Table 3-2. FUEL ANALYSIS SUMMARY

-€T-

ANALYSIS] RVP | 1BP] 5%} 103] 20%] 30%] 403%] 50%} 60%] 70%} 80% | 90% EBP
Batch 9.0 89 - 127 - - - 217 - - - 307 403
AO 6.6* | 96 | 136] 154] 180] 200] 213] 224] 232] 246] 269 | 316 386
Al 9.2 90 }118] 134] 164] 190} 210} 222] 232] 245} 268 } 319 394
A2 9.5 86 |} 112] 130} 160 | 1864 206) 218) 228} 240} 264 | 312 389
A3 9.5 85 $110] 126] 156} 185} 206] 219] 228] 241] 264 | 313 392
Ad 9.5 85 }112] 128] 159] 187] 206] 218] 226} 240} 263 | 320 390
AS 9.3 85 {11741134}, 164] 191] 208) 221{ 232 243 | 266 | 314 392
A6é 9.3 89 |119}| 136} 1641190} 209} 221] 231] 244] 268 | 316 391
A7 9.4 85 }117] 134] 162 | 190] 208] 221] 232] 244] 267 | 316 388
A8& 9.4 86 [117 | 134] 162 | 190] 208) 221) 231] 245 | 266 {317 386
AQ 9.3 gs j120 | 136] 164 }191] 209| 221] 233] 244] 267 | 316 390
Alo 8.9 86 J117 | 137} 175 | 202] 216] 227] 236) 248 | 274 | 338 390
All 9.1 92 {126 | 143 | 175 | 302] 216] 227] 236] 248 | 272 |321 396
Al2 8.9 87 1117 | 135] 170 [199] 214] 224] 234] 244 | 271 1325 396
Al3 9.0 93 {122 |139]174 |] 200] 216] 226] 235 | 247 | 271 |329 393
Al4 9.0 91 4123 [138 | 173 | 202 | 216] 226] 236 | 248 | 272 | 331 391
AlS 9.0 90 $123 {140 | 175 | 201 | 215] 225] 235 | 247 | 270 4328 376
Al6 9.2 87 $127 [127 | 166 | 195 |] 211] 221] 225 | 249 |] 268 4328 391

*Laboratory erroneously analyzed this sample, attempted to repeat the analysis
but ran out of sample.


CAR
No.

3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3069

, 3010

3011

3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021

MOD
TR:
CV:
ac,

CATE

77/C5/09
77/04/18
17/05/09
77/04/25
77/05/23
77/06/01
77/04/25
77/05/23
TT/O05/17
TT/O5/1T
77/04/26
77/05/09
17/04/20
TT/05/17
11/65/23
77/03/21

17/05/04
17/03/25
77/03/07
77/03/23

SIZE

A/C SIM:

MAKE
CODE

10
12
10
09
09
10
03
03
05
05
14
ol
06
06
03
03
04
04
16
06

rorM

VIN

NL45C 76137289
HP4107G102657
WL46JTAL1OLZ6
S$S2257R146706
CL41570113953
WL46JS7A174297
1M27B72106656
1V7787U108266
2C7IV7US11414
2CTTVTU510549
HLS30363522
4869C7L108409
FOKSIL1T2869F
FOK9IIL154923F
1V7786U126154
1V1586U225373
3J57K5R157191
3K57KSR163417
1162160636
6W82F296163

