Browse Topic: Evaporative emissions control systems (EVAP)

Items (50)
In recent years, stricter emission regulations for internal combustion engines have been implemented, including controls on evaporative fuel vapors from motorcycle fuel systems. To comply with these regulations, motorcycles are increasingly adopting evaporative emission control (EVAP) systems equipped with carbon canisters. The carbon canister adsorbs fuel vapors while the vehicle is stationary, preventing them from being released into the atmosphere. During engine operation, the stored vapors are purged back into the engine by the vacuum in the intake manifold, thereby regenerating the canister. EVAP system development must ensure compliance with emission standards while minimizing any negative impact on engine performance. As regulations are expected to become stricter in the future, there is increasing demand for high-performing canisters and more effective purge systems. This highlights the need for more efficient development methods. The aim of this study is to enhance the efficiency of EVAP system development by utilizing model-based development (MBD) with CAE technologies and machine learning-based surrogate models. Typically, there is a trade-off between simulation time and model accuracy in CAE, but surrogate models can significantly reduce computation time. By integrating CAE and surrogate models throughout the development process, a practical and efficient approach to developing EVAP systems is proposed.
Okuno, KeisukeHidai, AtsuyaTorigoshi, MasakiKinoshita, Hisatoshi
In the existing evaporation emission control and monitoring system, it is still necessary to popularize and develop more suitable evaporation emission monitoring, diagnosis and control methods. This study developed a design for the control system of evaporative emissions in hybrid vehicles, focusing on monitoring and controlling fuel evaporative emissions. A fuel evaporation model for automotive fuel tank was established. In this study, the key component of vehicle evaporative emission system, the fuel tank, is modeled and simulated. Through 6-hour and 12-hour experimental studies on fuel evaporation characteristics inside the tank, measurements were taken to determine the amount of evaporation under different liquid levels, temperatures, and vibration states. When the temperature increased from 12°C to 17°C and then further to 28°C, the rate of fuel evaporation increased by 25% and 50%, respectively. The increase in temperature significantly enhanced the rate of evaporation. A detailed simulation model for fuel evaporation was established by studying its composition as well as characteristics specific to different types of fuels. This allowed for the prediction of both components present during evaporation as well as their respective quantities. The average accuracy of evaporation model is 92.7%. providing a foundation for the subsequent development of carbon canister adsorption models.
Zheng, YushuoYu, XiaohongYao, ZhuoxiaoFeng, YifangLi, ZhijunChen, Tao
Due to the vibration of the vehicle, the performance of the vehicle carbon canisters will be changed, which will affect its control effect on the fuel evaporation emission. In this study, a vibration test platform capable of simulating vehicle vibration characteristics was used to simulate the possible vibration effects of the vehicle carbon canisters, and to analyze the absorption and desorption performance of the carbon canisters before and after long-term operation and its influence on vehicle evaporation emissions. The results show that the carbon canisters will precipitate the carbon powder after the continuous action of the forward and backward vibration of the vehicle. As a result, the ultimate adsorption and desorption amount of fuel vapor decreased, and the adsorption amount decreased more obviously. In the 48-hour Diurnal Breathing Loss (DBL) test, fuel vapor diffusion is more difficult due to the increased flow resistance of the carbon canisters after vibration, and fuel loss is reduced under unsaturated conditions, resulting in lower actual evaporative emissions. In evaporative emission control, it is necessary to adjust the control strategy reasonably according to the change of the working state of the carbon canisters.
Yu, XiaohongLiu, YiyaoFeng, YifangZheng, YushuoChen, TaoZhao, Hua
Under contract to the EPA, Eastern Research Group analyzed light-duty vehicle OBD monitor readiness and diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) using inspection and maintenance (I/M) data from four states. Results from roadside pullover emissions and OBD tests were also compared with same-vehicle I/M OBD results from one of the states. Analysis focused on the evaporative emissions control (evap) system, the catalytic converter (catalyst), the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system and the oxygen sensor and oxygen sensor heater (O2 system). Evap and catalyst monitors had similar overall readiness rates (90% to 95%), while the EGR and O2 systems had higher readiness rates (95% to 98%). Approximately 0.7% to 2.5% of inspection cycles with a “ready” evap monitor had at least one stored evap DTC, but DTC rates were under 1% for the catalyst and EGR systems, and under 1.1% for the O2 system, in the states with enforced OBD programs. Monitor readiness decreased, and DTC rates increased, as vehicles aged. DTCs were typically limited to a small subset of all possible DTCs for any particular system. For the on-road versus I/M analysis, lower overall readiness rates and higher overall DTC rates occurred during the roadside test than during the I/M test, and the prevalence of roadside DTCs was shown to decrease around the time of the vehicle’s I/M test, possibly indicating some positive I/M influence of reducing on-road DTCs. Roadside Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) fail rates also decreased around the time of the I/M test, suggesting a positive influence of I/M programs on reducing vehicle emissions.
