Search Results

The study was aimed at assessing in-use emissions of a USEPA 2010 emissions-compliant heavy-duty diesel vehicle powered by a model year (MY) 2011 engine using West Virginia University's Transportable Emissions Measurement System (TEMS). The TEMS houses full-scale CVS dilution tunnel and laboratory-grade emissions measurement systems, which are compliant with the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Title 40, Part 1065 [1] emissions measurement specifications. One of the specific objectives of the study, and the key topic of this paper, is the quantification of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (CO2, N2O and CH4) along with ammonia (NH3) and regulated emissions during real-world operation of a long-haul heavy-duty vehicle, equipped with a diesel particulate filter (DPF) and urea based selective catalytic reduction (SCR) aftertreatment system for PM and NOx reduction, respectively.

Diesel engines are highly reliable, durable and are used for a wide range of applications with low fuel usage owing to its higher thermal efficiency compared to other mobile power sources. Heavy-duty diesel engines are used for both on-road and off-road applications and dominate the heavy-duty engine segment of the United States transportation market. Due to their high reliability, there are considerable numbers of on-road legacy heavy-duty diesel engine fleets still in use in the United States. These engines are relatively higher oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) producers than post 2007 model year diesel engines. There have been various emission certification or verification programs which are carried out in states like California and Texas for different aftermarket retrofit devices, fuels and additive technologies for reducing NOx and PM emissions from these legacy diesel engines.

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), using urea injection, is being examined as a method for substantial reduction of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) for diesel engines, but the urea injection rates must be controlled to match the NOx production which may need to be predicted during open loop control. Unfortunately NOx is usually measured in the laboratory using a full-scale dilution tunnel and chemiluminescent analyzer, which cause delay and diffusion (in time) of the true manifold NOx concentration. Similarly, delay and diffusion of measurements of all emissions cause the task of creating instantaneous emissions models for vehicle simulations more difficult. Data were obtained to relate injections of carbon dioxide (CO2) into a tunnel with analyzer measurements. The analyzer response was found to match a gamma distribution of the input pulse, so that the analyzer output could be modeled from the tunnel CO2 input.

Hybrid-electric transit buses offer benefits over conventional transit buses of comparable capacity. These benefits include reduced fuel consumption, reduced emissions and the utilization of smaller engines. Factors allowing for these benefits are the use of regenerative braking and reductions in engine transient operation through sophisticated power management systems. However, characterization of emissions from these buses represents new territory: the whole vehicle must be tested to estimate real world tailpipe emissions levels and fuel economy. The West Virginia University Transportable Heavy Duty Emissions Testing Laboratories were used to characterize emissions from diesel hybrid-electric powered as well as diesel and natural gas powered transit buses in Boston, MA and New York City.

Synthetic diesel fuel can be made from a variety of feedstocks, including coal, natural gas and biomass. Synthetic diesel fuels can have very low sulfur and aromatic content, and excellent autoignition characteristics. Moreover, synthetic diesel fuels may also be economically competitive with California diesel fuel if produced in large volumes. Previous engine laboratory and field tests using a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer indicate that synthetic diesel fuel made using the Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) catalytic conversion process is a promising alternative fuel because it can be used in unmodified diesel engines, and can reduce exhaust emissions substantially. The objective of this study was a preliminary assessment of the emissions from older model transit operated on Mossgas synthetic diesel fuel. The study compared emissions from transit buses operating on Federal no. 2 Diesel fuel, Mossgas synthetic diesel (MGSD), and a 50/50 blend of the two fuels.

Emissions of six 32 passenger transit buses were characterized using one of the West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Heavy Duty Emissions Testing Laboratories, and the fixed base chassis dynamometer at the Colorado Institute for Fuels and High Altitude Engine Research (CIFER). Three of the buses were powered with 1997 ISB 5.9 liter Cummins diesel engines, and three were powered with the 1997 5.9 liter Cummins natural gas (NG) counterpart. The NG engines were LEV certified. Objectives were to contrast the emissions performance of the diesel and NG units, and to compare results from the two laboratories. Both laboratories found that oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter (PM) emissions were substantially lower for the natural gas buses than for the diesel buses. It was observed that by varying the rapidity of pedal movement during accelerations in the Central Business District cycle (CBD), CO and PM emissions from the diesel buses could be varied by a factor of three or more.

Speed-time and video data were logged for tractor-trailers performing local deliveries in Akron, OH. and Richmond, VA. in order to develop an emissions test schedule that represented real truck use. The data bank developed using these logging techniques was used to create a Yard cycle, a Freeway cycle and a City-Suburban cycle by the concatenation of microtrips. The City-Suburban driving cycle was converted to a driving route, in which the truck under test would perform at maximum acceleration during certain portions of the test schedule. This new route was used to characterize the emissions of a 1982 Ford tractor with a Cummins 14 liter, 350 hp engine and a 1998 International tractor with a Cummins 14 liter, 435 hp engine. Emissions levels were found to be repeatable with one driver and the driver-to-driver variation of NOx was under 4%, although the driver-to-driver variations of CO and PM were higher.

The emissions reduction benefits of Fischer-Tropsch (FT) diesel fuel have been shown in several recent published studies in both engine testing and in-use vehicle testing. FT diesel fuel shows significant advantages in reducing regulated engine emissions over conventional diesel fuel primarily to: its zero sulfur specification, implying reduced particulate matter (PM) emissions, its relatively lower aromaticity, and its relatively high cetane rating. However, the actual effect of FT diesel formulation on the in-cylinder combustion characteristics of unmodified modern heavy-duty diesel engines is not well documented. As a result, a Navistar T444E (V8, 7.3 liter) engine, instrumented for in-cylinder pressure measurement, was installed on an engine dynamometer and subjected to steady-state emissions measurement using both conventional Federal low sulfur pump diesel and a natural gas-derived FT fuel.

