated emissions (THC, CO, and
NOx) were measured with instruments interfaced to the CVS system and used for real-time
sampling during the testing.
Vehicle emissions were characterized by measurement of speciated (individual)
hydrocarbons (more than 250 compounds), speciated aldehydes (12 compounds), regulated
gaseous emissions (THC, CO, and NOx), 3 alcohols, and 2 ethers. Identifications or structural
formulas for more than 95% of the emitted HCs have been determined by established gas
chromatographic-mass spectrometric (GC-MS) techniques.8 Supplementary regulated, speciated
HCs, speciated aldehydes, ethanol, methanol, 2-propanol, methyltertiarybutyl ether (MTBE),
and ethyltertiarybutyl ether (ETBE) data are available from the authors.
Tailpipe Emissions
The vehicle UDDS bag samples were analyzed for speciated hydrocarbons, alcohols, and
ethers by gas chromatography.9 The data were manually transferred to a PC where peak
assignments were made and then the results were electronically transferred to the Archived
Mobile Source Emissions Data Base (AME). The individual hydrocarbons were identified
using a Lotus 1-2-3 program developed for identifying these compounds in complex
chromatograms.10 The concentrations of the regulated emissions were reported as g/mi and
mg/mi for individual HCs, aldehydes, alcohols, and ethers.
Aldehyde emissions were sampled from the CVS system through a heated (212 °F)
stainless steel line and collected on silica gel cartridges coated with acidified 2,4-
dinitrophenylhydrazine. A mass flow controller was used to regulate the sampling rate of the
aldehydes in the exhaust stream at 1 L/min. The aldehydes were analyzed by the previously
described liquid chromatographic procedure.11
5
-------
Table 3. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 75 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Summer Grade
Summer Grade
THC. g/mi
0.34
1.67
0.18
0.35
CO, g/mi
5.02
23.84
1.35
5.05
NOx, g/mi
0.75
0.44
0.37
2.90
Fuel Economy, mpg
20.85
21.03
20.50
20.26
Ethanol, mg/mi
0.08
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
5.04
6.05
3.82
3.52
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.19
4.38
0.99
1.89
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
8.68
15.12
6.83
9.20
Benzene, mg/mi
13.00
98.60
5.38
12.72
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
1.18
5.25
0.51
1.19
PM2.5, mg/mi
6.80
5.49
4.05
2.27
PM10, mg/mi
8.58
7.75
7.95
3.40
6
-------
Table 3a. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 75 °F.
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Summer Grade
Summer Grade
THC. g/mi
0.07
0.40
0.26
0.66
CO, g/mi
0.56
9.38
2.98
6.82
NOx, g/mi
0.06
0.12
0.73
4.05
Fuel Economy, mpg
24.97
25.42
20.32
20.52
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
0.72
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.04
0.65
4.64
4.80
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
0.38
0.28
1.16
2.54
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
2.50
2.09
9.03
11.54
Benzene, mg/mi
2.13
50.95
8.91
40.00
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
0.41
8.35
0.87
1.81
PM2.5, mg/mi
2.00
4.60
4.80
3.20
PM10, mg/mi
4.50
4.50
6.10
3.70
7
-------
Table 3b. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 75 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disconnected
Fuel
Summer Grade
THC. g/mi
0.16
0.31
CO, g/mi
0.74
4.74
NOx, g/mi
0.10
0.81
Fuel Economy, mpg
21.24
21.46
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.32
1.15
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
0.36
0.39
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
2.42
2.26
Benzene, mg/mi
4.81
27.41
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
0.11
0.35
PM2.5, mg/mi
2.50
2.80
PM10, mg/mi
3.30
3.00
8
-------
Table 4. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 40 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.81
0.76
3.43
2.06
0.44
0.42
0.69
0.34
CO, g/mi
10.49
8.49
51.20
27.01
3.37
3.40
7.63
3.31
NOx, g/mi
0.70
0.90
0.53
0.56
0.35
0.38
3.27
3.77
Fuel Economy, mpg
18.79
18.69
17.43
18.14
18.48
18.03
18.27
18.55
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
0.41
<0.01
4.24
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
5.46
9.56
13.35
9.09
3.88
3.69
4.49
3.98
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
2.20
7.42
13.48
22.23
1.68
6.28
3.24
5.57
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
12.34
21.46
42.33
38.31
9.53
14.03
14.16
13.73
Benzene, mg/mi
35.98
31.69
167.92
114.45
14.47
11.04
29.34
13.43
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
4.12
3.40
26.05
9.84
1.80
1.47
1.98
1.61
PM2.5, mg/mi
13.71
13.28
19.48
15.64
9.19
6.09
9.85
4.03
PM10, mg/mi
15.09
18.13
20.93
17.81
11.62
9.24
8.54
10.41
9
-------
Table 4a. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 40 °F.
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.19
0.20
0.42
0.21
0.47
0.46
0.93
1.31
CO, g/mi
1.65
1.54
5.73
2.07
4.85
4.24
9.80
17.54
NOx, g/mi
0.08
0.13
0.82
3.00
1.06
0.71
4.56
2.70
Fuel Economy, mpg
24.00
23.35
22.94
23.89
19.23
19.30
19.02
18.81
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
2.22
<0.01
<0.01
0.10
<0.01
<0.01
1.79
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
0.90
0.80
1.28
0.95
9.39
8.09
10.42
18.81
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
0.43
2.01
0.95
1.99
2.65
4.05
4.69
12.45
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
2.35
4.09
4.07
4.15
20.36
16.08
24.84
41.40
Benzene, mg/mi
6.37
8.17
36.58
12.34
17.56
14.58
52.47
75.07
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
0.25
0.52
1.64
0.37
2.92
1.36
3.90
4.69
PM2.5, mg/mi
4.05
8.40
10.4
6.05
7.13
7.65
6.30
6.70
PM10, mg/mi
5.40
7.50
9.8
6.15
9.50
9.05
6.30
10.97
10
-------
Table 4b. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 40 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.57
0.44
0.87
0.41
CO, g/mi
1.56
1.05
8.36
0.56
NOx, g/mi
0.16
0.12
0.79
2.91
Fuel Economy, mpg
19.75
19.40
19.81
19.48
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
1.08
<0.01
0.44
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.36
1.79
0.77
1.83
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
0.69
2.72
1.07
2.17
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
3.84
6.27
4.32
5.23
Benzene, mg/mi
17.57
14.77
71.80
10.40
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
1.42
1.71
1.43
0.63
PM2.5, mg/mi
9.95
9.10
12.27
6.80
PM10, mg/mi
10.05
10.00
12.17
8.10
11
-------
Table 5. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 20 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
1.25
1.20
4.63
2.78
0.66
0.69
1.02
0.47
CO, g/mi
13.36
11.93
69.50
35.07
6.00
6.24
10.61
4.84
NOx, g/mi
0.86
0.81
0.84
0.53
0.46
0.50
3.41
3.69
Fuel Economy, mpg
17.45
17.71
16.12
17.07
17.00
17.25
17.26
17.61
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
0.77
5.30
7.62
<0.01
0.07
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
4.91
3.10
13.86
5.17
3.78
4.07
4.52
4.46
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
2.78
11.39
22.74
33.82
1.99
8.89
3.48
7.31
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
14.51
20.18
63.11
48.32
10.74
18.44
15.02
16.78
Benzene, mg/mi
54.47
49.36
198.27
141.39
21.99
17.57
40.05
18.91
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
6.64
6.14
41.10
14.93
3.42
2.57
2.84
2.66
PM2.5, mg/mi
35.96
27.90
43.24
27.56
22.11
13.69
25.82
12.89
PM10, mg/mi
40.44
30.67
48.33
28.61
22.21
21.89
26.13
13.93
12
-------
Table 5a. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 20 °F.