YR

17
W
17
7
W
7
17
7
77
7
77
77
16
16
76
76
75
75
To
76

O01 CARD LISTING
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION DATA

MAKE

ocOG
PLYM
0006
CHRY
CHRY
DO0G
Chev
CHEV
PCNT
PCNT
DATS
BUIC
FORO
FORD
CHEV
CHEV
cLoS
OLDS
voLK
FORD

MOOL

ASPE
VOLA
MGNO
CORD
NEwP
MONO
MORZ
VEGA
ASTR.
ASTR
2802
SKYL
MAVE
MAVE
VEGA
VEGA
cuUTL
cUTL
SEDA
GRAN

“an

SIZ CID TR

<25
225
260
360
360
360
140
140
151
15h
168
231
250
250
140
140
350
350

97
302

WERNESWUU SE SERRE ENR OW

ee ee ete tet Uren en rene

NO.
cv CYL AC

NOS FNNEENONNNN SHS SER
THUDEHLOOTOSE SHOOTERS
PNP RRR RN PRR ENE Re eee

Full, 2 = Intermediate, 3 = Compact, 4 = subcompact
5 = 5eSpeed Manual

Automatic, 4 = 4-Speed Manual,
Fuel Injection, 1 = 1 Barrel, 2 = 2 Barrel,

Air Conditioning, 2 = No Air Conditioning

4 = 4 Barrel

INRT
wT

4000
3500
4500
4500
5000
4500
3000
2750
3000
3000
3000
3500
3000
3000
2750
3000
4000
4900
2000
3500

ROAD
HP

12.0
12.3
14.0
14.0
14.7
14.0
11.3

9.9
11.3
11.3
11.3
12.3
10.3
11.3
10.9
11.3
13.2
13.2

8.3
12.3

A/C
SIM

oD0M

47719
10943
17787

4036
10255

1707

7259

6107

3239

2366

2146

5135
16983
11149

3760

4702
35997
13521

4339

7321


=~ 5
Sr \
COMPARTMENT (1976 FORD GRANADA) SHOWING
IO OF HOT SOAK EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS



CAR
NO.

MAKE MCE Nue INRT ROAD A/C
DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SId CID TR Cv CYL AC wT HP SIM

3002 77/04/18 12 HP41C7G102657 77 PLYM VOLA 3 22> 1 1 6 1 3500 1263 i

-6e-

» EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

CYCLE GRAMS (HC} TEST NO. RUN NOw vAT.

CIURNAL 1.70 1 1220 4/19/77
HOT SOAK 1.64 1 1220 4/19/77
COMPOSITE 3235 1 1220 4/19/77

DIURNAL 1.19 2 1222 4/20/77
HOT SOAK 0.91 2 1222 4/20/77
COMPOSITE 2.10 2 1222 4/20/77

OTURNAL 2.31 3 1227 4/26/17
HOT SOAK 1.28 3 1227 4/20/71
COMPOSITE 3.60 3 1227 4/co/TT

yo0M
15943


ENTER

COLD SOAK} 12 to 36 hour soak
AREA

40% FILL
FUEL TANK

+

VEHICLE b— 40 CFR 36.133-78
INTO SHED

DIURNAL
EVAP_TEST

Pus

VEHICLE
ONTO DYNO

-— 40 CFR 86.135-78
to 40 CFR 86.137-78

1975 FTP

Y
PUSH
VEHICLE
INTO SHED

-— 40 CFR 86.138-78

HOT SOAK
EVAP TEST

REMOVE
VEHICLE
FROM_SHED

Figure 3-2. EVAPORATIVE/EXHAUST EMISSION TEST
(EPA Contract 68-03-2412 - Task Order 3)

-7-


CAR
NO.

MAKE McD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
CATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR CV CYL AC wT HP oI

3013 77/05/09 O01 4869C7L108409 77 BUIC SKYL 3 231 21 2 6 1 3500 12.3 1

-6b-

+ EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS »

cYCLe GRAMS (HC) TEST NG. RUN NO. DATE
DIURNAL 1.20 1 1246 5/10/77
HOT SOAK 4.96 1 1246 5/10/77
CCMPOSITE 6.16 1 1246 5/10/77
DIURNAL 0.75 2 1249 5/11/77
HOT SOAK 4018 2 1249 5/11/77
COMPOSITE 4.9% 2 1249 S/LL/T?
DIURNAL 1.02 3 1252 5/12/77
HOT SOAK 4.53 3 1252 5/12/77
CCMPOSITE 5.56 3 41252 5/12/77

yvOM
5135


CAR
NO.

3010 77/05/17

-Lbe

MAKE
DATE CODE

VIN

05 2C77V7U510549

MoD NO.
YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYt AC
77 ~PCNT ASTR 4 151 1 2 4 L

» EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

INRT ROAD Ase
wT HP SIM
3000 11.3 L

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO.