Sabisch, MichaelWeatherby, MeredithKishan, SandeepFulper, Carl
In gasoline Powertrain systems, the evaporative emission control (EVAP) system canister purge valve (CPV) can be actuated by pulse-width modulated (PWM) signals. The CPV is an electronically actuated solenoid. The PWM controlled CPV, when actuated, creates pressure pulsations in the system. This pulsation is sent back to the rest of the EVAP system. Given the right conditions, the fill limit vent valve (FLVV) inside the fuel tank can be excited. The FLVV internal components can be excited and produce noise. This noise can be objectionable to the occupants. Additional components within the EVAP system may also be excited in a similar way. This paper presents a bench test method using parts from vehicle’s EVAP system and other key fuel system components. The test method achieves the following objectives: first, re-create the conditions that result in excitation; second, establish a controlled environment that provides insight into the noise phenomenon; and finally, set the ground work for further studies which may lead to further noise mitigation methods. The key system parameters controlled in this method are: frequency and duty cycle of the PWM signal, liquid level inside the fuel tank and tank grade/orientation. The output data includes: EVAP system purge flow rate, pressure signal inside the EVAP system (one near the CPV and one near the FLVV) and acceleration in Z (vertical) direction on the top tank surface near the FLVV mounting location.
Li, ZheDong, MikeHarrigan, DennisGardner, Michael
In order to meet more stringent evaporative emissions requirements, multiple advancements in vehicle fuel system and carbon canister technologies have been made. Regardless of technological advancements, the vapor pressure of the fuel remains a vital property in controlling evaporative emissions. A series of tests were performed to explore the effects of vapor pressure on multiday diurnal evaporative emissions for 9 and 10 psi Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) 10% ethanol (E10) gasoline-blend fuels, followed by tests with 7 psi RVP E10 gasoline on a subset of the same vehicles. A test procedure was developed to monitor evaporative emissions, canister loading profiles and breakthrough emissions for each of the fuels. A total of five vehicles were tested on all 3 fuels, blended to represent 7, 9, and 10 psi at sea level. Tests were run over 14 days using the United States (U.S.) Federal Diurnal Cycle (72°F to 96°F) in a Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determination (SHED) at a test facility in Colorado. Two of the five vehicles had evaporative emissions systems that met the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements for a Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV), while the other three vehicles were certified to U.S. Tier 2 evaporative emissions standards. The data collected throughout the testing provide a correlation between the hydrocarbon slip from the vehicle canister and the fuel vapor pressure. The data indicate that achieving lower evaporative emissions can be accomplished through the use of decreased vapor pressure fuels.
Dolch, JohannaReek, AaronGlinsky, GerardDicicco, DominicUghetta, Valerie
This SAE Recommended Practice applies to nomenclature of emissions and emissions reduction apparatus as applied to various engines and vehicles. Modifying adjectives are omitted in some cases for the sake of simplicity. However, it is considered good practice to use such adjectives when they add to clarity and understanding.
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
Exhaust and evaporative emissions systems have been developed to match the characteristics and usage of the Toyota THS II plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Based on the commercially available Prius, the Toyota PHEV features an additional external charging function, which allows it to be driven as an electric vehicle (EV) in urban areas, and as an hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) in high-speed/high-load and long-distance driving situations. To reduce exhaust emissions, the conventional catalyst warm up control has been enhanced to achieve emissions performance that satisfies California's Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle (SULEV) standards in every state of battery charge. In addition, a heat insulating fuel vapor containment system (FVS) has been developed using a plastic fuel tank based on the assumption that such a system can reduce the diffusion of vapor inside the fuel tank and the release of fuel vapor in to the atmosphere to the maximum possible extent. As a result, these measures have enabled the mass-production of the world's first PHEV that satisfies California's SULEV and zero evaporative emissions standards.
Takagi, NaoyaWatanabe, TakashiFushiki, ShunsukeYamazaki, MakotoAsou, ShuichiNishimura, Yuusaku
This SAE Recommended Practice is applicable to all E/E systems on MD and HD vehicles. The terms defined are largely focused on compression-ignited and spark-ignited engines. Specific applications of this document include diagnostic, service and repair manuals, bulletins and updates, training manuals, repair data bases, under-hood emission labels, and emission certification applications. This document focuses on diagnostic terms, definitions, abbreviations, and acronyms applicable to E/E systems. It also covers mechanical systems which require definition. Nothing in this document should be construed as prohibiting the introduction of a term, abbreviation, or acronym not covered by this document. The use and appropriate updating of this document is strongly encouraged. Certain terms have already been in common use and are readily understood by manufacturers and technicians, but do not follow the methodology of this document. To preserve this understanding, these terms were included and have been identified with the footnote (2), "historically acceptable common usage," so they will not erroneously serve as a precedent in the construction of new names. These terms fall into three categories: a Acronyms that do not logically fit the term. b Acronyms existing at the component level, i.e., their terms contain the base word or noun that describes the generic item that is being further defined. c Acronyms for terms that appear to contain the base word, but are frequently used as a modifier to another base word. (This use may possibly be thought of as following the methodology since the acronym is normally used as a modifier.)
