Search Results

This study was aimed at experimentally investigating the impact of diesel/natural gas (NG) dual-fuel retrofitting onto gaseous emissions emitted by i) legacy, model year (MY) 2005 heavy-duty engines with cooled EGR and no after-treatment system, and ii) a latest technology engine equipped with DPF and urea-SCR after-treatment systems that is compliant with 2010 US-EPA emissions standards. In particular, two different dual-fuel conversion kits were evaluated in this study with pure methane (CH4) being used as surrogate for natural gas. Experiments were conducted on an engine dynamometer over a 13-mode steady-state test cycle as well as the transient FTP required for engine certification while gaseous emissions were sampled through a CVS system. Tailpipe NOx emissions were observed at a comparable level for diesel and diesel/CH4 dual-fuel operation for the 2010 compliant engine downstream the SCR.

As part of the 1998 Consent Decrees concerning alternative ignition strategies between the six settling heavy-duty diesel engine manufacturers and the United States government, the engine manufacturers agreed to perform in-use emissions measurements of their engines. As part of the Consent Decrees, pre- (Phase III, pre-2000 engines) and post- (Phase IV, 2001 to 2003 engines) Consent Decree engines used in over-the-road vehicles were tested to examine the emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2). A summary of the emissions of NOx and CO2 and fuel consumption from the Phase III and Phase IV engines are presented for 30 second “Not-to-Exceed” (NTE) window brake-specific values. There were approximately 700 Phase III tests and 850 Phase IV tests evaluated in this study, incorporating over 170 different heavy duty diesel engines spanning 1994 to 2003 model years. Test vehicles were operated over city, suburban, and highway routes.

A Saturn 1.9 liter engine has been converted for operation on either compressed natural gas or gasoline. A bi-fuel controller (BFC) that uses closed-loop control methods for both fuel delivery and spark advance has been developed. The performance and emissions during operation on each fuel have been investigated with the BFC, as well as the performance and emissions with the stock original equipment manufacturer (OEM) controller using gasoline. In-cylinder pressure was measured at a rate of 1024 points per revolution with piezoelectric pressure transducers flush-mounted in the cylinder head. The in-cylinder pressure was used in real time for ignition timing control purposes, and was stored by a data acquisition system for the investigation of engine stability and differences in the combustion properties of the fuels.

Aerodynamic drag testing is a key component of the CO2 certification schemes for heavy-duty vehicles around the world. This paper presents and compares the regulatory approaches for measuring the drag coefficient of heavy-duty vehicles in Europe, which uses a constant-speed test, and in the United States and Canada, which use a coastdown test. Two European trucks and one North American truck were tested using the constant-speed and coastdown methods. When corrected to zero yaw angle, a difference of up to 12% was observed in the measured drag coefficients from the US coastdown procedure and the EU constant-speed test.

Transit agencies across the United States operate bus fleets primarily powered by diesel, natural gas, and hybrid drive systems. Passenger loading affects the power demanded from the engine, which in turn affects distance-specific emissions and fuel consumption. Analysis shows that the nature of bus activity, taking into account the idle time, tire rolling resistance, wind drag, and acceleration energy, influences the way in which passenger load impacts emissions. Emissions performance and fuel consumption from diesel and natural gas powered buses were characterized by the West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Emissions Testing Laboratory. A comparison matrix for all three bus technologies included three common driving cycles (the Braunschweig Cycle, the OCTA Cycle, and the ADEME-RATP Paris Cycle). Each bus was tested at three different passenger loading conditions (empty weight, half weight, and full weight).