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.52
0.49
0.69
0.48
0.68
0.65
1.24
1.58
CO, g/mi
4.64
3.57
8.74
4.20
5.74
5.64
13.85
21.54
NOx, g/mi
0.14
0.16
0.50
3.32
1.19
0.89
4.16
2.48
Fuel Economy, mpg
21.91
21.38
21.24
21.98
17.83
18.25
17.77
17.73
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
4.73
0.02
0.77
1.01
0.07
<0.01
0.96
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
0.85
1.06
0.80
1.15
8.54
5.32
11.32
11.91
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
0.78
4.29
0.66
3.23
2.52
4.73
5.16
21.42
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
3.10
7.48
3.30
6.48
19.04
14.04
28.02
42.44
Benzene, mg/mi
21.16
17.77
57.54
34.12
26.10
23.51
66.55
84.22
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
1.57
1.65
2.19
1.55
4.01
1.99
4.80
6.09
PM2.5, mg/mi
NA*
21.90
25.35
18.60
16.65
17.45
14.20
12.20
PM10, mg/mi
27.75
19.70
18.30
18.90
16.20
16.85
15.90
14.25
MA*-Data not available.
Table 5b. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 20 °F.
13
-------
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
1.09
0.96
1.42
0.85
CO, g/mi
2.57
2.49
7.01
1.75
NOx, g/mi
0.20
0.12
1.32
2.93
Fuel Economy, mpg
18.97
18.42
18.80
18.38
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
6.27
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
0.79
1.08
0.75
1.53
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.20
4.43
1.33
4.62
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
5.37
7.40
5.57
8.08
Benzene, mg/mi
32.92
29.42
72.96
27.74
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
2.41
2.95
2.15
0.99
PM2.5, mg/mi
20.75
19.30
28.10
21.10
PM10, mg/mi
21.25
19.30
28.05
22.20
14
-------
Table 6. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 0 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
2.03
2.20
5.70
4.29
1.19
1.22
1.58
1.12
CO, g/mi
16.76
16.88
91.55
53.70
9.97
9.34
15.09
8.05
NOx, g/mi
0.86
1.02
0.84
0.53
0.54
0.64
2.42
3.38
Fuel Economy, mpg
16.31
16.36
14.84
15.63
16.13
15.48
16.03
15.80
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
28.55
<0.01
34.60
<0.01
10.58
<0.01
2.69
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
5.31
7.33
15.92
7.34
4.41
4.51
4.73
4.61
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
3.78
18.28
30.11
60.75
2.91
11.33
3.80
10.06
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
18.36
34.49
80.80
83.22
14.33
21.01
16.92
20.59
Benzene, mg/mi
84.00
85.42
226.29
195.34
39.97
34.38
66.37
42.47
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
11.13
11.57
48.97
26.65
6.69
5.41
5.09
5.64
PM2.5, mg/mi
64.61
69.17
71.84
60.34
41.99
NA*
41.24
40.98
PM10, mg/mi
64.04
70.14
72.82
64.05
43.87
51.15
41.88
42.03
*
NA -Data not available.
15
-------
Table 6a. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 0 °F.
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.91
0.88
1.27
0.81
1.09
1.00
1.86
2.48
CO, g/mi
5.94
4.91
13.36
5.20
7.26
5.94
19.71
35.24
NOx, g/mi
0.17
0.20
0.50
3.52
1.40
1.23
3.82
2.18
Fuel Economy, mpg
19.93
19.86
19.57
20.48
16.83
16.61
17.03
16.72
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
12.17
0.40
0.73
<0.01
0.84
<0.01
2.59
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
0.90
1.26
0.97
1.43
9.00
6.31
13.32
22.12
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.19
7.57
0.92
6.07
2.76
6.93
6.17
45.79
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
4.55
12.39
5.48
11.31
20.87
19.13
33.74
81.43
Benzene, mg/mi
38.10
32.95
106.58
40.53
40.95
37.66
90.92
123.28
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
3.70
3.81
5.72
1.92
4.53
3.13
6.65
9.61
PM2.5, mg/mi
NA*
41.35
70.83
34.45
28.95
34.55
38.10
27.65
PM10, mg/mi
46.75
42.10
48.3
36.15
36.35
34.00
38.15
30.45
MA*-Data not available.
16
-------
Table 6b. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at 0 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
1.81
1.49
2.43
1.47
CO, g/mi
3.27
3.01
11.52
3.06
NOx, g/mi
0.19
0.14
0.78
3.50
Fuel Economy, mpg
17.25
17.02
16.81
17.23
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
42.91
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.00
1.30
0.70
1.64
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.26
8.09
1.67
7.46
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
6.09
12.78
6.49
11.88
Benzene, mg/mi
69.34
51.40
156.14
82.82
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
4.85
4.68
5.84
1.93
PM2.5, mg/mi
43.15
33.70
45.50
46.30
PM10, mg/mi
43.55
34.90
46.47
47.10
17
-------
Table 7. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at -20 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
2.42
4.94
9.59
8.30
2.76
2.17
4.75
1.98
CO, g/mi
25.01
28.44
134.26
89.90
15.54
13.31
33.94
10.33
NOx, g/mi
1.11
1.26
0.99
0.95
0.68
0.55
1.97
3.41
Fuel Economy, mpg
15.72
15.15
12.65
13.63
14.78
15.14
14.46
14.95
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
187.34
<0.01
193.31
<0.01
13.70
<0.01
3.02
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
8.34
8.74
28.76
19.67
5.57
5.34
4.45
6.95
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
5.68
37.73
38.11
131.51
4.58
19.61
6.14
16.01
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
25.33
58.94
119.00
181.77
21.02
33.36
24.19
31.48
Benzene, mg/mi
144.78
155.35
346.42
303.64
93.29
64.31
181.45
76.78
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
20.44
18.42
72.09
55.43
13.49
10.05
21.28
8.11
PM2.5, mg/mi
112.33
118.70
155.49
157.53
77.24
*
NA
123.10
76.73
PM10, mg/mi
113.31
131.57
159.71
160.69
104.44
81.77
124.35
77.38
^A -Data not available.
18
-------
Table 7a. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at -20 °F.
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
1.81
2.27
2.47
1.56
2.03
NA*
3.92
5.55
CO, g/mi
8.25
7.56
12.73
7.17
9.52
NA
35.02
73.33
NOx, g/mi
0.17
0.20
1.01
2.22
1.43
NA
3.13
1.85
Fuel Economy, mpg
18.66
18.20
17.97
19.17
15.84
NA
15.53
14.94
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
72.36
0.80
2.19
<0.01
NA
<0.01
3.55
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.18
2.16
1.55
2.01
8.63
NA
20.76
51.37
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.85
18.08
1.41
10.80
3.28
NA
10.81
97.54
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
7.38
26.61
8.59
18.15
22.25
NA
50.96
197.74
Benzene, mg/mi
71.39
85.14
131.17
80.67
69.64
NA
156.58
236.24
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
8.13
8.58
11.21
4.70
9.35
NA
12.39
34.99
PM2.5, mg/mi
71.50
118.25
117.25
72.75
84.10
NA
74.30
57.30
PM10, mg/mi
92.00
120.75
119.2
76.75
89.05
NA
75.70
59.30
vfA*- Data not available-Vehicle starting problem.