Truck and Bus Control and Communications Network Committee
Cost Effective Emissions Control Based on Optimized Flex Fuel Electronic Injection for PROCONVE-L5 in Brazil2008-36-037910/7/2008
From January 2009 the new PROCONVE L5 emissions legislation will be in place in Brazil, reducing significantly the current emissions levels. In order to comply with this new legislation, all automakers have to take actions on hardware and electronic fuel injection calibration to meet these new standards. Hardware changes can be efficient, such as increasing the amount of precious metals in the catalyst; however, the cost penalty may turn it unfeasible. The objective of this text is to introduce how an efficient electronic fuel injection calibration, focused on emissions control can be a decisive way to reduce overall product cost. The influence of electronic fuel injection becomes more evident in the current Brazilian reality, where the overwhelming majority of vehicle sales are flexible fuel powered, increasing the challenge and difficulty to correctly control emissions. The text shows the hardware changes that aim combustion stability, generating lower raw emissions of HC, CO and NOx, and focus on electronic fuel injection calibration to optimize cost and to refine combustion management. The lessons learned during the development, methods to control the gases, ways of optimizing the cold and hot EPA-75 Phases, influences and difficulties of each fuel blend - E22, E63 and E93 - and also the methods of evaporative emissions control are described and analyzed.
Rodrigues, SauloFerreira, Rafael Peixoto
Oxygenated Fuel Considerations for In-Shop Fuel System Leak Testing Hazards2008-01-05544/14/2008
Because of domestic production from renewable sources and their clean burning nature, alcohols, especially ethanol, have seen growing use as a blending agent and replacement for basic hydrocarbons in gasoline. The increasing use of alcohol in fuels raises questions on the safety of these fuels under certain non-operational situations. Modern vehicles use evaporative emission control systems to minimize environmental emissions of fuel. These systems must be relatively leak-free to function properly and are self-diagnosed by the vehicle On-Board Diagnostic system. When service is required, the service leak testing procedures may involve forcing test gases into the “evap” system and also exposure of the fuel vapors normally contained in the system to atmosphere. Previous work has discussed the hazards involved when performing shop leak testing activities for vehicles fuelled with conventional hydrocarbon gasoline [1, 2]. Oxygenate-blended fuels have significantly different vapor behaviors than conventional gasoline, and these changes affect the flammable mixture hazards associated with leak testing procedures. This paper discusses the relevant vapor/liquid equilibrium and vapor properties of various oxygenate fuels and examines how these affect the flammable mixture hazards associated with shop leak testing procedures for fuel systems containing high oxygenate blends. The emphasis is on E85 as the most common currently used alternative fuel. A simple binary hexane-ethanol model was used to predict the equilibrium fuel vapors that are present in the fuel tank vapor space during shop leak testing with E85 present. The model was compared to experimental results that included the effects of weathering. The hazard associated with other oxygenated fuels could be predicted using previous literature. The results show that the vapor flammability hazards of oxygenate-blended gasoline fuels during leak testing activities are initially similar to those from conventional gasoline. However, the potential effects of fuel weathering during shop testing and of anomalous temperatures are significantly more severe for some oxygenated fuel blends, particularly the high alcohol blends including E85.
Frank, K. M.Checkel, M. D.
This SAE Recommended Practice is applicable to all E/E systems on MD and HD vehicles. The terms defined are largely focused on compression-ignited and spark-ignited engines. Specific applications of this document include diagnostic, service and repair manuals, bulletins and updates, training manuals, repair data bases, under-hood emission labels, and emission certification applications. This document focuses on diagnostic terms, definitions, abbreviations, and acronyms applicable to E/E systems. It also covers mechanical systems which require definition. Nothing in this document should be construed as prohibiting the introduction of a term, abbreviation, or acronym not covered by this document. The use and appropriate updating of this document is strongly encouraged. Certain terms have already been in common use and are readily understood by manufacturers and technicians, but do not follow the methodology of this document. To preserve this understanding, these terms were included and have been identified with the footnote (2), "historically acceptable common usage," so they will not erroneously serve as a precedent in the construction of new names. These terms fall into three categories: a Acronyms that do not logically fit the term. b Acronyms existing at the component level, i.e., their terms contain the base word or noun that describes the generic item that is being further defined. c Acronyms for terms that appear to contain the base word, but are frequently used as a modifier to another base word. (This use may possibly be thought of as following the methodology since the acronym is normally used as a modifier.)
