Search Results

Exhaust and hot soak evaporative emissions were measured in a fleet of 1993 production flexible/variable-fueled vehicles on methanol fuels blended with a reformulated gasoline. A fleet of 1993 California Tier 1 gasoline vehicles was also tested on the same reformulated gasoline blended to meet the specifications of California Phase 2 fuel. Ozone-forming reactivity, expressed as reactivity weighted emissions and specific reactivity, was calculated using 1991 SAPRC and 1994 CBM MIR and MOR factors. Within the FFV/VFV fleet, FTP exhaust and reactivity weighted emissions were significantly lower by 18 to 32% with Phase 2 gasoline relative to Industry Average gasoline. With the exception of greater NMOG emissions with the M85 blends, and lower OMHCE emissions with M85 blended with Industry Average gasoline, exhaust organic emissions, CO and NOx with the methanol fuels were not significantly different than their base gasolines.

Three-day diurnal SHED evaporative emissions were measured in a fleet of ten Auto/Oil current (1989) and 2 older (1984) vehicles using Auto/Oil Industry Average fuel. SHED temperature cycled each 24-hour period from 72 to 96 F (22.2 to 35.5C). Measurements included speciation of individual hydrocarbons in the SHED as well as total mass emissions at the end of each of the three 24-hour test periods. Previous evaporative emission studies provided evidence that permeation and/or fuel seepage could contribute significantly to the mass of diurnal and hot soak emissions. Data from this investigation were used to quantify the contribution of liquid fuel to total SHED emissions during diurnal testing. A calculation method, based on the concentration of 29 select hydrocarbons in the SHED, is presented to apportion SHED emissions between those associated with liquid fuel losses and those associated with fuel tank head space vapor losses.

Four vehicle fleets, consisting of 3 to 4 vehicles each, were emission tested on a 48″ roll chassis dynamometer using both the FTP urban dynamometer driving cycle and the REP05 driving cycle. The REP05 cycle was developed to test vehicles under high speed and high load conditions not included in the FTP. The vehicle fleets consisted of 1989 light-duty gasoline vehicles, 1992-93 limited production FFV/VFV methanol vehicles, 1992-93 compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles and their gasoline counterparts, and a 1992 production and two prototype ethanol FFV/VFV vehicles. All vehicles (except the dedicated CNG vehicles) were tested using Auto/Oil AQIRP fuels A and C2. Other fuels used were M85 blended from A and C2, E85 blended from C1, which is similar to C2 but without MTBE, and four CNG fuels representing the range of in-use CNG fuels. In addition to bag measurements, tailpipe exhaust concentration and A/F data were collected once per second throughout every test.

This paper reports the test results from the DPF (diesel particulate filter) portion of the DECSE (Diesel Emission Control - Sulfur Effects) Phase 1 test program. The DECSE program is a joint government and industry program to study the impact of diesel fuel sulfur level on aftertreatment devices. A systematic investigation was conducted to study the effects of diesel fuel sulfur level on (1) the emissions performance and (2) the regeneration behavior of a continuously regenerating diesel particulate filter and a catalyzed diesel particulate filter. The tests were conducted on a Caterpillar 3126 engine with nominal fuel sulfur levels of 3 parts per million (ppm), 30 ppm, 150 ppm and 350 ppm.

The Coordinating Research Council conducted a program to measure the reversibility of fuel sulfur effects on emissions from California Low Emission Vehicles (LEVs). Six LEV models were tested using two non-oxygenated conventional Federal fuels with 30 and 630 ppm sulfur. The following emission test sequence was used: 30 ppm fuel to establish a baseline, 630 ppm fuel, and return to 30 ppm fuel. A series of emission tests were run after return to 30 ppm to ensure that emissions had stabilized. The effect of the driving cycle on reversibility was evaluated by using both the LA4 and US06 driving cycles for mileage accumulation between emission tests after return to 30-ppm sulfur fuel. The reversibility of sulfur effects was dependent on the vehicle, driving cycle, and the pollutant. For the test fleet as a whole most but not all of the sulfur effects were reversible.