This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Texas Project: Part 3 - Off-Cycle Emissions of Light-Duty Vehicles Operating on CNG, LPG, Federal Phase 1 Reformulated Gasoline, and/or Low Sulfur Certification Gasoline
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Off-cycle emissions from seven different types of 1994 light-duty vehicles were examined The test fleet consisted of 19 individual vehicles including a passenger car, two makes of light light-duty trucks, and five types of heavy light-duty trucks The driving cycles used for these tests were the US06(hard acceleration, high speed) cycle and the 20 °F FTP (the “Cold FTP”) Conventional FTPs were done for comparison Each vehicle was usually operated on at least two of the following CNG, LPG, Federal Phase 1 reformulated gasoline (FP1 RFG), and a low sulfur certification gasoline For both the conventional FTP and the US06 cycles, the alternative fuels produce statistically significant benefits in Ozone Forming Potential and exhaust toxics but the NOx emissions are not statistically different from those when operating on FP1 RFG with at least 90% confidence During Cold FTP tests, the emissions of CO and of toxics when operating on FP1 RFG are not statistically different from those when operating on a low sulfur certification gasoline In contrast the alternative fuels produce statistically significant benefits in the emissions of both CO and toxics compared to either of the gasolines during Cold FTP tests The Reactivity Adjustment Factor calculated from the present conventional FTP results for CNG agrees closely with the CARB value However, the present RAF for LPG is about half CARB s value, which is believed to be a consequence of the low propene in Texas LPG compared to the high propene in California LPG The effects of the test type on the emissions are also discussed
Authors
Topic
Citation
Wu, D., Matthews, R., Zheng, J., Shen, K. et al., "The Texas Project: Part 3 - Off-Cycle Emissions of Light-Duty Vehicles Operating on CNG, LPG, Federal Phase 1 Reformulated Gasoline, and/or Low Sulfur Certification Gasoline," SAE Technical Paper 962100, 1996, https://doi.org/10.4271/962100.Also In
References
- Matthews, R D Chiu J Zheng J Wu D-Y Dardalis D Hall M J Ellzey J E Mock C Love G 1996 “1995 Annual Report - The Texas Project Light-duty vehicle conversions to natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas” Combustion and Engines Research Program Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712
- Matthews, R D Chiu J Zheng J Wu D-Y Dardalis D Shen K Roberts C Hall M J Ellzey J L Mock C Wicker R B Jaeger S 1996 “The Texas Project Part 1 - Emissions and fuel economy of aftermarket CNG and LPG conversions of light-duty vehicles” SAE Paper 962098
- Chiu, J Matthews R D 1996 “The Texas Project Part 2 - Control system characteristics of aftermarket CNG and LPG conversions for light-duty vehicles” SAE Paper 962099
- Pahl, R H McNally M J 1990 ‘Fuel blending and analysis for the Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program” SAE Paper 902098
- Koehl, W J Benson J D Burns V R Gorse, R A Jr Hochhauser A M Knepper J C Leppard W R Painter L J Rapp L A Reuter R M Rutherford J A 1993 “Effects of gasoline sulfur level on exhaust mass and speciated emissions the question of linearity - Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program” SAE Paper 932727 Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program II SAE Special Publication SP-1000
- Lindhjem, C E 1995 “The effect of gasoline reformulation and sulfur reduction on exhaust emissions from post-1983 but pre-1990 vehicles” SAE Paper 950778
- Mayotte, S C Lindhjem C E Rao V Sklar M S 1994 “Reformulated gasoline effects on exhaust emissions Phase I Initial investigation of oxygenate, volatility, distillation, and sulfur effects” SAE Paper 941973
- Mayotte, S C Rao V Lindhjem C E Sklar M S 1994 “Reformulated gasoline effects on exhaust emissions Phase II Continued investigation of the effects of fuel oxygenate content, oxygenate type, volatility, sulfur, olefins, and distillation parameters” SAE Paper 941974
- Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program 1995 “Effects of gasoline T50, T90, and sulfur on exhaust emissions of current and future vehicles” AQIRP Technical Bulletin No 18 August
- Matthews, R D Chiu J Hilden D “CNG compositions in Texas and the effects of composition on emissions, fuel economy, and driveability of NGVs” SAE Paper 962097
- Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program 1995 “Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vehicles compared with gasoline vehicles” Technical Bulletin No 15 July 1995
- Hochhauser, A M Koehl W J Benson J D Burns V R Knepper J C Leppard W R Painter L J Rapp L A Rippon B H Reuter R M, Rutherford J A 1995 “Comparison of CNG and gasoline vehicle exhaust emissions mass and composition - The Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program” SAE Paper 952507 Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program III SAE Special Publication SP-1117
- Siegl, W O Richert J F O Jensen T E Schuetzle D Swarin S J Loo J F Prostak A Nagy D Schlenker A M 1993 “Improved emissions speciation methodology for Phase II of the Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program - hydrocarbons and oxygenates” SAE Paper 930142 , also in Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program Volume II , SAE Special Publication SP-1000 63 98
- California Air Resources Board 1995 “Proposed California exhaust emission standards and test procedures for 1988 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles” 10 20 95
- CleanFleet 1995 “Vehicle Emissions, Vol 7” Dec