DIURNAL 7267 1 1272 6/ 1/77
HOT SOAK 1.54 1 1272 o/ 1/77
COMPOSITE 921 1 1272 6/ W417
DIURNAL 5256 2 1275 of 2/17
HOT SOAK 1.56 2 1275 6/ 2/17
COMPOSITE Tol2 2 1275 o/ 2/77
DIURNAL 0.51 3 1278 6/ 3/TT
HCT SOAK 1.29 3 1278 of 3/717
COMPOSITE 1.80 3 1278 o/ 3/77
DIURNAL 5.14 4 1283 6/15/77
HOT SOAK 1.84 4 1283 6/15/77
COMPOSITE 6.98 4 1283 6/15/77

oud"
2366


INRT ROAD A/C
AC wt HP SIM
1 3000 11.3 1

3/22/77
3/22/77
3/22/77

3/23/77
3/23/77
3/23/17

af24/7T
3/24/77

CAR MAKE MQD NO.
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR Cv CYL
3017 77/03/21 03 1V15B6U225373 76 CHEVY VEGA 4 140 21 2 4
»« EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «
CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NO.
DIURNAL 0047 1 1204
HOT SOAK 0.70 1 1204
COMPOSITE 1.17 1 1204
1 DIURNAL 0.94 2 1206
g HOT SOAK 0.63 2 1206
1 COMPOSITE 1.57 2 1206
OLURNAL 0.53 3 1208
HOT SOAK 1.08 3 1208
COMPOSITE 1.60 3 1208

3024/77

OuomM
4702


car MAKE MOD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYt AC WT HP Sim
3021 77/03/23 06 6W82F296163 76 FORD GRAN 3 302 21 2 8 1 3500 12.3 a

cYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NO. vate
DIURNAL 3.93 1 1210 3/28/17
HOT SOAK 12.05 1 1210 3/28/77
COMPOSITE 15.98 1 1210 3/28/77
1 CIURNAL 3.91 2 1213 3/30/77
3 HOT SOAK 11.65 2 1213 3/30/77
1 COMPOSITE 15.56 2 1213 3/30/77
OLURNAL 4.23 3 1214 4/ TT
HOT SOAK 12.60 3 1214 4/1/77
COMPOSITE 16.83 3 1214 4/ WIT

o00M
7321


CAR MAKE M9D NC. INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYL AC wT HP SIm
3008 77/05/23 03 1V77B7U108266 77 CHEV VEGA 4 140 4 2 4 2 2750 969 é

« EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NOe DATc
DIURNAL 2.90 1 1263 5/24/77
HOT SOAK 1.29 1 1263 9/24/17
COMPOSITE 4.20 1 1263 5/24/77
1 OIURNAL 0.40 2 1266 5/25/07
> HOT SOAK 0.89 2 1266 5/25/77
, CCMPOSITE 1.29 2 1206 5/25/77
DIURNAL 060 3 1269 Sf2o/Tt
HOT SOAK 0.99 3 1269 5/26/77
COMPOSITE 1.59 3 1269 5/20/77

ouoM
6107


3.4.1 Data Recording and Reduction

Test data were recorded on standard data forms used during the 1975 FY
Emission Factor Test Program. However, some modifications to the forms were
required for this Task Order to accommodate specific additional information.
In addition, data regarding idle parameter specifications and measurements
were not reported.

The test data were reduced by converting deflections and ranges to concen-
trations, and auditing the data. This function was performed by Olson's Data
Quality Assurance group. Punched card output in the format defined by EPA was
provided to the Project Officer at the end of this task.

3.4.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation

The interpretation of the data included establishing the relationship
between preconditioning and emission levels. Tests for statistically signifi-~
cant differences were performed between the second emission test, which was
considered the baseline test, and the other tests to determine whether precondi-
tioning caused statistically different emissions.

The statistical test used to determine significant differences in emissions
due to preconditioning was the paired t-test. This test applies to cases
where two treatments; i.e., preconditioning, are applied to each member of a
population. In this case, each member was one of the vehicles in the test
fleet. The paired t-test was evaluated at the 95 percent confidence level and
was applied to the following comparisons of preconditioning.

° None versus 1974 FTP
° None versus road route
° 1975 FTP versus road route

In addition to statistical tests, diurnal evaporative emission data were
plotted as a function of the amount of fuel in the tank, ambient air temperature,
and distance driven prior to the first evaporative emissions test. These
plots were prepared for both the actual diurnal emission level and diurnal
data normalized by dividing the first test (no preconditioning) by the second
test (1975 FIP).