Truck and Bus Control and Communications Network Committee
Fuel Tank and Charcoal Canister Fire Hazards during EVAP System Leak Testing2007-01-12354/16/2007
The combination of on-board diagnostics and evaporative emission control (EVAP) systems has led to a growing need to identify and repair leaks in automotive EVAP systems. The normal leakfinding method involves purging the system with a smoke fluid, usually air or nitrogen containing an oil aerosol and then looking for a visual indication of the leak. The purge flow used to distribute smoke through the system displaces substantial amounts of fuel vapor from the tank vapor space and can also raise the oxygen level inside the fuel system. If any ignition source is present, the formation of flammable mixtures both inside and outside the vehicle systems can lead to a flash fire hazard associated with leak finding procedures. Currently available fire statistics (such as NFPA) are not sufficiently detailed to attribute service shop fires to specific testing procedures. However, concern over anecdotal reports of flash fires has led to a study of flammable mixture formation during evap system testing. This paper describes a set of experimental and modeling studies aimed at better understanding fuel vapor behavior and associated fire hazards of EVAP system leak testing. The first phase of the project involved experimental measurement and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling of fuel vapour / air mixture distribution in a tank vapour space with an imposed flow rate typical of leak testing equipment. Initial fuel vapor concentrations, (and thus the quantity of vapor expelled during the initial purge), depend strongly on fuel volatility and temperature. In addition, purge flow rates in the vicinity of 10 litres/minute can produce substantial quantities of flammable mixture inside the fuel system. The quantity of purged vapor available for an external flash fire is highest for high volatility gasoline while the quantity of flammable mixture formed inside the fuel system tends to be highest for low volatility gasoline. The second phase of the project examined charcoal canister behavior with typical leak test flows imposed through the EVAP system. A basic model of canister behavior was established by measuring butane working capacity and gasoline working capacity under standard test conditions. Further experimental tests examined the fuel vapour concentrations leaving a pre-loaded charcoal canister with an imposed purge flow. Test results showed substantial release rates of fuel-rich gasoline vapor during early stages of testing and a long period of flammable vapor emission with prolonged testing. Ignition tests confirmed the flammability and flame characteristics of the mixture leaving the canister. Recommended procedures to limit the flammable mixtures formed during leak-testing are discussed in the paper.
Frank, KevinCheckel, David
Design Considerations & Characterization Test Methods for Activated Carbon Foam Hydrocarbon Traps in Automotive Air Induction Systems2007-01-14294/16/2007
As OEMs race to build their sales fleets to meet ever more stringent California Air Resources Board (CARB) mobile source evaporative emissions requirements, new technologies are emerging to control pollution. Evaporative emissions emanating from sources up-stream in the induction flow and venting through the ducts of the engine air induction system (EIS) need to be controlled in order classify a salable vehicle as a Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle (PZEV) in the state of California. As other states explore adopting California's pollution control standards, demand for emissions control measures in the induction system is expected to increase. This paper documents some of the considerations of designing an adsorbent evaporative emissions device in to a 2007 production passenger car for the North American and Asian markets. This new evaporative emissions device will be permanently installed in the vehicle's air cleaner cover without requiring service for 150K miles (expected vehicle life). Addressed are many of the questions and concerns associated with integrating emissions control technology into the EIS. Testing techniques for characterizing the emissions control functions of hydrocarbon traps are discussed in detail. This paper also illustrates and discusses the need to write a uniform and accepted test standard for EIS based emissions technology. This effort is currently being pursued at the SAE and ISO working groups.
Schaffer, Scott A.Arruda, AnthonyBielicki, JamesBugli, Neville
In order to correspond to the exhaust emissions regulations that become severe every year, more advanced engine control becomes necessary. Engine engineers are concerned about the Hydrocarbons (HCs) that flow through the air-intake ports and that are difficult to precisely control. The main sources of the HCs are, the canister purge, PCV, back-flow gas through the intake valves, and Air / Fuel ratio (A/F) may be aggravated when they flow into the combustion chambers. The influences HCs give on the A/F may also grow even greater, which is due to the increasingly stringent EVAP emission regulations, by more effective ventilation in the crankcase, and also by the growth of the VVT-operated angle and timing, respectively. In order to control the A/F more correctly, it is important to estimate the amount of HCs that are difficult to manage, and seek for suitable controls over fuel injection and so on. Therefore, the authors have developed a HC concentration measuring technology for the air-intake system using FID of which gas sampling performance has been remarkably improved. The characteristics of the system are as follows; 1. Applicable to each point of the intake system 2. Applicable to all engine operating conditions including the transition stage 3. Small influences on the A/F control by gas sampling 4. High accuracy; 1%F.S. This report presents the results gained from the several tests carried out on EVAP purging, PCV gas supplying, and VVT system operation, as well as on the process of measuring technology development.
Kawano, TakanobuItakura, HideakiKato, NaoyaOsanai, AkinoriMatsubara, Takuji
This paper discusses an approach to detecting small leaks in an automobile's evaporative emissions systems that is a technique based upon ideal gas laws. It does this by monitoring pressure in the system while the vehicle's engine is off. This low cost solution can be easily implemented on General Motors vehicles using existing components. The topics covered in this paper include details on the background of the problem and the technique, the underlying thermodynamics of the technique, a description of the algorithm, testing and data collection considerations.
