Search Results

The Advanced Light-Duty Powertrain and Hybrid Analysis tool (ALPHA) was created by EPA to evaluate the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions of Light-Duty (LD) vehicles. ALPHA is a physics-based, forward-looking, full vehicle computer simulator capable of analyzing various vehicle types combined with different powertrain technologies. The ALPHA desktop application was developed using MATLAB/Simulink. The ALPHA tool was used to evaluate technology effectiveness and off-cycle technologies such as air-conditioning, electrical load reduction technology and road load reduction technologies of conventional, non-hybrid vehicles for the Midterm Evaluation of the 2017-2025 LD GHG rule by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) has developed a test method for the analysis of washcoat material in small engine catalytic converters. Each small engine catalytic converter contains a metallic monolith. Each metallic monolith is removed from its outer casing, manually disassembled, and then separated into washcoat and substrate. The washcoat material is analyzed for platinum group metals (PGMs) using X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometry. Results from the XRF analysis are used to calculate PGM ratios in the washcoat. During monolith disassembly, care is taken to minimize loss of washcoat or substrate, but some material is inevitably lost. The recovered washcoat mass does not necessarily equal the quantity of washcoat that was present in the intact catalytic converter.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to estimate the per-vehicle cost of employing selected advanced efficiency-improving technologies in light-duty motor vehicles. The development of transparent, reliable cost analyses that are accessible to all interested stakeholders has played a crucial role in establishing feasible and cost effective standards to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The FEV team, together with engineering staff from EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, and FEV's subcontractor, Munro & Associates, developed a robust costing methodology based on tearing down, to the piece part level, relevant systems, sub-systems, and assemblies from vehicles ?with and without? the technologies being evaluated.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to estimate the per-vehicle cost of employing selected advanced efficiency-improving technologies in light-duty motor vehicles. The development of transparent, reliable cost analyses that are accessible to all interested stakeholders has played a crucial role in establishing feasible and cost effective standards to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The FEV team, together with engineering staff from EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, and FEV's subcontractor, Munro & Associates, developed a robust costing methodology based on tearing down, to the piece part level, relevant systems, sub-systems, and assemblies from vehicles “with and without” the technologies being evaluated.

In 2005, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) embarked on a mission to help the city of Beijing, China, clean its air. Working with the Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau (BEPB), the effort was a pilot diesel retrofit demonstration program involving three basic retrofit technologies to reduce particulate matter (PM). The three basic technologies were the diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC), the flowthrough diesel particulate filter (FT-DPF), and the wallflow diesel particulate filter (WF-DPF). The specific retrofit systems selected for the project were verified through the California Air Resources Board (CARB) or the EPA verification protocol [1]. These technologies are generally verified for PM reductions of 20-40 percent for DOCs, 40-50 percent for the FT-DPF, and 85 percent or more for the high efficiency WF-DPF.

The potential discrepancy between the fuel economy shown on new vehicle labels and that achieved by consumers has been receiving increased attention of late. EPA has not modified its labeling procedures since 1985. It is likely possible that driving patterns in the U.S. have changed since that time. One possible modification to the labeling procedures is to incorporate the fuel economy measured over the emission certification tests not currently used in deriving the fuel economy label (i.e., the US06 high speed and aggressive driving test, the SC03 air conditioning test and the cold temperature test). This paper focuses on the US06 cycle and the possible incorporation of aggressive driving into the fuel economy label. As part of its development of the successor to the MOBILE emissions model, the Motor Vehicle Emission Modeling System (MOVES), EPA has developed a physically-based model of emissions and fuel consumption which accounts for different driving patterns.

Due to its high efficiency and superior durability the diesel engine is again becoming a prime candidate for future light-duty vehicle applications within the United States. While in Europe the overall diesel share exceeds 40%, the current diesel share in the U.S. is 1%. Despite the current situation and the very stringent Tier 2 emission standards, efforts are being made to introduce the diesel engine back into the U.S. market. In order to succeed, these vehicles have to comply with emissions standards over a 120,000 miles distance while maintaining their excellent fuel economy. The availability of technologies such as high-pressure common-rail fuel systems, low sulfur diesel fuel, NOx adsorber catalysts (NAC), and diesel particle filters (DPFs) allow the development of powertrain systems that have the potential to comply with the light-duty Tier 2 emission requirements. In support of this, the U.S.