-17-


CAR
NO.

3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
13010
©3011
73013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021

FIC

190
180
240
255
265
240
185
160
160
160
170
210
190
190
160
160
20c
220
110
192

OG2 CARD LISTING
EMISSION CONTROL SYSTMS

EM AIR EGR FT CAT TR PCV CBE FTE ccc cc ccPe

PEP EP Re Ee ee ee ee
PR RNB RP EPP N RNR RE EN
Pe ee
NENN NUNN NER NANNRNNND
ee ee rer ee
RARRRNRANNANARARARNN
Pee Re ee ee
NONNA NEE RF ONNANARNNNN
ree eee te eee ee ted

KEY TO CODES

Frc
EM
AIR
EGR
FI
cat

Fuel Tank Capacity (gals)

Engine Modification (1=yes)

Air Injection (l=yes, 2=no)

Exhaust Gas Recirculation (l=yes, 2=no)
Fuel Injection (l=yes, 2=no)

Oxidation Catalyst (1l=yes)

Termal Reactor (2=no)

NNER NR RNR RAN NE
NEN NARA NNER ANNAN NAN
MEN NNN EER SENN NNR NINN

Positive Crankcase Ventilation (l-installed and functioning)

Carburetor Bowl Evaporative Emission Control l=yes,

Fuel Tank Evaporative Emission Control (1=yes)
Carbon Canister Contraction (l=open bottom, 2=closed bottom)
2=running yapors bypass bed)

Carbon Canister (l=all vapors enter bed,
Carbon Canister Purges to (l-air cleaner,

2~carburetor,

2=no, O=not applicable)

3=PCV, 4-manifold)


ABSTRACT

Evaporative (SHED) and exhaust emission tests were performed on 20 late-
model catalyst-equipped vehicles to investigate the effect of three precondition-
ing procedures consisting of: 1) no preconditioning, 2) 1975 FTP driving
schedule, and 3) 10-minute road route. A failure analysis was also performed
on several vehicles which were found to either have high evaporative emissions
or evaporative emissions which were higher than similarly equipped vehicles.

iv


-8z-

MILES

356

30

25h

20,

15

10

8 Figure 4-5.

NORMALIZED EMISSIONS VERSUS MILES DRIVEN

ll
©
19 16
oO;
@ &
09 ol 14
@ 0} (0)
10
é °
17
2
fo) é

fol

13
. fo)
05
20 fo)
O)
+ 1 = 1 1 1 i
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 8.0
NORMALIZED EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS


Table 3-3. FUEL TOLERANCES

T

EPA ASTM "ACCEPTANCE
L PROPERTY SPECIFICATION [REPRODUCIBILITY | _RANGE*
Reid Vapor Pressure
(psi) 8.7-9.2 0.3 8.4-9.5
Distillation
pp °F 75-95 9 66-104
10% OF 120-135 8 112-143
508 oF 200-230 6 194-236
908 Cr 300-325 ee 289-336
EBP °F «415 9 “£424

*A fuel will be considered acceptable if the Olson analysis of the drum
sample is within the EPA specification or does not differ from an
acceptable AMOCO analysis by more than the reproducibility of the
analytical method.

-14-


-0z-

VEHICLE
NUMBER

3008

3009

3010

3011

3013

3014

3015

Table 4-1.

EVAP CUM REPIRT

MODEL
YEAR

1977

1977

1977

1977

1977

1976

1976

MAKE

CrEV

PONT

PONT

DATS

BUIC

FORD

FORD

cio

140

151

168

231

250

250

TEST

evap
1S75
1975
1975
evap
evap
EvAP
1975
1975
1575
EVAP
evap
evap
1S75
1975
1975
1S75
EVAP
EVAP
EVAP
EvAP
1975
1S75
AS75
EVAP
EVAP
EVAP
1975
S75
1975
EVAP
EvaP
EVAP
1S75
1975
1S75
evap
EVAP
EVAP
1975
1975
1975
EvAP

TYPE

TST
FIP
FTP
FTP
Ist
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
TsT
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
FIP
1ST
TST
Tst
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
1st
1ST
TST
FTP
FIP
FTP
TST
TST
1ST
FTP
FIP
FTP
TST
TST
1st
FTP
FTP
FTP
TST