19
-------
Table 7b. Vehicle UDDS tailpipe emission rates at -20 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disconnected
Fuel
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
4.03
3.19
4.03
3.48
CO, g/mi
5.73
4.83
11.46
4.93
NOx, g/mi
0.26
0.18
1.43
3.25
Fuel Economy, mpg
16.06
15.49
15.96
16.19
Ethanol, mg/mi
<0.01
187.96
<0.01
<0.01
Formaldehyde, mg/mi
1.01
1.31
0.71
NA*
Acetaldehyde, mg/mi
1.91
21.59
1.22
NA
Total Aldehydes, mg/mi
8.08
27.61
5.67
NA
Benzene, mg/mi
125.69
101.11
196.57
121.40
1,3-Butadiene, mg/mi
9.16
10.35
5.47
3.73
PM2.5, mg/mi
93.85
77.70
69.20
87.50
PM10, mg/mi
93.85
78.30
70.40
89.60
vfA* - Data not available.
20
-------
Table 8. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emissions rates at 75 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Summer Grade
Summer Grade
THC. g/m
0.33
1.11
0.02
0.06
CO, g/mi
6.96
21.66
0.38
1.37
NOx, g/mi
1.30
0.50
0.36
2.74
PM2.5, mg/mi
5.26
5.71
2.74
1.83
PM10, mg/mi
8.70
8.22
4.57
2.74
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
No Malfunction
02 Sensor
Disconnected
Fuel
Summer Grade
Summer Grade
THC, g/m
0.03
0.21
0.24
0.12
CO, g/mi
1.11
8.77
2.38
0.98
NOx, g/mi
0.11
0.15
1.11
0.14
PM2.5, mg/mi
17.8
3.80
NA*
NA
PM10, mg/mi
20.7
4.20
NA
NA
vfA*- Data not avai
able.
21
-------
Table 9. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at 40 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.49
0.38
2.55
1.26
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.03
CO, g/mi
11.02
7.40
46.70
21.96
1.31
1.18
0.84
0.04
NOx, g/mi
1.07
1.18
0.62
0.58
0.30
0.28
3.86
5.02
PM2.5, mg/mi
3.90
6.98
6.98
4.77
4.58
2.88
2.64
2.27
PM10, mg/mi
6.44
13.52
8.47
8.62
4.82
3.07
2.07
7.96
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.02
0.07
0.04
0.02
0.25
0.13
0.38
0.67
CO, g/mi
0.53
0.98
0.18
0.17
2.99
2.27
4.03
9.98
NOx, g/mi
0.28
0.15
2.13
4.32
0.98
0.66
5.86
3.60
PM2.5, mg/mi
1.30
4.45
2.20
5.65
6.27
4.25
2.45
3.55
PM10, mg/mi
2.10
3.45
2.35
3.05
7.07
5.4
2.00
4.00
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
Table 9a. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at 40 °F.
22
-------
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.05
0.06
0.39
0.05
CO, g/mi
0.27
0.27
10.94
0.08
NOx, g/mi
0.08
0.05
0.24
3.90
PM2.5, mg/mi
1.65
0.90
0.87
4.00
PM10, mg/mi
1.85
0.90
1.03
3.50
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
Table 10. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at 20 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
23
-------
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.58
0.38
3.38
1.76
0.11
0.10
0.10
0.03
CO, g/mi
13.16
7.54
62.86
30.86
1.36
0.93
0.76
0.10
NOx, g/mi
1.10
1.10
0.91
0.54
0.34
0.39
4.20
4.58
PM2.5, mg/mi
8.84
1.62
10.42
4.10
4.06
2.31
2.96
2.76
PM10, mg/mi
5.38
4.86
15.44
4.33
3.72
2.77
5.14
5.08
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.31
0.22
0.51
0.72
CO, g/mi
1.22
0.90
0.99
0.02
2.82
3.24
6.40
9.86
NOx, g/mi
0.11
0.14
1.20
5.10
1.02
0.77
5.15
3.13
PM2.5, mg/mi
15.95
1.25
2.95
8.10
5.65
5.55
1.40
3.15
PM10, mg/mi
14.20
3.05
2.35
7.25
9.95
4.8
1.60
4.60
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
Table 10a. Vehicle
M240 tailpipe emission rates at 20 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
24
-------
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.06
0.05
0.50
0.04
CO, g/mi
0.23
0.19
10.88
0.08
NOx, g/mi
0.08
0.03
0.20
3.81
PM2.5, mg/mi
1.15
1.20
3.30
0.20
PM10, mg/mi
1.90
1.20
3.40
4.70
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
25
-------
Table 11. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at 0 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.64
0.41
3.20
2.40
0.15
0.13
0.12
0.05
CO, g/mi
13.32
7.75
78.16
41.58
1.56
0.91
0.87
0.22
NOx, g/mi
1.13
1.16
0.87
0.54
0.34
0.37
4.74
4.60
PM2.5, mg/mi
14.32
4.72
15.00
8.30
7.28
1.75
6.56
3.79
PM10, mg/mi
18.88
5.30
20.10
9.91
8.55
5.15
7.38
6.08
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.08
0.06
0.15
0.02
0.31
0.24
0.64
1.14
CO, g/mi
1.31
1.34
2.96
0.03
2.60
3.48
9.20
18.72
NOx, g/mi
0.15
0.15
0.65
5.22
1.10
0.88
4.74
1.76
PM2.5, mg/mi
0.70
2.70
5.47
7.70
2.65
4.70
4.00
3.05
PM10, mg/mi
3.00
4.80
4.47
10.35
2.55
4.85
4.70
4.85
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
Table 11a. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at 0 °F.
26
-------
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
THC. g/mi
0.07
0.05
0.37
0.08
CO, g/mi
0.32
0.21
6.23
0.12
NOx, g/mi
0.09
0.07
0.54
3.33
PM2.5, mg/mi
0.70
2.80
2.33
1.60
PM10, mg/mi
1.60
1.60
3.37
1.90
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
27
-------
Table 12. Vehicle IM240 tailpipe emission rates at -20 °F.
Vehicle
Taurus
Concord
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.84
0.57
4.48
3.58
0.27
0.16
0.29
0.10
CO, g/mi
17.19
9.34
88.28
63.80
3.06
1.62
3.20
0.78
NOx, g/mi
1.32
1.16
1.23
0.82
0.62
0.34
4.88
5.18
PM2.5, mg/mi
9.21
6.40
13.58
12.56
7.06
4.67
7.38
5.02
PM10, mg/mi
13.31
9.72
13.92
16.70
12.15
9.23
11.83
5.02
Vehicle
Focus
Regal
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.14
0.16
0.37
0.04
0.29
NA*
0.96
3.03
CO, g/mi
1.76
2.34
11.06
0.16
3.48
NA
12.73
52.25
NOx, g/mi
0.12
0.15
0.20
2.87
1.13
NA
4.16
2.51
PM2.5, mg/mi
2.03
3.30
5.30
3.05
3.05
NA
4.15
7.85
PM10, mg/mi
2.43
11.75
5.95
4.25
6.2
NA
6.80
10.10
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
NA*-Data not available
28
-------
Table 12a. Vehicle
M240 tailpipe emission rates at -20 °F.
Vehicle
Intrepid
Mode
No Malfunction
02 Sensor Disc.
Fuel
Base1^
E-10*
Base
E-10
THC, g/mi
0.11
0.06
0.32
0.09
CO, g/mi
0.35
0.29
3.03
0.18
NOx, g/mi
0.13
0.07
1.35
4.52
PM2.5, mg/mi
4.00
4.70
3.90
1.60
PM10, mg/mi
4.15
4.70
4.00
4.90
f Winter grade, without ethanol
* Winter grade, with ethanol
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Vehicle tests were performed in duplicate for all temperatures except at 75 °F. At 75 °F only a
single test with summer grade fuel was run. Empirical relationships could not be tested since only single
and duplicate tests were made; rather the relationships are indicative of trends. The THC emission results
reported were the values determined by a total hydrocarbon analyzer (using the flame ionization detector)
rather than a summation of the individual hydrocarbons as determined by gas chromatographic analysis.
