# Vehicle Aging and Comparative Emissions Testing Using E0 and E15 Fuels Evaporative Emissions Results NREL Subcontract JGC-9-99141 -01

August 31, 2010 Environmental Testing Corporation

Aurora, Colorado Keith Vertin, (303)365 -7849, kvertin@etclab.com

Tom Beierschmitt Environmental Testing Corporation is an accredited laboratory, in compliance with ISO 14001:96, and ISO 17025- 1999 for performing vehicle and engine emissions tests. American Association for Laboratory Accreditation Certificate Number 1975- 01.

# Topics  Test Approach

– Objective

– Vehicle preparation and canister loading 

#  Evaporative Emissions Results



## – 2 day diurnal

– Honda Odyssey repeat testing

– Comparison to EPA standard

# Evaporative Emissions



# Background Information  ETC was contracted by DOE/NREL to age eight vehicles to 120000 miles, and to perform periodic exhaust emissions tests 

###  ETC contributed SHED testing to the project, to also get some comparative information about the evaporative emissions from E0 and E15 -fueled vehicles 

###  2 - day diurnal evaporative emissions tests were performed following the triplicate FTP75 exhaust emissions tests, at 4000, 60000, 90000 and 120000 mile events 

###  Four vehicles were aged on E0 fuel and four aged on E15 fuel, using mileage accumulation dynamometers. Since the vehicles accumulated about 1000 miles per day during 24/7 aging on the MADs, the evaporative emissions system was not exercised as it would be in real- world driving

– Far fewer refuel, diurnal, and purge cycles

– Shorter duration of fuel exposure 

###  But the test approach provides some timely, comparative data on evaporative emissions from E0 and E15 fuels

# 2009 Model Year Vehicles

Ford Focus, 2.0L, Tier 2 Bin 4 Toyota Camry, 2.4L,Tier 2 Bin 5
Honda Odyssey, 3.5L, Tier 2 Bin 5 Saturn Outlook, 3.6L, Tier 2 Bin 5
4 vehicles aged using E0 fuel, 4 vehicles aged on E15 fuel

# Test Approach  Evaporative emissions run per Federal Test Procedure Supplemental Evaporative Test (“2 - Day Diurnal” sequence) 

###  Windshield washer bottles drained and flushed, vehicles washed, no vehicle baking, vehicles had newer tires 

###  All vehicles were SHED tested after approximately 4000 miles of run - in, on high altitude certification E0 fuel (40CFR86.113 - 04) 

###  One vehicle from each pair was then refueled on certification E15 fuel (fuel grade ethanol splash blended in certification E0 fuel) 

###  Conditioning after initial fuel change to certification E15:

– Approximately 1000 miles using Standard Road Cycle

– Certification E15 fuel was in tank for approximately 2 months before exhaust emissions and SHED testing (September to November/December 2009)

– E15 -fueled vehicles then retested in SHED using certification E15 fuel at approximately 5400 miles

# Test Approach, continued  For E0 control vehicles at mileage intervals of 60000, 90000 and 120000 miles:

– Control vehicles aged on E0 road fuel and switched to high altitude certification E0 fuel for last 500 miles of each interval

– SHED testing performed using certification E0 fuel after triplicate exhaust emissions tests were completed 

###  For E15 test vehicles at mileage intervals of 60000, 90000 and 120000 miles:

– Test vehicles aged on splash - blended E15 and switched to cert E15 fuel (fuel grade ethanol blended in cert E0 fuel) for last 500 miles of each interval

– SHED testing performed using cert E15 fuel after triplicate exhaust emissions tests completed, and before fuel change to cert E0 fuel

# Test Considerations  The RVP of the fuels are different, ethanol increases the RVP

– High altitude Cert E0 fuel RVP was 7.89 psi (typical)

– Cert E15 fuel RVP was 8.65 psi (typical) 

###  The “aftermarket” fuel drain hose used to aid fuel drain and fills (shown below) was removed prior to the prep cycle for all SHED testing as these hoses are permeable. The fuel supply hose connection was returned to stock configuration prior to each prep cycle. 

###  Vehicles do not have service ports, so canisters were butane - loaded through a modified gas cap as shown on next slide.

# Gas Cap Modification for Canister Loading

# Ford Focus 2 - Day Diurnal Results  Day 1 and Day 2 evaporative emissions very similar 

###  The 90000 mile SHED test for vehicle #128417 was skipped due to project time constraints Control Vehicle #128416, E0 Fuel Test Vehicle #128417, E15 Fuel

# Toyota Camry 2- Day Diurnal Results  Day 1 and Day 2 evaporative emissions were similar 

###  The 60000 mile test for vehicle #128419 was voided 

###  E vaporative emissions for vehicle #128418 and some other vehicles were higher at 4000 miles than at 60000 miles

– Possible explanation is vehicle and tire off - gassing but this was not quantified Control Vehicle #128418, E0 Fuel Test Vehicle #128419, E15 Fuel

# Honda Odyssey 2- Day Diurnal Results  Day 1 and Day 2 evaporative emissions were similar 

###  Omitted tests for E15 -fueled vehicle #128415:

– at 60000 miles, test possibly impacted by split fuel tank filler hose

– at 90000 and 120000 miles, tests impacted by split fuel tank filler hose 

###  Retest at 120000 miles after fuel tank filler hose replacement, using cert E0 fuel

– cert E0 in fuel tank about 6 weeks prior to retest Control Vehicle #128414, E0 Fuel Test Vehicle #128415 E15 Fuel E0 Fuel

# Honda Odyssey #128415



# Fuel Tank Filler Hose Issue  Hose is not in an area where vehicle is handled or strapped 

###  Split in hose was found by dripping fuel during drain and fill at 120000 miles 

###  ETC does not have plausible theory on how hose was split

Location of Split in Hose Fuel Tank

# Saturn Outlook 2 - Day Diurnal Results  Day 2 evaporative emissions significantly higher than Day 1 emissions, for both vehicles Control Vehicle #128420, E0 Fuel Test Vehicle #128421, E15 Fuel

# Supplemental Evaporative Test Results  2009 EPA Standard (Phase In): LDV = 0.65 g/test, LDT = 0.85 g/test Highest Day + 1 Hr Hot Soak 

###  Vehicles met the standard on both fuels

Focus Camry Odyssey Outlook 2009 EPA LDV Std 2009 EPA LDT Std

# Summary  SHED testing was performed to provide some timely, comparative data on vehicle evaporative emissions from E0 and E15 fuels 

#  Test approach does not claim to represent “real world” operation of the evaporative emissions control system

– Accelerated vehicle aging on mileage accumulation dynamometers had far fewer refuel, diurnal, and purge cycles

– Shorter duration of fuel exposure 

#  Supplemental evaporative emissions results for all tests were 

## under the 2009 Tier 2 federal standard