HC

5.99
0.68
0.65
0.53
4-20
1.29
1.59
0.37
0.33
C134
2.86
531
£.20
0.37
0.33
G.31
C.2y
9.21
T.12
1.80
6.58
1.70
1.76
1.93
4015
1.59
1.60
0.38
0.39
C46
belo
4.94
5.56
0.38
0.39
C.43
24.80
16.59
20.57
Co59
0.37
C.75
15.20

GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS
GRAMS
GRAMS

GRAMS

OF HC

15.32
13.54
11.14

OF HC
QF HC
OF HC
5.59
4.67
4.87
QF HC
OF HC
OF HC

12.04
10.75
10.76
10.86

OF HC
OF HC
OF HC
OF HC

75.72
75.24
87.60

OF HC
OF HC
OF HC
3.95
4o1T
3.61
OF HC
CF HC
OF HC
1.09
1.63
1.81
OF HC
OF HC
OF HC
1.44
1.68
3.76
CF HC

COMPOSITE EVAPORATIVE AND EXHAUST EMISSIONS (Continued)
CALIF s- NTA

FUEL

---- EMISSION RESULTS (GMS/MI) ---— ECIN
co

C32 NGXC (MPG)

356.5 4.09 23.19
365.3 4.23 22.84
357.5 4.09 23.56

47864 1.17 lowl7
490.0 1.29 17.80
480.3 1.25 18.15

494.5 1.16
489.7 1.07
492.8 1.11
500.4 1.09

612.6 1.05 14.31
637.7 1.14 13.75
603.9 1.06 14.53

534.2 1.12 16.50

1.54 14.00
2.10 12.14

TEST

NO.

PUN RUN EUR PUNE UN PUN RUNES UNE SUN RUN UNE UN RUN


Table 3-4. EVAPORATIVE EMISSION CORRELATION DATA
(GM/TEST)

OLSON RESULTS

PRECONDITIONING DIURNAL [HOT SOAK [TOTAL

40 Mile Freeway 3.9 12.1 16.0
1975 FTP 3.9 11.7 15.6
10-Minute Road 4.2 12.7 16.9

ARB_ RESULTS

PRECONDITIONING DIURNAL | HOT SOAK [TOTAL

40 Mile Freeway* 9.0 13.2 22.2
40 Mile Road and LA-4 4.9 11.2 16.1
LA-4 (1972 FTP) 3.8 12.4 16.2
40 Mile Road and LA-4 3.9 13.2 17.1

*Vehicle was tested without preconditioning
several days after being delivered to the ARB
laboratory.

-16-


Figure 4-6. NORMALIZED DIURNAL EMISSIONS VERSUS AIR TEMPERATURE

es 8

09
@ 18
fo}
e
14
19 1 07
29° .) [°)
@i6 04
60
2 08

-62-

AIR TEMPERATURE °F

65

60

55

50

1 1 1 1

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 -
NORMALIZED EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS


Figure 3-6. EXTERIOR OF SHED SHOWIN
AND SHED TEMPERATURES



CAR MAKE MOD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR CV CYL AC wT HP SIM JDOM
3019 77/03/25 04 3k57K5R163417 75 OLDS CUTL 2 350 1 4 8 1 4000 13.2 1 13521

« EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NG. RUN NO. DATE

DIURNAL 0.29 1 1237 5/3/17

HOT SOAK 1.25 1 1237 54 3/77
COMPOSITE 1.54 1 1237 5/ 3/77

—_ ---—. --+----+-~ -—- ----~----- +--+ ---- + +--+ - +

1 DIURNAL 0.35 2 1239 5/4/17
a HOT SOAK 1.70 2 1239 5/ 4/77
1 COMPOSITE 2.05 2 1239 5/4/77
DIURNAL 0.34 3 1247 5/ 5/77

HOT SOAK 1.88 3 1247 5/ S/T
COMPOSITE 2e21 3 1247 5/ 5/77



Section 3

METHODOLOGY

This section summarizes the methodology applied to vehicle procurement,
testing, and data reduction.