Tables 3-7b contain the UDDS tailpipe regulated emissions (THC, CO, and NOx), fuel economy, toxic
emissions (Formaldehyde, Acetaldehyde, Benzene, and 1,3-Butadiene), ethers/alcohols (MTBE, Ethanol,
and Methanol), and particulate emissions (PM2.5 and PM10) data. Tables 8-12a contain the IM240
tailpipe gas phase (THC, CO, and NOx) and particulate emissions (PM2.5 and PM10) data. Detailed
hydrocarbon, aldehyde and ketone tables are included showing the compounds determined from each bag
sample taken from the three bag FTP test. Figures 1 through 190 show the relation of compound
emission rates for the vehicles, fuels, test cycles, and test modes at the program test temperatures. Each
point (symbol) on the plots is the data from an individual vehicle test run at the specified test temperature.
Figures 191 and 192 are regression plots (individual vehicle tests) showing the relationship of PM2.5 vs
PM10 and THC vs PM2.5 emissions, respectively.
Regulated Emissions
Total Hydrocarbons-UDDS Cycle. Hydrocarbon emissions (Figures 1-2, 39-40, 77-78, 115-116, and
153-154) increased in the mode no malfunction) and generally increased in 02 mode (malfunction-
oxygen sensor disconnected) as the test temperature decreased with all vehicles and fuels. The vehicle's
engine air/fuel mixture is controlled by a feedback loop via the oxygen sensor, and when the sensor was
disconnected, the vehicle operated in a slightly rich fuel condition throughout the test cycle. The greatest
HC emitter was the Taurus when tested with the base fuel, at -20 °F in the 02 mode, while the least HC
emitter was the Intrepid when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 °F in the NM mode (9.60 g/mile vs 0.16
29
-------
g/mile, respectively). Taurus HC emissions ranged from a low of 0.34 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel)
to a high of 9.60 g/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Regal HC emissions ranged from a low of 0.26
g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 5.55 g/mile (02 mode,-20 °F, E-10 fuel). Focus
emissions ranged from a low of 0.07 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 2.48 g/mile (02
mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Concord emissions ranged from a low of 0.33 g/mile to a high of 4.75 g/mile
(02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Intrepid HC emissions ranged from a low of 0.06 g/mile (NM mode, 75
°F, SG fuel) to a high of 4.07 g/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen sensor (02
mode) increased emissions from all vehicles at every temperature with the base fuel and generally
increased the emissions with the E-10 fuel. The E-10 fuel generally lowered HC emissions.
Total Hydrocarbons-IM240 Cycle. The hydrocarbon emissions (Tables 8-12a) in general showed a
general increase with all the vehicles emissions as the test temperature decreased from 75 °F to -20 °F.
When operating the vehicles on E-10 fuel, the emissions were generally decreased in both the NM and 02
modes.
Carbon Monoxide-UDDS Cycle. Carbon monoxide emissions (Figures 3-4, 41-42, 79-80, 117-118 and
155-156) increased as the test temperature decreased with all the vehicles, at all test modes and fuels with
one exception; the Focus emissions were greater at 0 °F than at -20 °F (13.36 vs 12.73 g/mile
respectively). The greatest CO emitter was the Taurus, (134.26 g/mile) when tested with base fuel, at -20
°F, in the 02 mode. The least emitters were the Focus, (0.56 g/mile) when tested with the SG fuel, at 75
°F, in the NM mode and the Intrepid, (0.56 g/mile) when tested with E-10 fuel, at 40 °F, in the 02 mode.
Taurus emissions ranged from a low of 5.02 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 134.26
g/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Regal emissions ranged from a low of 2.98 g/mile (NM mode, 75
°F, SG fuel) to a high of 73.33 g/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Focus emissions ranged from a low
of 0.56 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 13.36 g/mile (02 mode, 0 °F, base fuel). Concord
emissions ranged from a low of 2.55 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 33.94 g/mile (02
mode,-20 °F, base fuel). Intrepid emissions ranged from a low of 0.56 g/mile (02 mode, 40 °F, E-10
fuel) to a high of 11.62 g/mile (02 mode, 0 °F, base fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen sensor increased
the CO emissions from all vehicles when tested with base fuel and generally increased the CO emissions
when the vehicles were tested with the E-10 fuel. The E-10 fuel generally reduced the CO emissions
from the vehicles.
Carbon Monoxide-IM240 Cycle. The carbon monoxide emissions (Tables 8-12a) from the vehicles
generally increased as the test temperature decreased. E-10 fuel generally decreased vehicle CO
emissions. In the malfunction mode the emissions were generally increased for some vehicles and
decreased for others.
Oxides ofNitrogen-UDDS. Oxides of nitrogen emissions (Figures 5-6, 43-44, 81-82, 119-120, and 157-
158) show the vehicle emissions for all vehicles at all test conditions. The greatest emissions were
produced by the Regal when tested with the base fuel, at 40 °F, in the 02 mode. The least emissions
were produced by the Focus when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 °F, in the NM mode (4.56 vs 0.06
g/mile, respectively). Taurus emissions ranged from a low of 0.53 g/mile (02 mode, 40 °F, base fuel and
NM mode, at both 0 and 20 °F, E-10 fuel). Regal emissions ranged from a low of 0.73 g/mile (NM
mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 4.56 g/mile (02 mode, 40 °F, base fuel). Focus emissions ranged
from a low of 0.06 g/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 3.52 g/mile (02 mode, 0 °F, E-10
fuel). Concord emissions ranged from a low of 0.35 g/mile (NM mode, 40 °F, base fuel) to a high of
3.77 g/mile (02 mode, 40 °F, E-10 fuel). Intrepid emissions ranged from a low of 0.10 g/mile (NM
mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 3.50 g/mile (02 mode, 0 °F, E-10 fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen
30
-------
sensor decreased the emissions from the Taurus but increased the emissions from the Focus, Regal,
Concord, and Intrepid with both base and E-10 fuels. The E-10 fuel reduced the emissions from the
Regal and generally from the Intrepid but increased emissions from the Focus and Concord and generally
from the Taurus in the NM mode.
Oxides ofNitrogen-IM240. Tables 8-12a show vehicle IM240 data for both vehicles at all test
conditions. The emissions generally increased as the test temperature decreased, when the vehicles were
operated in the malfunction mode and when the vehicles were operated with the E-10 fuel.
Toxic Emissions
Benzene. Besides being present in the fuel itself, benzene is emitted from the tailpipe as a result of its
formation during the combustion process involving other fuel components, such as cyclohexane and the
alkylaromatics. 1213 In one study, from 2 to 7 % of the benzene was determined to be the result of the
rearrangement of these molecules during combustion.14 Benzene emissions (Figures 11-12, 49-50, 87-
88,125-126 and 163-164) increased as test temperatures decreased. The greatest benzene emitter was the
Taurus when tested with base fuel, at -20 °F, in the 02 mode and the lowest benzene emitter was the
Focus when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 °F, in the NM mode. Taurus benzene emissions ranged from a
low of 13.00 mg/mile (NM mode, at 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 346.41 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base
fuel). Regal benzene emissions ranged from a low of 8.91 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high
of 236.24 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Focus benzene emissions ranged from a low of 2.13
mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 131.17 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Concord
benzene emissions ranged from a low of 8.00 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F , SG fuel) to a high of 181.45
mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Intrepid emissions ranged from a low of 4.81 mg/mile (NM mode,
75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 196.56 mg/mile (02 mode,-20 °F, base fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen
sensor almost doubled the emissions from all vehicles when tested with the base fuel and increased the
emissions from all vehicles when tested with the E-10 fuel with the following exceptions: The Focus at -
20 °F in which the emissions decreased from 85.14 mg/mile to 80.68 mg/mile and the Intrepid at 20 and
40 F °F when the emissions decreased from 29.42 mg/mile to 27.74 mg/mile and 14.77 mg/mile to 10.40
mg/mile, respectively. The E-10 fuel generally lowered benzene emissions from the vehicles when tested
in the NM mode and in the 02 mode the E-10 fuel decreased the emissions from the Taurus, Focus,
Concord, and Intrepid, but increased emissions from the Regal.