A 2001 General Motors 4.3 liter V-6 marine engine was baseline emissions tested and then equipped with catalysts. Emission reduction effects of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) were also explored. Because of a U.S. Coast Guard requirement that inboard engine surface temperatures be kept below 200°F, the engine's exhaust system, including the catalysts, was water-cooled. Engine emissions were measured using the ISO-8178-E4 5-mode steady-state test for recreational marine engines. In baseline configuration, the engine produced 16.6 g HC+NOx/kW-hr, and 111 g CO/kW-hr. In closed-loop control with catalysts, HC+NOx emissions were reduced by 75 percent to 4.1 g/kW-hr, and CO emissions were reduced by 36 percent to 70 g/kW-hr of CO. The catalyzed engine was then installed in a Sea Ray 190 boat, and tested for water reversion on both fresh and salt water using National Marine Manufacturers Association procedures.

The use of a partial flow sampling system (PFSS) to measure nonroad steady-state diesel engine particulate matter (PM) emissions is a technique for certification approved by a number of regulatory agencies around the world including the US EPA. Recently, there have been proposals to change future nonroad tests to include testing over a nonroad transient cycle. PFSS units that can quantify PM over the transient cycle have also been discussed. The full flow constant volume sampling (CVS) technique has been the standard method for collecting PM under transient engine operation. It is expensive and requires large facilities as compared to a typical PFSS. Despite the need for a cheaper alternative to the CVS, there has been a concern regarding how well the PM measured using a PFSS compared to that measured by the CVS. In this study, three PFSS units, including AVL SPC, Horiba MDLT, and Sierra BG-2 were investigated in parallel with a full flow CVS.

Six heavy-duty diesel engines were tested for exhaust emissions on the ISO 8-mode nonroad steady-state duty cycle and the U.S. FTP highway transient test cycle. Two of these engines were baseline nonroad engines, two were Tier 1 nonroad engines, and two were highway engines. One of the Tier 1 nonroad engines and both of the highway engines were also tested on three transient cycles developed for nonroad engines. In addition, published data were collected from an additional twenty diesel engines that were tested on the 8-mode as well as at least one transient test cycle. Data showed that HC and PM emissions from diesel engines are very sensitive to transient operation while NOx emissions are much less so. Although one of the nonroad transient duty cycles showed lower PM than the steady-state duty cycles, all four of the other cycles showed much higher PM emissions than the steady-state cycle.

This paper describes a method used to compare the emissions from transient operation of an engine with the emissions from steady state operating modes of the engine. Weightings were assigned to each mode based on the transient cycle under evaluation. The method of assigning the weightings for each mode took into account several factors, including the distance between each second of the transient cycle's speed-and-torque point requests (in a speed vs. torque coordinate system) and the given mode. Two transient cycles were chosen. The transient cycles were taken from actual in-use data collected on nonroad engines during in-field operation. The steady state modes selected were based on both International Standard Organization (ISO) test modes, as well as, augmentation based on contour plots of the emissions from nonroad diesel engines. Twenty-four (24) steady-state modes were used. The transient cycle's speed-and-torque points are used to weight each steady state mode in the method.

Eleven experienced commercial automotive technicians were recruited and trained to repair IM240 emission failures using a specially developed 30 hour course. The training course emphasized the use of an oscilloscope and a flow chart and wave form strategy to repair vehicles. Each technicians' performance was evaluated based on the repair of three or four in-use Arizona IM240 failures. Pre-training and post-training written tests were also administered. Results from this limited study were encouraging. After the technician training, HC and CO emission levels were reduced by 69% and NOx by 58%. More importantly, most of the technicians learned some new and useful diagnostic and equipment skills which they can immediately apply to their businesses. They also became more motivated to tackle the challenge of repairing vehicles to low transient emissions, and aware of the existence and use of new sophisticated diagnostic tools such as oscilloscopes.