3.1 VEHICLE SELECTION AND PROCUREMENT

The 20 vehicles shown in Table 3-1 were selected by the Task Officer for
testing on this project. These vehicles were believed to be capable of meeting
1978 evaporative emission standards of 6 grams per test. They were consumer-
owned vehicles except that one leased vehicle (#3021) was used as a correlation
vehicle between Olson's Anaheim laboratory and the California Air Resources
Board (ARB) laboratory in El Monte, California.

The consumer-owned vehicles were obtained from prior participants (pre-
1977 model-year) and from respondents to direct mail solicitation (1977 model-

year) derived from vehicle registration listings.

The incentive package for participants included the following:

° Free fully-insured 1976 Ford Granada loan vehicle.
° Full tank of gas when participant's vehicle was returned.
° Cash or check for $15 each time the owner delivered the vehicle to

Olson. In the event of an aborted or invalid test which required
preconditioning by the owner, an additional $15 was paid.

° $50 savings bond upon completion of all testing and return of the
vehicle to its owner.

Upon initial arrival at Olson, the Vehicle Information Form, and vehicle
owner questionnaire used in the 1975 Emission Factor Test Program, were com-
pleted by the participant. The following data (shown in the Appendix) were
also recorded as part of the questionnaire when the vehicle was driven to
Olson.

° Odometer reading at start and end of drive to Olson test facility.
° Amount of fuel in tank at start of initial cold soak.
° Time of day and ambient temperature in the shade when the vehicle

was initially driven to Olson.

° Type of fuel evaporative emission controls.

-3-


~97-

MILES

35

30

25

20

15

10

Figure 4-3. DIURNAL EMISSIONS VERSUS MILES DRIVEN
&
r ll
(0)
po 16 06
od 9
01,09 4
L @ roy
10
05 ®
to}
7 2 7
Las oO 8
8 04
8 o
05
20 ®
at i. = 1 i ie 4 1 L A . 4 4 4
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 dU 12 13 14 15 16

EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS (GRAMS HC)


TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)

1 REPORT NO. 2. |3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO,
EPA-460/3-77-013
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE
Effect of Preconditioning on In-Use Vehicle August 1977
Testing and Failure Analysis of Evaporative |5. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Emission Control Systems
7 AUTHOR(S) ls. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Olson Laboratories, Inc.
421 East Cerritos Avenue 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Anaheim, California 92805 68-03-2412
Task Order No. 3
12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND AODRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management 14, SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control EPA-ORD
Emission Control Technology Div., Ann Arbor, Mich.

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES.

16, ABSTRACT

Evaporative (SHED) and exhaust emission tests were performed on 20 late-
model catalyst-equipped vehicles to investigate the effect of three precondition-
ing procedures consisting of: 1) no preconditioning, 2) 1975 FTP driving
schedule, and 3) 10-minute road route. A failure analysis was also performed
on several vehicles which were found to either have high evaporative emissions
or evaporative emissions which were higher than similarly equipped vehicles.

ike KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS jb. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS |c. COSATI Ficld/Group
1S. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT, 18. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
. Unclassified 67
Release to Public
20. SECURITY GLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
Unclassified

EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)


Table 4-3.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS OF 20 VEHICLES

EFFECT OF PRECONDITIONING ON

PRECONDITIONING
NONE DYNO-1975 FTP ROAD-10-MIN. ROUTE
HC co NO_C HC co NOC HC co NOC
x x x
Bag l
GM/Mile
Average 1.66 36.38} 2.25 |1.55 37.18}2.27 ]1.56 36.71 |2.33
Minimum 0.48 6.45 | 0.38 | 0.52 4.66}0.37 }0.50 7.99 10.44
Maximum 3.30 [110.98 | 5.18 | 3.28 112.95]5.05 {3.39 ]124.24 15.98
Composite
GM/Mile
Average 0.69 16.48 | 1.67 | 0.67 15.00 ]1.72 40.72 15.39 {1.77
Minimum 0.26 1.44 | 0.31 |0.23 1.41 0.31 [0.23 1.81 0.33
Maximum 1.82 75.72 | 4.55 11.76 75.24 44.57 [1.93 87.60 |4.47

-23-



FIGURES

Number

Vehicle Flowchart. ©. - 2-1 ee ee ee eee ee ee ee
Evaporative/Exhaust Emission Test... . . - - 2 ee ee ee ene
Interior of SHED Showing Recirculating Fan and Heat Exchanger. -