1,3-Butadiene. 1,3-Butadiene is not a gasoline component but a by-product of the combustion process.
This compound was emitted primarily in the initial 2 minutes of vehicle start-up, when the air-to-fuel
mixture was rich and the vehicle's emission control system was warming up. Figures 13-14, 51-52, 89-
90, 127-128, and 165-166 show the emission rates for all vehicles at all test conditions. 1,3-Butadiene
emissions increased as test temperature decreased with both fuels and in both test modes. The greatest
emitter was the Taurus when tested with the base fuel, at -20 °F, in the 02 mode and the lowest emitter
was the Intrepid when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 °F, in the NM mode. Taurus emissions ranged from
a low of 1.18 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F , SG fuel) to a high of 72.09 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base
fuel). Regal emissions ranged from a low of 0.87 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F , SG fuel) to a high of 34.99
mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Focus emissions ranged from a low of 0.25 mg/mile (NM mode,
40 °F, base fuel) to a high of 11.21 mg/mile (02 mode,-20 °F, base fuel). Concord emissions ranged
from a low of 0.51 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 21.28 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F,
base fuel). Intrepid emissions ranged from a low of 0.11 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high
31
-------
of 10.35 mg/mile (NM mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen sensor increased the
emissions from the Taurus, Regal, and Focus and generally from the Concord and Intrepid with the base
fuel. With the E-10 fuel, Taurus emissions were increased, and Regal and Concord emissions generally
increased, but Intrepid and Focus emissions decreased . The E-10 fuel reduced emissions from the
Concord and generally from the Taurus, Regal, and Intrepid, but increased emissions from the Focus in
the NM mode. The E-10 fuel decreased emissions from the Taurus, Focus, and Intrepid and generally
from the Concord but increased emissions from the Regal.
Formaldehyde andAcetaldehyde. Formaldehyde (Figures 7-8, 45-46, 83-84, 121-122 and 159-160) and
acetaldehyde (Figures 9-10, 47-48, 85-86, 123-124, and 161-162) were not present in the fuel but are by-
products of the incomplete combustion of the fuel. These two aldehydes are usually the major aldehydes
emitted, with formaldehyde generally the major emission product. Vehicle formaldehyde emissions
generally increased as test temperature decreased. The greatest formaldehyde emitter was the Regal
when tested with the E-10 fuel, at -20 F, in the 02 mode and the lowest emitter was the Focus when
tested with SG fuel, at 75 F, in the 02 mode (51.37 mg/mile vs 0.65 mg/mile, respectively). Taurus
formaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 3.10 mg/mile (NM mode, 20 F, E-10 fuel) to a high of
28.77 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 F, base fuel). Regal formaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 4.64
mg/mile (NM mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 51.37 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Focus
formaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 0.65 mg/mile (02 mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 2.16
mg/mile (NM mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Concord formaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 3.52
mg/mile (02 mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 6.95 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Intrepid
formaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 0.70 mg/mile (02 mode, 0 °F, base fuel) to a high of 1.79
mg/mile (NM mode, 40 °F, base fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen sensor in the NM mode, with base
fuel, increased the formaldehyde emissions from the Taurus and Regal and generally increased the
emissions from the Focus and Concord but reduced emissions from the Intrepid. In the oxygen sensor
disconnect mode with the E-10 fuel, Concord emissions were increased and generally increased with the
Taurus, Regal, Focus, and Intrepid. With the E-10 fuel, increased Intrepid emissions and generally
increased Taurus, Regal, Concord, and Focus emissions in the NM mode. In the 02 mode, the E-10 fuel
increased Intrepid emissions and generally increased Regal and Focus emissions, but decreased Taurus
emissions and generally decreased Concord emissions.
Vehicle acetaldehyde emissions generally increased as the test temperature decreased. The greatest
acetaldehyde emitter was the Taurus when tested with the E-10 fuel, at -20 F, in the 02 mode and the
lowest acetaldehyde emitter was the Focus when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 F, in the 02 mode (131.51
mg/mile and 0.28 mg/mile, respectively). Taurus acetaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 1.19
mg/mile (NM mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 131.51 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Regal
acetaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 1.16 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 97.54
mg/mile (02 mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Focus acetaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 0.28 mg/mile
(02 mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 18.08 mg/mile (NM mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Concord
acetaldehyde emissions ranged from a low of 1.48 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 F, SG fuel) to a high of 19.61
mg/mile (NM mode, -20 F, E-10 fuel). Intrepid emissions ranged from a low of 0.36 mg/mile (NM mode,
75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 21.59 mg/mile (NM mode,-20 °F, E-10 fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen
sensor increased the acetaldehyde emissions from the Taurus, Regal, and Concord and generally from the
Intrepid but generally decreased the emissions from the Focus with the base fuel. When tested with the
E-10 fuel in the 02 disconnect mode, the acetaldehyde emissions from the Taurus and Regal were more
than doubled and the emissions from the Focus and Concord were slightly decreased and Intrepid
emissions were generally decreased. Testing with the E-10 fuel increased the acetaldehyde emissions
from all vehicles, in both NM and 02 modes, from about 2 to almost 10 times depending upon the
32
-------
vehicle and the test temperature.
Particulate Emissions
PM2.5 andPM 10 - UDDS Cycle. The particulate emissions (PM2.5 and PM10) from all vehicles
(Tables 3-7b) generally increased (both modes) as the test temperature decreased. The PM2.5 particle
emissions were about the same as the PM10 particle emissions (Figure 191), indicating that gasoline
fueled vehicle particulate emissions are less than 2.5 um. Figure 192 is a regression plot of THC vs
PM2.5 for both vehicles at all test conditions, showing some correlation (R2 = .551) at these conditions.
A regression analysis of the Taurus emissions showed some correlation at all test conditions (R2 of
0.627). The Regal showed little THC vs PM2.5 correlation (R2 = .144) as regression analysis was
performed at different test modes and fuels. Regression analysis of THC vs PM2.5 for the Intrepid was
very good at R2 = .915, fair for the Focus at R2 = .579 and Concord at R2 = .725. The greatest PM2.5
emissions was produced by the Taurus when tested with E-10 fuel, at -20 °F, in the 02 mode and the
least emissions were produced by the Focus when tested with the SG fuel, at 75 °F, in the NM mode
(157.53 vs 2.00 mg/mile, respectively). Taurus PM2.5 emissions ranged from a low of 5.49 mg/mile (02
mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 157.53 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, E-10 fuel). Regal PM2.5
emissions ranged from alow of 3.20 mg/mile (02 mode, 75 °F, base fuel) to ahigh of 84.10 mg/mile
(base fuel, -20 °F, NM mode). Focus PM2.5 emissions ranged from a low of 2.00 mg/mile (NM mode,
75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 117.25 (02 mode, -20 °F, base fuel, . Concord PM2.5 emissions ranged from
a low of 2.27 mg/mile (02 mode, 75 °F, SG fuel) to a high of 123.10 mg/mile (02 mode, -20 °F, base
fuel). Intrepid PM2.5 emissions ranged from a low of 2.50 mg/mile (NM mode, 75 °F, SG fuel to a high
of 93.85 mg/mile (NM mode, -20 °F, base fuel). Disconnecting the oxygen sensor generally increased
the PM2.5 emissions from all the vehicles with the base fuel. With the E-10 fuel, the Focus and Regal
PM2.5 emissions were decreased, the Intrepid generally increased, the Concord generally decreased, but
the Taurus showed no trend. The E-10, NM mode, reduced emissions from the Intrepid but showed no
trend with the other vehicles. In the malfunction mode, the E-10 fuel reduced PM2.5 emissions from the
Focus, generally reduced emissions from the Concord, Taurus, and Regal, but the Intrepid showed no
trend. The PM10 emissions generally followed the PM2.5 trend.
