Search Results

The emissions of two ultralow NOx heavy-duty (HD) vehicles equipped with 0.02 g/bhp-hr low NOx natural gas (NG) engines were evaluated on a chassis dynamometer. This included a waste hauler and a city transit bus, each with a 0.02 g/bhp-hr NOx L9N near zero (NZ) natural gas engine. The vehicles were tested over a variety of different cycles, including the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS), port drayage cycles, transit bus cycles, and a refuse truck cycle. For both vehicles, the NOx emissions results were below the 0.02 g/bhp-hr level for most cycles, with the exception of some cold start tests. For the waste hauler, NOx emissions averaged between 0.014 and 0.002 g/bhp-hr for the hot start tests, and from 0.043 to 0.014 g/bhp-hr for the cold start tests. This represented NOx emissions reductions from 97%-100% of compared with previous ISL G 8.9 engines.

We assessed gaseous and particulate matter (PM) emissions from a current technology stoichiometric natural gas waste hauler equipped with a 2011 model year 8.9L Cummins Westport ISL-G engine with cooled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and three-way catalyst (TWC). Testing was performed on five fuels with varying Wobbe and methane numbers over the William H. Martin Refuse Truck Cycle. The results showed lower nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions for the low methane fuels (i.e., natural gas fuels with a relatively low methane content) for the transport and curbside cycles. Total hydrocarbon (THC) and methane (CH4) emissions did not show any consistent fuel trends. Non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) emissions showed a trend of higher emissions for the fuels containing higher levels of NMHCs. Carbon monoxide (CO) emissions showed a trend of higher emissions for the low methane fuels.

Emissions, fuel economy, and performance are determined over a light and a heavy driving cycle designed to represent the vehicles in-use driving patterns. The vehicles are 2010 class 8 Freightliner tractor trucks equipped with Cummins engines with Selective Catalytic Reduction and Diesel Particulate Filter emission control systems. The hybrid has lower carbon dioxide emissions, better fuel economy, and nitrogen oxide emissions statistically the same as the conventional. The CO emissions are well below the standards for both vehicles, but they are higher from the hybrid. The higher CO emissions for the hybrid are primarily related to the cooling of the Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) during the standard 20 minute key-off soak between repeats of the driving cycles. With a 1 minute key-off soak the CO emissions from the hybrid are negative.

Gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines have improved thermodynamic efficiency (and thus lower fuel consumption) and power output compared with port fuel injection (PFI) and their penetration is expected to rapidly grow in the near future in the U.S. market. In addition, the use of alternative fuels is expanding, with a potential increase in ethanol content beyond the current 10%. Increased emphasis has been placed on butanol due to its more favorable fuel properties, as well as new developments in production processes. This study explores the influence of mid-level ethanol and iso-butanol blends on criteria emissions, gaseous air toxics, and particulate emissions from two wall-guided gasoline direct injection passenger cars fitted with three-way catalysts. Emission measurements were conducted over the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) driving cycle on a chassis dynamometer.

Engine manufacturers have explored many routes to reducing the emissions of harmful pollutants and conserving energy resources, including development of after treatment systems to reduce the concentration of pollutants in the engine exhaust, using alternative fuels, and using alternative fuels with after treatment systems. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is one alternative fuel in use and this paper will discuss emission measurements for several LPG vehicles. Regulated emissions were measured for five school buses, one box truck, and two small buses over a cold start Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (CS_UDDS), the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS), and the Central Business District (CBD) cycle. In general, there were no significant differences in the gas phase emissions between the UDDS and the CBD test cycles. For the CS-UDDS cycle the total hydrocarbons and non-methane hydrocarbon emissions are higher than they are from the UDDS cycle.