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.

The objective of this study was to evaluate iso-butanol (C4H9OH) as an alternative fuel for spark ignition engines. Unlike methanol (CH3OH) and ethanol (C2H5OH), iso-butanol has not been extensively studied in the past as either a fuel blend candidate with gasoline or straight fuel. The performance of a single cylinder engine (ASTM=CFR) was studied using alcohol-gasoline blends under different input parameters. The engine operating conditions were: three carburetor settings (three different fuel flow rates), spark timings of 5°, 10°, 15°, 20°, and 25° BTDC, and a range of compression ratios from a minimum of 7.5 to a maximum of 15 in steps of one depending on knock. The fuels tested were alcohol-gasoline blends having 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% of iso-butanol, ethanol, and methanol. And also as a baseline fuel, pure gasoline (93 ON) was used. The engine was run at a constant speed of 800 RPM.

Emissions from light duty vehicles have traditionally been measured using a chassis dynamometer, while heavy duty testing has been based on engine dynamometers. However, the need for in-use vehicle emissions data has led to the development of two transportable heavy duty chassis dynamometers capable of testing buses and heavy trucks. A test cycle has been developed for Class 8 trucks, which typically have unsyncronized transmissions. This test cycle has five peaks, each consisting of an acceleration, cruise period, and deceleration, with speeds and acceleration requirements that can be met by virtually all vehicles in common service. Termed the “WVU 5 peak truck test”, this 8 km (5 mile) cycle has been used to evaluate the emissions from diesel and ethanol powered over-the-road tractors and from diesel and ethanol powered snow plows, all with Detroit Diesel 6V92 engines.

Data has been gathered using the West Virginia University Heavy Duty Transportable Emissions Laboratories from buses operating on diesel and a variety of alternate fuels in the field. Typically, the transportable chassis dynamo meter is set up at a local transit agency and the selected buses are tested using the fuel in the vehicle at the time of the test. The dynamometer may be set up to operate indoors or outdoors depending on the space available at the site. Samples of the fuels being used at the site are collected and sent to the laboratory for analysis and this information is then sent together with emissions data to the Alternate Fuels Data Center at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Emissions data are acquired from buses using the Central Business District cycle reported in SAE Standard J1376; this cycle has 14 ramps with 20 mph (32.2 km/h) peaks, separated by idle periods.

This work was undertaken to evaluate butanol as an alternative fuel for internal combustion engines- The evaluation was made by measuring the performance of a four-cylinder automotive spark-ignition engine when fueled with four different Fuels: (a) 100% unleaded-regular fuel was used for reference. (b) the test fuel, iso-butanol, was blended in amounts of 5, 10, 15, and 20% by volume with gasoline for the subject evaluation. (c) for comparison purposes, a 10% methanol-gasoline blend was used. (d) also for comparison, a 10% ethanol-gasoline blend was used. It was found that there was only about 2.5% reduction in the thermal efficiency of the test engine when 20% of the gasoline was replaced by butanol (the brake-specific-fuel-consumption, BSFC, increased by about 6.5%). Butanol was shown to be superior to both methanol and ethanol in terms of higher thermal efficiency (and correspondingly lower BSFC).