Search Results

Natural Gas engines are viewed as an alternative to diesel power in the quest to reduce heavy duty vehicle emissions in polluted urban areas. In particular, it is acknowledged that natural gas has the potential to reduce the inventory of particulate matter, and this has encouraged the use of natural gas engines in transit bus applications. Extensive data on natural gas and diesel bus emissions have been gathered using two Transportable Heavy Duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratories, that employ chassis dynamometers to simulate bus inertia and road load. Most of the natural gas buses tested prior to 1997 were powered by Cummins L-10 engines, which were lean-burn and employed a mechanical mixer for fuel introduction. The Central Business District (CBD) cycle was used as the test schedule.

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.

The West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratory was employed to conduct chassis dynamometer tests in the field to measure the exhaust emissions from heavy-duty buses and trucks. This laboratory began operation in the field in January, 1992. During the period January, 1992 through June, 1993, over 150 city buses, trucks, and tractors operated by 18 different authorities in 11 states were tested by the facility. The tested vehicles were powered by 14 different types of engines fueled with natural gas (CNG or LNG), methanol, ethanol, liquified petroleum gas (LPG), #2 diesel, and low sulfur diesel (#1 diesel or Jet A). Some of the tested vehicles were equipped with exhaust after-treatment systems. In this paper, a total of 12 CNG-fueled and #2 diesel-fueled transit buses equipped with Cummins L-10 engines, were chosen for investigation.

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.

The objective of this project, which is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), is to provide a comprehensive comparison of heavy-duty trucks operating on alternative fuels and diesel fuel. Data collection from up to eight sites is planned. Currently, the project has four sites: Raley's in Sacramento, CA (Kenworth, Cummins L10-300G, liquefied natural gas - LNG); Pima Gro Systems, Inc. in Fontana, CA (White/GMC, Caterpillar 3176B Dual-Fuel, compressed natural gas - CNG); Waste Management in Washington, PA (Mack, Mack E7G, LNG); and United Parcel Service in Hartford, CT (Freightliner Custom Chassis, Cummins B5.9G, CNG). This paper summarizes current data collection and evaluation results from this project.

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.

Chassis based emissions characterization of heavy-duty vehicles has advanced over the last decade, but the understanding of the effect of test schedule on measured emissions is still poor. However, this is an important issue because the test schedule should closely mimic actual vehicle operation or vocation. A wide variety of test schedules was reviewed and these cycles were classified as cycles or routes and as geometric or realistic. With support from the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Transportation Technologies (DOE/OTT), a GMC box truck with a Caterpillar 3116 engine and a Peterbilt over the road tractor-trailer with a Caterpillar 3406 engine were exercised through a large number of cycles and routes. Test weight for the GMC was 9,980 kg and for the Peterbilt was 19,050 kg. Emissions characterization was performed using a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer, with a full-scale dilution tunnel, analyzers for gaseous emissions, and filters for PM emissions.