DeRonne, MichaelLabus, GregLehner, ChadGonsiorowski, MarcWestern, BillWong, Kevin
Evaporative Emissions from Late-Model In-Use Vehicles2000-01-295810/16/2000
Evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles continue to be a major concern in areas where the national ambient air quality standard for ozone is violated. As a result, accurate estimates of real-world emissions from in-use motor vehicles are of vital importance in assessing the progress made in reducing emissions, as well as in determining the need for and required magnitude of additional emissions reductions. In this study, real-world evaporative emissions testing was performed on 50 late-model vehicles (30 passenger cars and 20 light-duty trucks), ranging in age from the 1992 to 1997 model year. Six of the 50 vehicles were equipped with enhanced evaporative emission control systems. Forty-nine of the 50 vehicles were procured from an Arizona State Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program test lane located in Mesa, Arizona, and one vehicle was procured from an employee of the test facility. Hot soak, running loss, and real-time diurnal testing was performed using tank fuel that averaged 6.5 Dry Vapor Pressure Equivalent (DVPE). Hot soak and running loss testing was performed at about 95 °F and one- and three-day diurnal testing was done using a diurnal heating range of 72-96 °F. The data collected indicate that the small percentage of the vehicle fleet with evaporative emission control system defects contributes disproportionately to the total evaporative emissions of the fleet. This observation, which has also been noted in previous studies examining real-world evaporative emissions from older vehicles, suggests that a few very high emitting vehicles produce the majority of the total fleet emissions. Identification and repair of vehicles with evaporative control system problems is required to fully achieve the intended reductions in real-world evaporative emissions. Comparison of the data collected from late-model vehicles with data from older vehicles in previous related studies indicates that, after the few extremely vehicles (referred to as high emitters) are eliminated, evaporative emissions from newer vehicles are, as expected, lower than those from older vehicles. Although only a limited number of vehicles with enhanced evaporative emission control systems were included in this test program, a comparison of data from those vehicles with the data from vehicles with the preceding generation of non-enhanced (basic) evaporative emission control systems indicates that the improvements in evaporative emission controls mirror what would be expected based on the differences in the evaporative emissions certification standards applicable to the two systems. Comparisons of the data collected in this study with emission predictions from U.S. EPA's MOBILE5b and CARB's MVEI7G models showed mixed results. The biggest discrepancies identified were the overprediction of running loss emission rates from vehicles with basic evaporative emission control systems by both models; the overprediction of total diurnal and resting loss emissions for vehicles with basic evaporative systems, which was more pronounced with MOBILE5b than for MVEI7G; and the overprediction of day 2 and day 3 diurnal emission rates by MOBILE5b for vehicles with both types of evaporative control systems.
Lyons, James M.Lee, John M.Heirigs, Philip L.McClement, DennisWelstand, Steve
Recently, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has proposed a new set of evaporative emissions and “Useful Life” standards, called LEVII EVAP regulations, which are more stringent than those of the enhanced EVAP emissions regulations. If the new regulations are enforced, it will become increasingly important for the carbon canister to reduce Diurnal Breathing Loss (DBL) and to prevent deterioration of the canister. Therefore, careful studies have been made on the techniques to meet these regulations by clarifying the working capacity deterioration mechanism and the phenomenon of DBL in a carbon canister. It has been found that the deterioration of working capacity would occur if high boiling hydrocarbons, which are difficult to purge, fill up the micropores of the activated carbon, and Useful Life could be estimated more accurately according to the saturated adsorption mass of the activated carbon and the canister purge volume. As a result, it is presumed that a more adaptable, longer Useful Life can be realized by providing a sufficient purge. It has been also found that the butane diffusion in a carbon canister during vehicle parking which is loaded to the canister during the DBL test, is the main cause of evaporative emissions from the canister. To prevent such diffusion, it is effective to divide the carbon bed into separated segments and insert some “labyrinth” between such carbon beds. Compared with the conventional canister, the improved canister was able to reduce DBL by half._Furthermore it became clear that DBL is reduced to approximately 1/3 when the gasoline fuel vapor is loaded to the canister instead of butane, which is the main cause of DBL. It was also concluded that the evaluation method should be reconsidered to account for real world conditions.
