Search Results

Increasing interest in biofuels—specifically, biodiesel as a pathway to energy diversity and security—have necessitated the need for research on the performance and utilization of these fuels and fuel blends in current and future vehicle fleets. One critical research area is related to achieving a full understanding of the impact of biodiesel fuel blends on advanced emission control systems. In addition, the use of biodiesel fuel blends can degrade diesel engine oil performance and impact the oil drain interval requirements. There is limited information related to the impact of biodiesel fuel blends on oil dilution. This paper assesses the oil dilution impacts on an engine operating in conjunction with a diesel particle filter (DPF), oxides of nitrogen (NOx) storage, a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) emission control system, and a 20% biodiesel (soy-derived) fuel blend.

Conventional diesel engines will continue to hold a vital role in the heavy- and medium-duty markets for the transportation of goods along with many other uses. The ability to offset traditional diesel fuels with low-net-carbon biofuels could have a significant impact on reducing the carbon footprint of these vehicles. A prior study screened several hundred candidate biofuel blendstocks based on required diesel blendstock properties and identified 12 as the most promising. Eight representative biofuel blendstocks were blended at a 30% volumetric concentration with EPA certification ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) and were investigated for emissions and fuel efficiency performance. This study used a single cylinder engine (based on the Ford 6.7L engine) using Conventional Diesel Combustion (CDC), also known as Mixing Control Compression Ignition (MCCI). The density, cetane number, distillation curve and sooting tendency (using the yield sooting index method) of the fuels were measured.

Six 2001 International Class 6 trucks participated in a project to determine the impact of gas-to-liquid (GTL) fuel and catalyzed diesel particle filters (DPFs) on emissions and operations from December 2003 through August 2004. The vehicles operated in Southern California and were nominally identical. Three vehicles operated “as-is” on California Air Resources Board (CARB) specification diesel fuel and no emission control devices. Three vehicles were retrofit with Johnson Matthey CCRT® (Catalyzed Continuously Regenerating Technology) filters and fueled with Shell GTL Fuel. Two rounds of emissions tests were conducted on a chassis dynamometer over the City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Route (CSHVR) and the New York City Bus (NYCB) cycle. The CARB-fueled vehicles served as the baseline, while the GTL-fueled vehicles were tested with and without the CCRT filters. Results from the first round of testing have been reported previously (see 2004-01-2959).

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.