PM2.5 andPM10 - IM240 Cycle. The particle emissions (Tables 8-12a) were generally greater at the
lower test temperatures. The use of E-10 fuel generally showed a decrease in emissions. When operating
in the malfunction mode emissions were generally increased.
Alcohols and Ether
In addition to the regulated emissions (HCs, CO, and NOx), aldehydes, and particulates, the two alcohols,
methanol (MeOH) and ethanol (EtOH), and methyltertiarybutyl ether (MTBE) were determined from
each vehicle test (Figures 17-22, 55-60, 93-98, 131-136, and 169-174). These compounds are not present
in the base fuel but are combustion products. Ethanol was added to the base winter grade fuel to prepare
the E-10 test fuel. The base winter grade fuel did not contain either methanol or MTBE. Ethanol was
not generally present in the emissions until the vehicles were fueled with the E-10 fuel. When testing
with E-10 fuel the ethanol emission were generally greater when the vehicles were tested in the NM mode
as compared with 02 mode emissions. Alcohol and ether emissions generally increased as the test
temperature decreased. Methanol emissions were present when the vehicles were tested with both modes
and fuels, with the E-10 fuel and 02 mode generally producing the most emissions. The MTBE
33
-------
emissions generally followed the methanol trend.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In reviewing the regulated emissions (HC, CO, and NOx), the toxic emissions (benzene, 1,3-
butadiene, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde), and the particulate emissions (PM2.5 and PM10) data it
should be noted that these are emissions from only five vehicles. These test vehicles could or could not
be representative of the on-road fleet. The malfunction conditions that were introduced are extreme
conditions in which the vehicle's oxygen sensor valve was rendered completely inoperable. In actuality,
the condition of this simulated malfunctions (oxygen sensor valve disconnected) for on-road vehicles
could be anywhere in the range of being completely operable to inoperable. Limited resources restricted
our testing to five vehicles and to duplicate runs (one at 75 °F) at 40, 20, 0 and -20 °F. Also, due to
resource limitations we were able to take only single PM2.5 and PM10 particulate filter from each of the
UDDS test cycles (all three phases combined) rather than individual PM2.5 and PM10 particle filters
from each of the UDDS's three phases.
Hydrocarbons-UDDS cycle - Hydrocarbons generally increased as test temperature decreased and the
most HCs were emitted when the 02 sensor was disconnected. The E-10 fuel generally reduced
HC emissions.
Hydrocarbons-IM240 cycle - In general, lowering the test temperature and disconnecting the 02 sensor
increased the HC emissions. The E-10 fuel generally reduced the HC emissions.
Carbon Monoxide-UDDS cycle - There was a general increase in CO emissions as the test temperature
decreased and disabling the 02 sensor resulted in the most CO emissions. The E-10 fuel
generally reduced CO emissions from the vehicles.
Carbon Monoxide-IM240 cycle - There was a general increase in CO emissions as the test temperature
decreased and the most CO was emitted when the 02 sensor was disconnected. The E-10 fuel
generally reduced CO emissions from the vehicles.
Oxides ofNitrogen-UDDS cycle - Disconnecting the oxygen sensor generally produced greater NOx
emissions from the vehicles.
Oxides of Nitrogen-IM240 cycle - Most emissions were produced in the malfunction mode, at lower
temperatures with the E-10 fuel.
Benzene - Benzene emissions generally increased as test temperature decreased, when the 02 sensor was
disconnected, and when tested on the E-10 fuel.
1,3-Butadiene - The 1,3-butadiene emissions generally increased as the test temperature decreased and
when operating in the malfunction mode. The E-10 fuel generally reduced the emission rates
from the vehicles.
Aldehydes - Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions generally increased as the test temperatures
34
-------
decreased, when testing in the malfunction mode, and when testing with E-10 fuel.
PM2.5 and PM10 particulate-UDDS cycle - The PM2.5 and PM10 particulate emissions levels were
comparable (indicating that all PM emissions are less than 2.5 um). Emissions from both vehicles
followed the HC trend and increased as the test temperatures decreased and the E-10 fuel
generally reduced particulate emissions. Disconnecting the 02 sensor on the vehicles generally
increased emissions.
PM2.5 and PM10 particulate-IM240 cycle - Particulate emissions generally increased as test temperature
decreased and when testing with E-10 fuel. In general, disconnecting the 02 sensor produced the most
emissions.
Alcohols and Ethers-Most emissions were produced when the test temperature was decreased, when the
vehicles were operated in the malfunction mode, and when tested with E-10 fuel.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge and express gratitude to William Crews and Richard Snow of Clean
Air Vehicle Technology Center, Inc. for providing analytical assistance. We also acknowledge Jerry
Faircloth, Ned Perry, and Jason Mills of Clean Air Vehicle Technology Center (CAVTC) for vehicle
testing and data processing assistance.
DISCLAIMER
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development
funded and managed the research described here under Contract 68-D0-0269 to Clean Air Vehicle
Technology Center, Inc. It has been subjected to Agency review and approved for publication. Mention
of trade names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use.
35
-------
REFERENCES
1. Health Effects Institute Communications, Research Priorities for Mobile Air Toxics, No. 2 (1993)
2. D. W. Dockery, C. A. Pope., \\\,Annu. Rev. Public Health 1997, 15, 107-132.
3. Particulate air pollution and daily mortality: Replication and validation of selected studies;
Health Effects Institute: Boston, 1995
4. S. Cadle, P. A. Mulawa, J. Ball, C. Donase, A. Weibel, J. C. Sagebeil, K. T. Knapp, R. Snow,
Environ. Sci Technol. 1997, 31,3405-3412
5. R. Snow, L. Baker, W. Crews, C. O. Davis, J. Duncan, N. Perry, P. Siudak, F. Stump, W. Ray, J.
Braddock, "Characterization of emissions from a methanol fueled vehicle". J. Air Pollu. Control
Assoc. 39: 48 (1989)
6. F. Stump, S. Tejada, F. Black, W. Ray, W. Crews, R. Davis, "Compound injection to assure the
performance of motor vehicle emissions sampling systems". SAE Paper 961118, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1996
7. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 86, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
DC, 1983
8. F. D. Stump and D. Dropkin, "Gas Chromatographic Method for Quantitative Determination of
C2to C13 Hydrocarbons in Roadway Vehicle Emissions", Anal. Chem. 57:2629(1986).
9. F. Stump, K. Knapp, and W. Ray, "Seasonal Impact of Blending Oxygenated Organics with
Gasoline on Motor Vehicle Tailpipe and Evaporative Emissions," J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 40,
872-880, (1990).