Itakura, HideakiKato, NaoyaKohama, TokioHyoudou, YoshihikoMurai, Toshimi
Diurnal Emissions from In-Use Vehicles1999-01-14635/3/1999
One hundred fifty-one vehicles were recruited from the I/M lane in Mesa, AZ during the summer of 1996, and their 24 hour diurnal emissions were measured in a variable temperature SHED (VT-SHED). The fleet selection included the earliest applications of evaporative emission control, and later technologies that had at least 5 years of exposure. Model years 1971 through 1991 were tested. Fifty-three percent of the sample tested had daily emissions of more than 10 grams. Five of the 151 were over 50 grams per day, and had significant liquid leaks. Twenty-six (17%) of the vehicles had emissions exceeding one gram per hour. Thirty-two of the 151 tested (21%) had identifiable liquid leaks. Carburetor systems had higher emissions than fuel injection systems. The highest emitters had resting losses of more than 0.8 g/hr. These eight highest emitters were considered outliers for the purposes of general analysis, and were not used, as is noted in the report. “Resting Losses” were estimated for the fleet using the last 6 hours of the diurnal. Carbureted vehicles averaged 0.2 g/hr (outliers omitted) and fuel injected vehicles were estimated at 0.1 g/hr. Analysis of the closed bottom canisters against the open bottom design indicated a 2 gram per day difference between the two designs. An I/M purge and pressure check identified most of the major failures, but often for the wrong reasons.
Haskew, Harold M.Liberty, Thomas F.
Vapor and Liquid Composition Differences Resulting from Fuel Evaporation1999-01-03773/1/1999
Liquid fuels and the fuel vapors in equilibrium with them typically differ in composition. These differences impact automotive fuel systems in several ways. Large compositional differences between liquid and vapor phases affect the composition of species taken up within the evaporative emission control canister, since the canister typically operates far from saturation and doesn't reach equilibrium with the fuel tank. Here we discuss how these differences may be used to diagnose the mode of emission from a sealed container, e.g., a fuel tank. Liquid or vapor leaks lead to particular compositions (reported here) that depend on the fuel components but are independent of the container material. Permeation leads to emissions whose composition depends on the container material. If information on the relative permeation rates of the different fuel components is available, the results given here provide a tool to decide whether leakage or permeation is the dominant mode of emission. Using well-established methods based on vapor-liquid equilibria, generalized vapor-phase correlations, and the UNIFAC model for liquid-phase nonideality, we have calculated the magnitude of the compositional difference for each species in several model fuel mixtures, as a function of temperature. In fuel C, a binary iso-octane/toluene mixture (of 1:1 volume ratio or 4:5 mass ratio), we find that the vapor is enriched in iso-octane to a 2:1 mass ratio. In ternary mixtures that contain alcohols at low concentrations (e.g., CM15), the vapor mass fraction of alcohol exceeds its liquid-phase mass fraction by a factor of three or more. In the same mixtures at high alcohol concentrations, the vapor mass fraction of iso-octane exceeds its liquid-phase mass fraction by a factor of 5 or more. The relative vapor mass fractions (on an air-free basis) of each species change with increasing temperature: the relative iso-octane fraction decreases, the relative toluene fraction increases slightly, and the relative alcohol fraction increases significantly. Results for ternary mixtures that contain MTBE and for a model indolene fuel are also presented.
Greenfield, Michael L.Rossi, Giuseppe
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring the hydrocarbon emissions occurring during the refueling of passenger cars and light trucks. It can be used as a method for investigating the effects of temperatures, fuel characteristics, etc., on refueling emissions in the laboratory. It also can be used to determine the effectiveness of evaporative emissions control systems to control refueling emissions. For this latter use, standard temperatures, fuel volatility, and fuel quantities are specified.
Emissions Systems Forum Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring the hydrocarbon emissions occurring during the refueling of passenger cars and light trucks. It can be used as a method for investigating the effects of temperatures, fuel characteristics, etc., on refueling emissions in the laboratory. It also can be used to determine the effectiveness of evaporative emissions control systems to control refueling emissions. For this latter use, standard temperatures, fuel volatility, and fuel quantities are specified.
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice applies to nomenclature of emissions and emissions reduction apparatus as applied to various engines and vehicles. Modifying adjectives are omitted in some cases for the sake of simplicity. However, it is considered good practice to use such adjectives when they add to clarity and understanding.