Six in-use vehicles were tested on a baseline gasoline and nine gasoline/ethanol blends to determine the effect of ethanol content in fuels on automotive exhaust emissions and fuel economy. The baseline gasoline was representative of average summer gasoline and served as the base from which the other fuels were blended. For the majority of the vehicles, total hydrocarbon, and carbon monoxide exhaust emissions as well as fuel economy decreased while NOx and acetaldehyde exhaust emissions increased as the ethanol content in the test fuel increased. Formaldehyde and carbon dioxide emissions were relatively unaffected by the addition of ethanol. The emission responses to the increased fuel oxygen levels were consistent with what would be expected from leaning-out the air/fuel ratio for a spark ignition engine. The results are shown graphically and a linear regression is performed utilizing the method of least squares to investigate statistically significant trends in the data.

The Schatz Heat Battery stores excess heat energy from the engine cooling system during vehicle operation. This excess energy may be returned to the coolant upon the ensuing cold start, shortening the engine warm-up period and decreasing cold start related emissions of unburned fuel and carbon monoxide (CO). A Heat Battery was evaluated on a test vehicle to determine its effect on unburned fuel emissions, CO emissions, and fuel economy over the cold start portion (Bag 1) of the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) at 24°C and -7°C ambient conditions. The Heat Battery was mounted in a vehicle fueled alternately with indolene clear (unleaded gasoline) and M85 high methanol blend fuels. Several Heat Battery/coolant flow configurations were evaluated to determine which would result in lowest cold start emissions.

The cyclic and steady-state vehicle emissions, fuel economy, performance, and cold start behavior of an automobile equipped with a direct injection methanol engine are compared with those of three other comparable vehicles. One of the comparable vehicles was powered by a gasoline-fueled engine, and the other two were Diesels. One of the Diesel-powered vehicles was naturally aspirated and the other was turbocharged. All evaluations were made using the same road load horsepower and equivalent test weight. All the evaluations were conducted at low mileage. The emissions of the methanol vehicle are compared to California low emission vehicle standards, and to the emissions of another methanol vehicle.

On-vehicle proof-of-concept testing was conducted to evaluate the ability of the dual oxygen sensor catalyst evaluation method to identify serious losses in catalyst efficiency under actual vehicle operating conditions. The dual oxygen sensor method, which utilizes a comparison between an upstream oxygen sensor and an oxygen sensor placed downstream of the catalyst, was initially studied by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under steady-state operating conditions on an engine dynamometer and reported in Clemmens, et al. (1).* At the time that study was released, questions were raised as to whether the technological concepts developed on a test fixture could be transferred to a vehicle operating under normal transient conditions.

A Methanol catalyst test program has been conducted in two phases. The purpose of Phase I was to determine whether a base metal or lightly-loaded noble metal catalyst could reduce Methanol engine exhaust emissions with an efficiency comparable to conventional gasoline engine catalytic converters. The goal of Phase II was the reduction of aldehyde and unburned fuel emissions to very low levels by the use of noble metal catalysts with catalyst loadings higher than those in Phase I. Catalysts tested in Phase I were evaluated as three-way converters as well as under simulated oxidation catalyst conditions. Phase II catalysts were tested as three-way converters only. For Phase I, the most consistently efficient catalysts over the range of pollutants measured were platinum/rhodium configurations. None of the catalysts tested in Phase I were able to meet a NOx level of 1 gram per mile when operated in the oxidation mode.

This paper develops and discusses the 1978-85 time trends in alternative measures of vehicle fuel economy. Nine alternative measures are presented ranging from ton-miles per gallon to menu-weighted performance adjusted miles per gallon. For each alternative measure, trends for important groups of manufacturers are presented. Ail of the trends in alternative measures are compared to the percent improvement implied by the original 1978 and 1985 passenger car average fuel economy standards (AFES).

This, the fourteenth in this series of papers, examines trends in fuel economy, technology usage and estimated 0 to 60 MPH acceleration time for model year 1986 passenger cars. Comparisons with previous year's data are made for the fleet as a whole and using three measures of vehicle/engine size: number of cylinders, EPA car class, and inertia weight class. Emphasis on vehicle performance and fuel metering has been expanded and analysis of individual manufacturers has been deemphasized; comparisons of the Domestic, European, and Japanese market sectors are given increased emphasis.