10. S. Tejada, J. Sigsby, "Identification of chromatographic peaks using Lotus 1-2-3", J.
Chromatogr. Sci., 26: 292 (1988)
11. S. Tejada, "Evaluation of silica gel cartridges in situ with acidified 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine
for sampling aldehydes and ketones in air", Intern. J. Environ.Anal. Chem. 26:167(1986)
12. E. W. Kaiser, W. O. Siegl, D. F. Cotton, R. W. Anderson, "Effects of fuel structure on emissions
from a spark-ignited engine II. Naphthalene and aromatic fuels", Environ. Sci. Technol., 26,
1581-1586 (1992)
13. E. W. Kaiser, W. O. Siegl, Y. I. Henig, R. W. Anderson, F. H. Trinker, "Effects of fuel structure
on emissions from a spark-ignited engine", Environ. Sci. Technol., 25, 2005 (1991)
14. F. D. Stump. K. T. Knapp, W. D. Ray, C. Burton, R. Snow, "The seasonal impact of blending
oxygenated organics with gasoline in motor vehicle tailpipe and evaporative emissions-Part II",
SAE Paper 902129, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1990
36
-------
Figure 1. Taurus, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 2. Taurus, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
6
5
4
J
E 3
o>
2
1
0
-40 -20
4
0 Base
A E-10
A SG
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 3. Taurus, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 4, Taurus, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 5. Taurus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 6. Taurus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
0 0.8
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
37
-------
Figure 7. Taurus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 8. Taurus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
O Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 9. Taurus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
50
40
j 30
t20
10
0
A
A
A
A
$ O
0
k
0
—A,
¦40
-20
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Figure 10. Taurus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
v Base
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 1. Taurus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
200 |
Figure 1 2. Taurus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
400
150
100
-40 -20
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
J 250
E 200
350
300
150
100
-40 -20
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
38
-------
Figure 1 3. Taurus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
25
20
j? 15
t 10
5
0
f
A
4
T
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
¦40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 14. Taurus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 15. Taurus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 16. Taurus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 7. Taurus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 18. Taurus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
O Base
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
39
-------
Figure 1 9. Taurus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 20. Taurus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
0 Base
O Base
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 21. Taurus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 22. Taurus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
Test Temperature, F
t Temperature, F
Figure 23. Taurus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 24. Taurus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
0 Base
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
40
-------
Figure 25. Taurus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
200 |
Figure 26. Taurus, PMIO, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
200
150
100
¦40 -20
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
150
100
-40 -20
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
Figure 27. Taurus, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
1
0.9
0.8
0
0.7
F
CO
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
T
A
-A-
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Figure 28. Taurus, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
0
$
t
~
$
I
A
$
A
i
A
¦40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 29. Taurus, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 30. Taurus, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
20
18
16
0
14
F
CO
12
10
8
6
-40
-20
* 1 i
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Test Temperature, F
41
-------
Figure 31. Taurus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
1.5
1.4
1.3
E 1.2
ra
1.1
1
0.9
~
-A-
k
A
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure 32. Taurus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 33. Taurus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
24
23
22
(0
o>
I 21
E
20
19
18
t
-40 -20
-i
A
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Figure 34. Taurus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
ra 70
Test Temperature, F
Figure 35. Taurus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 36. Taurus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
25
20
o 15
E
10
0
1 •
LJL
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
42
-------
Figure 37. Taurus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 38. Taurus, PMIO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
v Rase
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 39. Concord, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 40. Concord, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
O Base
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 41. Concord, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 42. Concord, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
20
15
£ 10
D>
*
o
A o
1
*
1
A
-40
-20
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
O Base
~ E-10
A SG
60
80
Test Temperature, F
43
-------
Figure 43. Concord, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
k
-4sr
-40 -20
o
*
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
O Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Figure 44. Concord, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
A
A
h A
A
A
~ ~
A
O
A
$
a
A.
-40
-20
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
80
Figure 45. Concord, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 46. Concord, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
20
15
f"
A.
* t
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 47. Concord, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure 48. Concord, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
20
15
10
k
A
t
i
~
e
$
0
A
40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
44
-------
Figure 49. Concord, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 50. Concord, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 51. Concord, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 52. Concord, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02
15
10
t
t
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
v Base
Test Temperature, F
Figure 53. Concord, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 54. Concord, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, C2 mode
^ Base
A E-10
4
Test Temperature,F
21
20
19
§» 18
ja>
E 17
16
15
14
«
i
-*0-
O Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
45
-------
Figure 55. Concord, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
07
(I)
F
0.6
O)
0.5
F
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-4 h~
^ Base
~ E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature,F
80
Figure 56. Concord, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 57. Concord, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 58. Concord, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
A F-10
Test Temperature,F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 59. Concord, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
20
15
A
J!
1) 10
5
A
A
O
A
Base
E-10
SG
~
A
A
~
$ A 4
$ A
-40
-20
0 20 40
Test Temperature,F
60 80
Figure 60. Concord, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
46
-------
Figure 61. Concord, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
90
80
70
60
E
60
40
30
20
10
0
T
-40 -20
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
80
Figure 62. Concord, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 63. Concord, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
X
1
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 64. Concord, PM10, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 65. Concord, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
0.3
0.25
0.2
a>
| 0.15
"3>
0.1
0.05
A.
A
A O
¦*—t"
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature,F
80
Figure 66. Concord, THC, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
o
~5~
~
A
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
47
-------
Figure 67, Concord, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 68, Concord, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
o
o
I-*
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
E-10
A SG
Test Temperature, F
Figure 69. Concord, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
E
o>
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Jl
* t
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 70. Concord, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
8
7
6
_0)
£ 5
4
3
2
2 i *
¥
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 71. Concord, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure 72. Concord, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
v Base
Test Temperature, F
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature,F
48
-------
Figure 73. Concord, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
12
10
8
E c
O
~
A
~
~
Base
E-10
SG
I °
A
V
A 8
A
4
~
A
A A
A
2
-40
¦20
0
20 40
60 80
Test Temperature,F
Figure 74. Concord, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
12
10
8
6
O
A
~
O
o
4
£
A
f t
— 11
O Base
~ E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure 75. Concord, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
^ Base
A F-10
r~I
Test Temperature,F
Figure 76. Concord, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
20
15
10
O
A
O
2
A i
A ^
A
9 <
> A
$
A
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
80
Figure 77. Focus, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
2.5
2
£ 1.5
D>
1
0.5
0
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 78. Focus, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
2.5
®
e 1.5
~D>
1
0.5
"5"
O
^-4
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
49
-------
Figure 79. Focus, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure 80. Focus, CO, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
15
10
E
D)
$ i
o
A
A
$
O
A
A
A
—A
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 81. Focus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
0.25
0.2
£ 0.15
D>
0.1
0.05
A
t-r
A
~
O Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 82. Focus, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
E 2
~o>
t
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
V
$
§
o
—A.
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 83. FOCUS, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 84. Focus, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
1.5
0.5
$
-o-
~
o
¦V
o
A
-A-
i i
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
2
1.5
O
mg/mile
o
A
Base
E-10
SG
o
$
O
A
0.5
4
$
~
i
A
4
-40
-20
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
50
-------
Figure 85. Focus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 86. Focus, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
Figure 87. Focus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 88. Focus, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 89. Focus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
A
-A-
¦t
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure 90. Focus, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
15
10
E
D>
E
o
~ 0
~
6
A
A
~ <
~ «*
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
51
-------
Figure 91. Focus, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 92. Focus, Fuel Ecenomy, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
o) 22
a> 22
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 93. Focus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
2.5
2
® 1.5
£
1 1
0.5
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 94. Focus, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 95. Focus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 96. Focus, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
52
-------
Figure 97. Focus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 98. Focus, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
e 15
Test Temperature, F
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
Figure 99. Focus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
150
100
50
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 00. Focus, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 101. Focus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
O Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 02. Focus, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
150
100
D)
E
50
o
~
A
o
t
. 1
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
53
-------
Figure 1 03. Focus, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 1 04. Focus, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 05. Focus, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
£
D>
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
~
-0-
o
I
t i
~"
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 06. Focus, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
20
15
-i
'E 10
~D>
o
o
A
o
$
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 07. Focus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 1 08. Focus, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
0.6
0.5
0.4
a>
F
0 3
o>
0.2
0.1
0
3 ' 1
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
5
4
£ 3
~B>
2
1
0
A
A
A
A
m.
