Search Results

Beginning in 2007, heavy-duty engine manufacturers in the U.S. have been responsible for verifying the compliance on in-use vehicles with Not-to-Exceed (NTE) standards under the Heavy-Duty In-Use Testing Program (HDIUT). This in-use testing is conducted using Portable Emission Measurement Systems (PEMS) which are installed on the vehicles to measure emissions during real-world operation. A key component of the HDIUT program is the generation of measurement allowances which account for the relative accuracy of PEMS as compared to more conventional, laboratory based measurement techniques. A program to determine these measurement allowances for gaseous emissions was jointly funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and various member companies of the Engine Manufacturer's Association (EMA).

Emissions from manual transmission motorcycles have been shown to be dependent upon transmission shift patterns. Presently, when undergoing an emission test for an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certification a manufacturer can designate their own shift points during the cycle or utilize an EPA prescribed shift pattern which uses basic up or down shifts at specific speeds regardless of the type of motorcycle, 40 CFR 86.528-78(h). In order to predict the real-life emissions from motorcycles, a comparative real-life shift pattern has been developed which can then be used to evaluate the suitability of the manufacturer’s shift schedule. To that end, a model that predicts shift points for motorcycles has been created. This model is based on the actual operation of different motorcycles by real life operators in a combined city and highway setting.

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.

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 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.

The causes of Unburned Hydrocarbon (UHC) emissions from a premixed compression ignited engine were investigated for both homogeneous and stratified charge conditions. A fast response Flame Ionization Detector (fast FID) was used to provide cycle-resolved UHC exhaust emission measurements. These fast FID UHC measurements were coupled with numerical flow simulation results to provide quantitative and qualitative insight into the sources of UHC emissions. The combined results were used to evaluate the effects of engine load, local gas temperatures, fuel stratification, and crevice quenching on UHC emissions.

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.

In this paper results are given from single-cylinder, steady-state engine tests using the Texaco Diesel Additive (TDA) as an in-fuel emission reducing agent. The data include NOx, total unburned hydrocarbons, indicated specific fuel consumption, and heat release analysis for one engine speed (1500 RPM) with two different loads (Φ ≈ 0.3, IMEP = 0.654 MPa and Φ ≈ 0.5, IMEP = 1.006 MPa) using the baseline fuel and fuels with one percent and five percent additive by weight. The emissions were measured in the exhaust stream of a modified TACOM-LABECO single cylinder engine. This engine is a 114 mm x 114 mm (4.5″ x 4.5″) open chamber low swirl design with a 110.5 MPa (16,000 psi) peak pressure Bosch injector. The injector has 8 holes, each of 0.2 mm diameter. The intake air was slightly boosted (approximately 171 kPa (25 psia)) and slightly heated (333 K (140 °F)). In previous research on this engine the emissions, including soot, were well documented.

This study was conducted to develop an understanding of how rate-shaped and split injections can affect the soot and NOx emissions of a heavy-duty diesel engine. The tests were performed on a single cylinder version of the Caterpillar 3406 production engine, modified to accept an electronically-controlled, high-pressure common-rail injection system that offers a very high degree of flexibility in injection timing, split injections, and rate shaping of the initial injection. The engine was instrumented for particulate measurements with a full dilution tunnel, and CO, CO2 and NOx emission meters. Cylinder pressure was used to study heat release rates, and the response to changes in the injection scheme. The results show that rate-shaped injection, when optimized for lowest BSFC, does not appreciably affect pressure rise or peak cylinder gas pressures.

Progress on the development and validation of a CFD model for diesel engine combustion and flow is described. A modified version of the KIVA code is used for the computations, with improved submodels for liquid breakup, drop distortion and drag, spray/wall impingement with rebounding, sliding and breaking-up drops, wall heat transfer with unsteadiness and compressibility, multistep kinetics ignition and laminar-turbulent characteristic time combustion models, Zeldovich NOx formation, and soot formation with Nagle Strickland-Constable oxidation. The code also considers piston-cylinder-liner crevice flows and allows computations of the intake flow process in the realistic engine geometry with two moving intake valves. Significant progress has been made using a modified RNG k-ε turbulence model, and a multicomponent fuel vaporization model and a flamelet combustion model have been implemented.

Progress on the development and validation of a CFD model for diesel engine combustion and flow is described. A modified version of the KIVA code is used for the computations, with improved submodels for liquid breakup, drop distortion and drag, spray/wall impingement with rebounding, sliding and breaking-up drops, wall heat transfer with unsteadiness and compressibility, multistep kinetics ignition and laminar-turbulent characteristic time combustion models, Zeldovich NOx formation, and soot formation with Nagle Strickland-Constable oxidation. The code also considers piston-cylinder-liner crevice flows and allows computations of the intake flow process in the realistic engine geometry with two moving intake valves. Significant progress has been made using a modified RNG k-ε turbulence model, and a multicomponent fuel vaporization model and a flamelet combustion model have been implemented.

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.

An experimental program was conducted to characterize the gaseous and particulate emissions from a 1975 Peugeot 504D light duty diesel-powered vehicle. The vehicle was tested over the 1975 Federal Test Procedure, Highway Fuel Economy Test, and Sulfate Emissions Test driving cycles using four different fuels covering a fair range of composition, density, and sulfur content. In addition to fuel economy and regulated gaseous emission measurements of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen, emission measurements were also obtained for non-regulated pollutants including sulfur dioxide, sulfates, aldehydes, benzo[a]pyrene, carbonyl sulfide, hydrogen cyanide, nonreactive hydrocarbons, and particulate matter. The results are discussed in terms of emission trends due to either fuel type or driving cycle influence.