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: a A 1 h soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 15.6 to 28.9 °C (60 to 84 °F) b A 17.9 km (11.1 mile) drive on a chassis dynamometer c A 1 h hot soak immediately following the 17.9 km (11.1 mile) drive The method described in this document, commonly known as the SHED (Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determination) technique, employs an enclosure in which the vehicle is placed during the diurnal and hot soak phases of the test. Vapors that escape from all openings in the fuel system—both expected and unexpected—are retained in the enclosure, and the increase in hydrocarbon (HC) concentration of the atmosphere in the enclosure represents the evaporative emissions. Emission values measured by the enclosure method can, therefore, be significantly different than those obtained by the former trap method, depending on fuel system configuration and component design. The test sequence and methods for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. This document is intended as a guide toward standard practices, but may be subject to frequent change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. The document includes the following sections: a Definitions b Test Fuel c Test Facilities and Equipment d Measurement Method e Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System f Test Sequence g Information and Data to be Recorded h Presentation of Data
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice establishes uniform laboratory techniques for the continuous and bag-sample measurement of various constituents in the exhaust gas of the gasoline engines installed in passenger cars and light-duty trucks. The report concentrates on the measurement of the following components in exhaust gas: hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), oxygen (O2), and nitrogen oxides (NOx). NOx is the sum of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Historical techniques still used for some purposes are included in the Appendices. A complete procedure for testing vehicles may be found in SAE Recommended Practice J1094, Constant Volume Sampler System for Exhaust Emissions Measurement. This recommended practice includes the following sections: (1) Introduction (2) Definitions and Terminology (3) Emissions Sampling Systems (4) Emissions Analyzers (5) Data Analysis and Reduction (6) Associated Test Equipment (7) Test Procedures (8) Appendices A, B, and C
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
The highly preferred SAE Recommended Practice for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks is the enclosure technique detailed in SAE J171. The sensitivity and accuracy of the enclosure technique is superior to that of the trap method. This recommended practice is retained for historical reference and for use with older vehicles imported into the United States of America. In addition, this trap method is referenced in SAE J171a for making running loss measurements which cannot practically be made in an enclosure. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: (1) A 1 h soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 60 to 84°F (15.6 to 28.9 °C). (2) A 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run on a chassis dynamometer. (3) A 1 h hot soak immediately following the 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run. The method for measuring weight of fuel vapors emitted during the test employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are adsorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The test sequence and method for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1. Definitions 2. Test Fuel 3. Test Facilities and Equipment 4. Measurement Method 5. Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6. Test Sequence 7. Information and Data to be Recorded 8. Presentation of Data
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: 1 A 1 h soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle's tank is raised from 60-84°F (15.6-28.9°C). 2 An 11.1 mile (17.9 km) run on a chassis dynamometer. 3 A 1 h hot soak immediately following the 11.1 mile (17.9 km) run. The method described in this recommended practice for measuring the weight of fuel vapors emitted during the tests differs from that described in SAE J170a (July, 1972). SAE J170a employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are absorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The method described in this report employs an enclosure in which the vehicle is placed during the diurnal and hot soak phases of the test. Vapors that escape from all openings in the fuel system--both expected and unexpected--are retained in the enclosure, and the increase in hydrocarbon concentration of the atmosphere in the enclosure represents the evaporative emissions. Emission values measured by the enclosure method may, therefore, be significantly different than those obtained by the trap method, depending on fuel system configuration and component design. The test sequence and methods for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. This SAE Recommended Practice is intended as a guide toward standard practices, but may be subject to frequent change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1 Definitions 2 Test Fuel 3 Test Facilities and Equipment 4 Measurement Method 5 Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6 Test Sequence 7 Information and Data to be Recorded 8 Presentation of Data
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This recommended practice applies to nomenclature of emissions and emissions reduction apparatus as applied to various engines and vehicles. Modifying adjectives are omitted in some cases for the sake of simplicity. However, it is considered good practice to use such adjectives when they add to clarity and understanding.
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: 1 A 1 h soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 60 to 84 F (15.6 to 28.9 C). 2 A 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run on a chassis dynamometer. 3 A 1 h hot soak immediately following the 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run. The method described in this recommended practice for measuring the weight of fuel vapors emitted during the tests differs from that described in SAE J170a. SAE J170a employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are absorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The method described in this report employs an enclosure in which the vehicle is placed during the diurnal and hot soak phases of the test. Vapors that escape from all openings in the fuel system—both expected and unexpected—are retained in the enclosure, and the increase in hydrocarbon concentration of the atmosphere in the enclosure represents the evaporative emissions. Emission values measured by the enclosure method may, therefore, be significantly different than those obtained by the trap method, depending on fuel system configuration and component design. The test sequence and methods for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. This SAE Recommended Practice is intended as a guide toward standard practices, but may be subject to frequent change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1. Definitions 2. Test Fuel 3. Test Facilities and Equipment 4. Measurement Method 5. Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6. Test Sequence 7. Information and Data to be Recorded 8. Presentation of Data
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This recommended practice applies to nomenclature of emissions and emissions reduction apparatus as applied to various engines and vehicles. Modifying adjectives are omitted in some cases for the sake of simplicity. However, it is considered good practice to use such adjectives when they add to clarity and understanding.