~
$
O
V
6-
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
54
-------
Figure 1 09. Focus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure 11 0. Focus, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
27
26
25
"§> 24
E 23
22
21
20
~
"O"
t
~T
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
27
26
25
§> 24
»,
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 11 2. Focus, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
10
9
8
7
E
6
5
4
3
2
1
JL
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
Figure 11 3. Focus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 11 4. Focus, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
25
20
® 15
E
10
t
i *
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
55
-------
Figure 11 5. Regal, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
_CD
£
"5)
2.5
1.5
0.5
o
t
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 11 6. Regal, THC, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
25
20
15
10
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
Figure 11 7. Regal, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 118. Regal, CO, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 11 9. Regal, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 20. Regal, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
T
~
~
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
56
-------
Figure 121. Regal, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
11
10
9
¦i 8
£
E 7
6
5
4
$
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature. F
80
Figure I 22. Regal, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
150
100
50
A
• *
4 *
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 23. Regal, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 1 24. Regal, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
E-10
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 25. Regal, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure I 26. Regal, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
80
70
60
50
as
E
40
<»
b
30
20
10
0
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Test Temperature, F
57
-------
Figure 127. Regal, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 128. Regal, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 29. Regal, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure I 30. Regal, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
21
20
19
ra
O)
18
a> lo
£
17
16
15
f
T
4
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 31. Regal, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure I 32. Regal, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
O)
E
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
"O"
~
A
A
~
_A_
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
58
-------
Figure 1 33. Regal, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
1.5
0.5
T
A
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 34. Regal, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
WU
80
Figure I 35. Regal, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
~
±
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
80
Figure I 36. Regal, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
$
-a.
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure I 37. Regal, PM2.5 UDDS Cycle, NM mode
100
90
80
70
d)
60
E
50
<»
b
40
30
20
10
0
-O-
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
80
Figure I 38. Regal, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
-40
-20
~
A
0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
80
59
-------
Figure 1 39. Regal, PM10, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
100
90
80
70
d)
60
E
50
O)
b
40
30
20
10
0
X
1
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60 80
Figure I 40. Regal, PM10, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
~
T
A
A
* I
—
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 41. Regal, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
0.4
0.35
0.3
as
£ 0.25
D)
0.2
0.15
0.1
~
-0-
A ~"
A O
A
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 42. Regal, THC, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 43. Regal, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
3.5
a>
£ 3
2.5
2
~ o
~
-O-
A
A
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 44. Regal, CO, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
T
J L
T
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
60
-------
Figure 1 45. Regal, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
® 0.9
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 46. Regal, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
7
/s
6
O
O
g/mile
5
~
~
~
A
o
Base
~
A
A
E-10
2
A *
A
k
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 47. Regal, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure I 48. Regal, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
23
22
| 21
E
20
19
t
T
$
A
O Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
23
22
21
20
19
18
1 * 1
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 49. Regal, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 1 50. Regal, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
12
10
S
a>
I 6
?
4
2
0
A
O
4 o
r
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
v Base
A E-10
Test Temperature, F
61
-------
Figure 1 51 Regal, PM10, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
14
12
10
a>
S
b
n>
b
6
4
2
0
T
~
4-
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure I 52. Regal, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
20
15
10
o
X
~
~ o
J
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 53. Intrepid, THC, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure I 54. Intrepid, THC, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
v Base
E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure 155. Intrepid, CO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 1 56. Intrepid, CO, UDDS Cycle, C2 mode
~r
T
s
-A-
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
60
SO
20
15
10
v
o
~
o
~
o
$
~
A
A
~
A
mmA—m
A
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
SO
62
-------
Figure 157. Intrepid, NOx, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure 158, Intrepid, NOx, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
E-10
A SG
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 59. Intrepid, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure I 60. Intrepid, Formaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
e
"o>
£ 1.2
1
0.8
0.6
^ Base
A e-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
1.5
I 1
0.5
A
~
o
A
o
$ O ~
o
o
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I6l, Intrepid, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 162. Intrepid, Acetaldehyde, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
25
20
15
£
10
0
T
O
A
O Base
A e-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Test Temperature, F
63
-------
Figure 163. Intrepid, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
150
100
50
$
-A-
$
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 164. Intrepid, Benzene, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
250
200
150
100
50
o
~
s
A
~
~
A
* ~
~
A
A
A
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
SO
Figure I 65. Intrepid, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 1 66. Intrepid, 1,3-Butadiene, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
12
10
$
±
T
~
^ Base
A e-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
Figure 167. intrepid, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 168. intrepid, Fuel Economy, UDDS Cycle, C2 mode
22
21
20
19
O)
"55
_0)
£ 18
17
16
15
T
O Base
A e-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
cc 19
Test Temperature, F
64
-------
Figure 169. Intrepid, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
4
~
~
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
80
Figure 170. Intrepid, MTBE, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 171. Intrepid, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
200
150
100
50
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A e-10
A SG
60
80
Figure I 72. Intrepid, EtOH, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 73. Intrepid, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
Figure I 74. Intrepid, MeOH, UDDS Cycle, 02 mode
30
25
20
15
10
^ Base
A E-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Test Temperature, F
65
-------
Figure 1 75. Intrepid, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, NM mode Figure 1 76. Intrepid, PM2.5, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
$
T
-A,
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
v Base
E-10
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 77. Intrepid, PMIO, UDDS Cycle, NM mode
120
100
80
60
40
20
8
T
^ Base
A e-10
A SG
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 78. Intrepid, PMIO, UDDS Cycle, Q2 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure I 79. Intrepid, THC, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 180. Intrepid, THC, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.1
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
~
A
6
o
*
~
o
A M.
A
~
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
66
-------
Figure 181. Intrepid, CO, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure 182. Intrepid, CO, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
A O O
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
15
10
~
o
s
o
o
o
~
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60 80
Figure I 83. Intrepid, NOx, IM240 Cycle, NM mode
Figure 184, Intrepid, NOx, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
O O
0°
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Test Temperature, F
^ Base
A E-10
80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 185. Intrepid, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure 186. Intrepid, Fuel Economy, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
23.5
23
22.5
22
21.5
21
20.5
20
19.5
O
"W
-8—jr
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
^ Base
A E-10
80
23
22.5
22
S, 21.5
CD
0)
E 21
20.5
20
19.5
$
~
~
T
-40 -20 0 20 40
Test Temperature, F
60
^ Base
A E-10
80
67
-------
Figure 187. Intrepid PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, NM mode Figure 188. Intrepid, PM2.5, IM240 Cycle, Q2 mode
~o W
o
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
v Base
Test Temperature, F
Figure 1 89. Intrepid, PmlQ, IM24Q Cycle, NM mode
O
T
^ Base
A E-10
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Test Temperature, F
Figure 190. Intrepid, PM10, IM240 Cycle, 02 mode
Test Temperature, F
Figure 191. PM2.5 vs Pml 0, All vehicles at all test conditions
Figure 1 92. THC vs PM2.5, All vehicles at all test conditions
PM2.5, mg/mile
68
------- |