Search Results

The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA’s) National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) has been developing new approaches for use in screening emissions from various types of new and in-use (used) engines to investigate if their exhaust emissions comply with federal emission standards. If the results from screening tests suggest anything unusual, EPA’s compliance program could investigate further to determine if that particular engine group or family should receive more rigorous compliance testing and analysis. In 2019, the EPA finished developing a means to screen the emissions of marine outboard engines, including the use of specialized equipment, laboratory methods, and procedures capable of controlling outboard marine engines to screen whether their exhaust is in line with appropriate emission standards.

As part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) continuing assessment of advanced light-duty (LD) automotive technologies to support the setting of appropriate national greenhouse gas (GHG) standards and to evaluate the impact of new technologies on in-use emissions, a 2016 Honda Civic with a 4-cylinder 1.5-liter L15B7 turbocharged engine and continuously variable transmission (CVT) was benchmarked. The test method involved installing the engine and its CVT in an engine-dynamometer test cell with the engine wiring harness tethered to its vehicle parked outside the test cell. Engine and transmission torque, fuel flow, key engine temperatures and pressures, and onboard diagnostics (OBD)/Controller Area Network (CAN) bus data were recorded.

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).

Gasoline engine downsizing is already established as a technology for reducing vehicle CO2 emissions. Further benefits are possible through more aggressive downsizing, however, the tradeoff between the CO2 reduction achieved and vehicle drivability limits the level of engine downsizing currently adopted by vehicle manufacturers. This paper will present the latest results achieved from a very heavily downsized engine, and resulting demonstrator vehicle, featuring eSupercharging in combination with a conventional turbocharger. The original 1.2 litre, 3-cylinder, MAHLE downsizing engine has been re-configured to enable a specific power output in excess of 160 kW/litre. Of key importance is a cost effective, efficient and flexible boosting system.

In 2015 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a new steady-state engine dynamometer test procedure by which heavy-duty engine manufacturers would be required to create engine fuel rate versus engine speed and torque “maps”.[1] These maps would then be used within the agencies' Greenhouse Gas Emission Model (GEM)[2] for full vehicle certification to the agencies' proposed heavy-duty fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards. This paper presents an alternative to the agencies' proposal, where an engine is tested over the same duty cycles simulated in GEM. This paper explains how a range of vehicle configurations could be specified for GEM to generate engine duty cycles that would then be used for engine testing.

In designing a regulatory vehicle simulation program for determining greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and fuel consumption, it is necessary to estimate the performance of technologies, verify compliance with the regulatory standards, and estimate the overall benefits of the program. The agencies (EPA/NHTSA) developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model (GEM) to serve these purposes. GEM is currently being used to certify the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions of the Phase 1 rulemaking for all heavy-duty vehicles in the United States except pickups and vans, which require a chassis dynamometer test for certification. While the version of the GEM used in Phase 1 contains most of the technical and mathematical features needed to run a vehicle simulation, the model lacks sophistication. For example, Phase 1 GEM only models manual transmissions and it does not include engine torque interruption during gear shifting.

The large fleet share and rapid growth of two and three wheeler vehicles in India means that careful attention must be paid to reducing emissions and fuel consumption from these vehicles. Emission standards and emission control technologies employed in passenger vehicles have not fully migrated to two and three wheelers. Fuel economy standards and advanced fuel efficient technologies, which offer great potential for reducing sector energy consumption, have also not been implemented for this important mode of transportation. This paper contains an overview of the engine technology changes and after-treatment systems being employed by Indian two and three-wheeler manufacturers to meet the Bharat Stage-III emission standards. An assessment of technical options to meet future emission standards is discussed. Adoption of evaporative emissions and on-board diagnostic systems technologies are discussed as well.

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.

The introduction of MultiAir technology [8] has had a strong impact on engine performance, fuel consumption, emissions and control. This technology, intended at first for gasoline engines and applied only on intake valves, is aiming at the reduction of engine breathing losses and, as a consequence, reduction of pollutant emissions and fuel consumption, together with an improvement of maximum intake efficiency. Further positive effects of MultiAir technology have been a significant improvement of Low End Torque, engine driveability (“fun-to-drive” index) and other operating conditions (e.g. idle control). Current development of MultiAir technology is focusing on a better management of hot EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation), still acting only on the intake side, although with specifically designed valve lift profiles. This application of MultiAir technology is pushing gasoline engines towards new levels of performance improvements.