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: 1 A 1 h soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 60 to 84 F (15.6 to 28.9 C). 2 A 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run on a chassis dynamometer. 3 A 1 h hot soak immediately following the 7.5 mile (12.1 km) run. The method described in this recommended practice for measuring the weight of fuel vapors emitted during the tests differs from that described in SAE J170. SAE J170 employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are absorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The method described in this report employs an enclosure in which the vehicle is placed during the diurnal and hot soak phases of the test. Vapors that escape from all openings in the fuel system—both expected and unexpected—are retained in the enclosure, and the increase in hydrocarbon concentration of the atmosphere in the enclosure represents the evaporative emissions. Emission values measured by the enclosure method may, therefore, be significantly different than those obtained by the trap method, depending on fuel system configuration and component design. The test sequence and methods for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. This SAE Recommended Practice is intended as a guide toward standard practices, but may be subject to frequent change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1. Definitions 2. Test Fuel 3. Test Facilities and Equipment 4. Measurement Method 5. Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6. Test Sequence 7. Information and Data to be Recorded 8. Presentation of Data
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: 1 A 1 hr soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 60 to 84 F. 2 A 7 mile run on a chassis dynamometer. 3 A 1 hr hot soak immediately following the 7 mile run. The method described in this recommended practice for measuring the weight of fuel vapors emitted during the tests differs from that described in SAE J170. SAE J170 employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are absorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The method described in this report employs an enclosure in which the vehicle is placed during the diurnal and hot soak phases of the test. Vapors that escape from all openings in the fuel system—both expected and unexpected—are retained in the enclosure, and the increase in hydrocarbon concentration of the atmosphere in the enclosure represents the evaporative emissions. Emission values measured by the enclosure method may, therefore, be significantly different than those obtained by the trap method, depending on fuel system configuration and component design. The test sequence and methods for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. This SAE Recommended Practice is intended as a guide toward standard practices, but may be subject to frequent change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1. Definitions 2. Test Fuel 3. Test Facilities and Equipment 4. Measurement Method 5. Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6. Test Sequence 7. Information and Data to be Recorded 8. Presentation of Data
SAE IC Powertrain Steering Committee
This SAE Recommended Practice describes a procedure for measuring evaporative emissions from fuel systems of passenger cars and light trucks. Emissions are measured during a sequence of laboratory tests that simulate typical vehicle usage in a metropolitan area during summer months: (1) A 1 hr soak representing one diurnal cycle in which temperature of fuel in the vehicle’s tank is raised from 60 to 84 F. (2) A 7 mile run on a chassis dynamometer. (3) A 1 hr hot soak immediately following the 7 mile run. The method for measuring weight of fuel vapors emitted during the test employs activated carbon traps connected to the fuel system at locations where vapors are expected to escape. Vapors from these openings are adsorbed by the traps, and the gain in weight of the traps represents the fuel evaporative emissions. The test sequence and method for measuring emissions are applicable to vehicles either with or without systems or devices to control fuel evaporative emissions. Although they have been used successfully with a wide range of vehicles equipped with a variety of control devices, they should not be applied indiscriminately to new or unique vehicles or fuel systems. For example, based on experience that temperature excursions of the fuel tank in parked vehicles follow those of ambient air, the test sequence prescribes heating of the fuel tank to simulate a diurnal soak. Any control system designed to alter the relation between fuel and ambient temperatures will not be properly evaluated in the test sequences prescribed. The recommended practice includes the following sections: 1. Definitions 2. Test Fuel 3. Test Facilities and Equipment 4. Measurement Method 5. Preparation of Test Vehicle and Fuel System 6. Test Sequence 7. Information and Data to be Recorded 8. Presentation of Data
The effect of fuel composition on automotive evaporative emissions has been studied using five cars, not equipped with evaporative emission controls, and a total of 31 fuels. The amount of evaporative emissions increased with increasing fuel volatility. Also, the evaporative emission photochemical reactivity per gram increased with increasing C4 and C5 olefins in the fuel and decreased with increasing C4 and C5 paraffins. For an assessment of the smog potential of evaporative emissions, the amount and reactivity per gram should not be considered independently, since they both are simultaneously dependent on fuel composition. The product of amount and reactivity per gram (the Evaporative Reactive Index) is a good measure of the contribution of evaporative emissions to photochemical air pollution. An empirical equation for predicting the Evaporative Reactive Index from fuel properties has been derived. First, the two-part equation predicts the emission amount from the percent fuel evaporated in an ASTM distillation at 160 F and the fuel’s Reid vapor pressure. Second, the reactivity per gram of the evaporative emissions can be determined from the percent C4 and C5 olefins and the percent C4 and C5 paraffins in the fuel. Utilization of the Evaporative Reactive Index (ERI) may be illustrated by the following examples. Removal of 65% of the butane from the typical Los Angeles gasoline would reduce the fuel evaporated at 160 F from 29 - 23% and lower Reid vapor pressure from 9.5 - 7 psi. The ERI equation would predict a decrease in evaporative emission amount from 110 - 68 gm/day and an increase in reactivity per gram (based on the NO2 formation rate scale) from 0.049 – 0.055. The ERI (NO2) would decrease from 5.4 - 3.7 (31%). On the other hand, replacement of the C4 and C5 olefins in the same fuel with C4 and C5 paraffins would not affect the percent evaporated at 160 F, Reid vapor pressure, or emission amount; but the equation would predict a decrease in reactivity per gram (NO2) from 0.049 - 0.028 and a decrease in the ERI (NO2) from 5.4 - 3.1 (43%).
Jackson, Marvin W.Everett, Robert L.
Items per page:
1 – 50 of 50