Concern over atmospheric pollution has led to the development of testing procedures to evaluate the hydrocarbon, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen emissions from internal combustion engines. In order to perform emissions testing on vehicles, a chassis dynamometer capable of simulating expected driving conditions must be employed. West Virginia University has developed a Heavy Duty Transportable Emissions Testing Laboratory to perform chassis testing on trucks and buses. Emissions from the vehicle are monitored and recorded over the duration of a testing schedule. Usually the vehicle emissions from the whole test are reported as mass of emissions per unit distance driven. However, there is interest in relating the instantaneous emissions to the immediate conditions at specific points in the test, and in determining the emissions for discrete segments of the test (modal analysis).

The need to assess the effect of exhaust gas emissions from heavy duty vehicles (buses and trucks) on emission inventories is urgent. Exhaust gas emissions measured during the fuel economy measurement test procedures that are used in different countries sometimes do not represent the in-use vehicle emissions. Since both local and imported vehicles are running on the roads, it is thought that studying the testing cycles of the major vehicle manufacturer countries is worthy. Standard vehicle testing cycles on chassis dynamometer from the United States, Canada, European Community Market, and Japan1 are considered in this study. Each of the tested cycles is categorized as either actual or synthesized cycle and its representativness of the observed driving patterns is investigated. A total of fourteen parameters are chosen to characterize any given driving cycle and the cycles under investigation were compared using these parameters.

Recent interest in the effect of engine life on vehicle emissions, particularly those from alternately fueled engines, has led to a need to test heavy duty trucks in the field over their lifetime. West Virginia University has constructed two transportable laboratories capable of measuring emissions as a vehicle is driven through a transient test schedule. Although the central business district (CBD) cycle is well accepted for bus testing, no time-based schedule suited to the testing of class 8 trucks with unsynchronized transmissions is available. The Federal Test Procedure for certifying heavy duty engines can be translated with some difficulty into a flat road chassis cycle although original data clearly incorporated unpredictable braking and inclines. Two methods were attempted for this purpose, but only an energy conservation method proved practical.

Gaseous and particulate emissions from heavy-duty vehicles are affected by fuel types, vehicle/engine parameters, driving characteristics, and environmental conditions. Transient chassis tests were conducted on twenty-six heavy-duty vehicles fueled with methanol, compressed natural gas (CNG), #1 diesel, and #2 diesel, using West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratory. The vehicles were operated on the central business district (CBD) testing cycle, and regulated emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), total hydrocarbon (HC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM) were measured. Comparisons of regulated emissions results revealed that the vehicles powered on methanol and CNG produced much lower particulate emissions than the conventionally fueled vehicles.

A correlation study of vehicle exhaust emissions measurements was conducted by the West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratory and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Emissions Testing Facility. A diesel fueled transit bus was tested by both chassis dynamometer emissions testing laboratories. Exhaust emissions were sampled from the tested vehicle during the operation of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Central Business District (CBD) testing cycle. Data of gaseous and particulate matter emissions was obtained at each testing laboratory. The emissions results were compared to evaluate the effects of different equipment, test procedures, and drivers on the measurements of exhaust emissions of heavy-duty vehicles operated on a chassis dynamometer.

Exhaust gas composition and particulate matter emission levels were obtained from in-use heavy duty transit buses powered by 6V-92TA engines with different fuels. Vehicles discussed in this study were pulled out of revenue service for a day, in Phoenix, AZ, Pittsburgh, PA and New York, NY and tested on the Transportable Heavy Duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratory employing a transient chassis dynamometer. All the vehicles, with engine model years ranging from 1982 to 1992, were operated on the Federal Transit Administration Central Business District Cycle. Significant reductions in particulate matter emissions were observed in the 1990-1992 model year vehicles equipped with the trap oxidizer systems. Testing vehicles under conditions that represent “real world” situations confirmed the fact brought to light that emission levels are highly dependent upon the maintenance and operating conditions of the engines.

The federal emission standards for heavy duty vehicle engines require the exhaust emissions to be measured and calculated in unit form as grams per break horse-power-hour (g/bhp-hr). Correct emission results not only depend on the precise emission measurement but also rely on the correct determination of vehicle energy consumption. A Transportable Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emission Testing Laboratory (THDVETL) designed and constructed at West Virginia University provides accurate vehicle emissions measurements in grams over a test cycle. This paper contributes a method for measuring the energy consumption (bhp-hr) over the test cycle by a chassis dynamometer. Comparisons of analytical and experimental results show that an acceptable agreement is reached and that the THDVETL provides accurate responses as the vehicle is operated under transient loads and speeds. This testing laboratory will have particular value in comparing the behavior of vehicles operating on alternative fuels.

Regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were obtained from in-use vehicles, two trucks and two buses, operated on the Transportable Heavy Duty Engine Emissions Testing Laboratory. Presented here is the data on transient emissions from a refuse truck with a Cummins LTA10-260 engine, a GMC tractor with a CAT 3176 engine and two buses with Detroit Diesel 6V-92TA engines (one with a particulate trap and the other without) when tested on different fuels. The reported study on in-use heavy duty vehicles is part of an on-going program aimed at establishing a database on the exhaust emissions from vehicles tested on a chassis dynamometer under conditions that represent the ‘real-world’ situations. The paper also discusses, briefly, the entire testing laboratory. The Transportable Laboratory can be effectively used in testing programs, such as recall, deterioration and emission factors.