Current U.S. Army ground vehicles predominately use commercial off-the-shelf or modified commercial diesel engines as the prime mover. Unique military engines are typically utilized when commercial products do not meet the mobility requirements of the particular ground vehicle in question. In either case, such engines traditionally have been calibrated using North American diesel fuel (DF-2) and Jet Propellant 8 (JP-8) compatibility wasn't given much consideration since any associated power loss due to the lower volumetric energy density was not an issue for most applications at then targeted climatic conditions. Furthermore, since the genesis of the ‘one fuel forward policy’ of using JP-8 as the single battlefield fuel there has been limited experience to truly assess fuel effects on diesel engine combustion systems until this decade.

A hybrid electric vehicle simulation tool (IBZ-Simulator) has been developed at the Fuel Cell Institute of the University of Applied Sciences Esslingen to study the fuel economy potential of a Fuel Cell hybrid urban bus. In this paper, the fundamental architecture of the FC urban buses was described, as well as the control strategy to manage the power flow between the different elements of the drive train. A comparison of the hybrid with the conventional type and ICE-hybrid type is performed, and important factors relating to the vehicle efficiency (accessory loads, vehicle mass, Fuel Cell system ramping rate and battery capacity) were assessed. The using of supercapacitor (or ultracapacitors) as peak power buffer has been investigated.

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 project objective was to investigate the ultrafine solid particle emissions of the prevalent traffic, by performing field measurements at an urban traffic artery in Zurich/Switzerland. Subsequently, various scenarios were postulated to assess the potential of the diesel particle filters (DPF) to improve curbside air quality. Soot aerosols are known to be carcinogenic [1]. If all heavy-duty diesel vehicles were equipped with DPFs, then the number of particles emitted from the entire vehicle fleet could be reduced by 75 to 80%. For PM10, the curtailment scope is considerably lower, around 20%, because more than half of those emissions are not from the exhaust and therefore would not be filtered.

Current SAE practices for evaluating potential improvements in fuel economy on heavy-duty vehicles rely on gravimetric measurements of fuel tanks. However, the recent evolution of portable emissions measurement systems (PEMS) offers an alternative means of evaluating real-world fuel economy that may be faster and more cost effective. This paper provides a direct comparison of these two methods based on a recent EPA study conducted at Southwest Research Institute. More than 228 on-road tests were performed on two pairs of class 8 tractor-trailers according to SAE test procedure J1321 in an assessment of various chassis components designed to reduce drag losses on the vehicle. During these tests, SEMTECH-D™ portable emissions measurement systems from Sensor's, Incorporated were operating in each of the vehicles to evaluate emissions and to provide a redundant measure of fuel economy.

Reducing aerodynamic drag and tire rolling resistance in trucks using cooled EGR engines meeting EPA 2004 emissions standards has been observed to result in increases in fuel economy and decreases in NOx emissions. We report here on tests conducted using vehicles equipped a non-EGR engine meeting EPA 2004 emission standards and an electronically-controlled engine meeting EPA 1998 emissions standards. The effects of trailer fairings and single-wide tires on fuel economy and NOx emissions were tested using SAE test procedure J1321. NOx emissions were measured using a portable emissions monitoring system (PEMS). Fuel consumption was estimated by a carbon balance on PEMS output and by the gravimetric method specified by test procedure J1321. Fuel consumption decreased and fuel economy increased by a maximum of about 10 percent, and NOx emissions decreased by a maximum of 20 percent relative to baseline.

We hypothesize that components designed to improve fuel economy by reducing power requirements should also result in a decrease in emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Fuel economy and NOx emissions of a pair of class 8 tractor-trailers were measured on a test track to evaluate the effects of single wide tires and trailer aerodynamic devices. Fuel economy was measured using a modified version of SAE test procedure J1321. NOx emissions were measured using a portable emissions monitoring system (PEMS). Fuel consumption was estimated by a carbon balance on PEMS output and correlated to fuel meter measurements. Tests were conducted using drive cycles simulating highway operations at 55 mph and 65 mph and suburban stop-and-go traffic. The tests showed a negative correlation (significant at p < 0.05) between fuel economy and NOx emissions. Single wide tires and trailer aerodynamic devices resulted in increased fuel economy and decreased NOx emissions relative to the baseline tests.

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.

The continued availability of leaded specialty aviation gasolines remains as an item of crucial importance in the near-term future of general aviation; however, the development of new piston engines capable of operation with other transportation fuels available in large pools is considered an indispensable element in the long-range survival of the industry. This paper offers a road map that while allowing the continued utilization of the current fleet of piston aircraft, sets the stage for a transition to new piston powerplants and associated aircraft, compatible with widely available transportation fuels such as motor gasoline based aviation fuels for the lower and some medium performance aircraft, and aviation turbine fuels for the balance of medium and high performance airplanes.