Search Results

Onboard refueling control technology has been successfully applied to two vehicles with 98+% efficiency in tests with 10.5 RVP fuel at 84° F. The Onboard system, which controls exhaust, evaporative, refueling, and so called “running losses”, was constructed out of components found in current automotive evaporative control systems. During refueling, the tank vapors are forced into the enhanced charcoal canister by a flowing liquid seal in the fillpipe. The canister was removed from the engine compartment and mounted within the vehicle frame close to the fuel tank. Each vehicle demonstrates a different possible safe location from a crash worthiness viewpoint. In order to further improve safety by preventing the expulsion of liquid gasoline upon gas cap removal, the orifices in the production tank vent lines were removed so that the fuel tank is at atmospheric pressure at all times. As modified, no significant driveability differences from production vehicles were found.

Fuel economy measurements from portions of Phase I of the Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program were analyzed. The following fuel variables were examined: aromatics, olefins, T90, RVP, and various oxygenates (MTBE, ETBE and ethanol). Two vehicle fleets were tested: twenty 1989 vehicles and fourteen 1983-1985 vehicles. Three measures of fuel economy were analyzed. EPA Fuel Economy used the calculation defined in the Federal Register and is an attempt to correct for changes in fuel properties. Volumetric Fuel Economy is based on a carbon balance calculation and is a measure of the actual volume of gasoline burned. Energy Specific Fuel Economy is a measure of fuel economy based on energy content. The following fuel changes resulted in reductions of Volumetric Fuel Economy in both fleets: reduced aromatics, reduced olefins, reduced T90, and addition of oxygenates. Changes in RVP did not have a significant effect on fuel economy.

Engine-out and tailpipe exhaust, and hot soak evaporative emissions of two reformulated test gasolines and an Industry Average reference gasoline were compared in four vehicle fleets designed for progressively lower emission standards. The two reformulated gasolines included: 1) a gasoline meeting 1996 California Phase 2 regulatory requirements, and 2) a gasoline blended to the same specifications but without an oxygenated component. These two gasolines were compared with the Auto-Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program's (AQIRP) Industry Average gasoline representing 1988 national average composition. The vehicle fleets were the AQIRP Older (1983 to 85MY) and Current (1989MY) vehicle fleets used in prior studies, and two new AQIRP test fleets, one designed to 1994 Federal Tier 1 standards and a prototype Advanced Technology fleet designed for lower emission levels of 1995 and later.