SHED With Vehicle Inside After Hot Soak Test... .. +. + +++
Instrument System and Calibration Gases for Measuring Hydrocarbon

we www
Ubwne

Concentration. . . ee es es
= Exterior of SHED Showing Recorders for Fuel and SHED Temperatures.
= Diurnal Emissions Versus Fuel Level. . . . - - - ee eee ee ee
- Diurnal Emissions Versus Air Temperature ......-+-+++s+5
- Diurnal Emissions Versus Miles Driven. . . . 2... ee ee ee ee

Normalized Emissions Versus Fuel Level . . 2... 6 ee ee ee ee
Normalized Emissions Versus Miles Driven... . 2. +--+ eee
Normalized Diurnal Emissions Versus Air Temperature. .... +--+:
Engine Compartment (1976 Ford Granada) Showing Location of Hot Soak

Evaporative Emissions. . . a
1976 Ford Carburetor Showing Passage for Choke Linkage . .....

pee ea ea
NOUBWNEOD

b
t
o

TABLES

3-1 Vehicles Selected for Testing. ..........2.-2.6.2-2-8.4
3-2 Fuel Analysis Summary. . . . - - - ee ee ee ee ee ee
3-3 Fuel Tolerances. . - 2. 6 6 6 ee ee ee ee ee ee ee
3-4 Evaporative Emission Correlation Data. ..............
4-1 Composite Evaporative and Exhaust Emissions. ...........
4-2 Effect of Preconditioning on Evaporative Emissions .......

4-3 Effect of Preconditioning on Exhaust Emissions of 20 Vehicles. .

vi


CONTENTS

Foreward . Ce .
Abstract . a .
Figures. . Be ee ee .
Tables . . ee .

1 Introduction and Summary. ..... .

2 Conclusions ...........-. .

3 Methodology... ....+4 5.22.6. .

3.1 Vehicle Selection and Procurement . .

3.2 Vehicle Test Sequence ....... .

3.2.1 Vehicle Preconditioning ...... .

3.2.2 Evaporative Emission Tests. .... .

3.2.3 FTP Exhaust Emission Tests. ... . .

3.2.4 Quality Assurance Procedures. .. . -

3.3 Failure Analysis. ......-... .

3.4 Data Analysis .... 2... eae .

3.4.1 Data Recording and Reduction. ... .

3.4.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation. . .

4.1 Effect of Preconditioning on Evaporative and Exhaust Emissions.

4.2 Analysis of Failed Evaporative Emission Control Systems .
Appendix . 2. - 6 ee ee ee ee ee ee ee .

iii
iv
vi

vi

wu nwwn be

12
12
15
15
17
17
18
18

33


canister. The fuel system was deemed to be leak tight if the pressure loss in
5 minutes was less than 2 inches of water. Initially, fuel cap pressure
checks were made prior to only the first test. After one vehicle (#3006) had
been tested, the fuel pressure was checked prior to each test to ensure that
no leaks developed during the testing due to repeated removal of the cap as
occurred with vehicle #3006.

The tank fuel was drained and replaced with the chilled (53°F-58°F)
Indolene Cluar test fuel immediately prior to entering the SHED for the diurnal
test. The test fuel was analyzed to establish conformity to 40 CFR 86.133-78
Specifications and stored under refrigeration until transfer to the vehicle.
Table 3-2 summarizes the test fuel RVP and distillation by drum number. The
initial batch of fuel (ten drums) was found to be consistently higher in RVP
than the batch analysis indicated. It was not possible to firmly establish
whether the initial batch was actually high or whether the analytical laboratory
(Union Research) had erroneously analyzed these fuel samples.

3.2.3 FTP Exhaust Emission Tests

Exhaust emission tests were performed in accordance with 40 CFR 86.135-78
through 40 CFR 86.137-78, and 40 CFR 86.140-78. The FTP was performed within
1 hour of the end of the diurnal test and was usually initiated within 30 minutes
of the end of the diurnal test.

3.2.4 Quality Assurance Procedures

All evaporative and exhaust emission data were audited for compliance
with EPA procedures and specifications published in 40 CFR Part 86, Subpart B,
and in Sections IV through X of Exhibit C of Contract No. 68-03-2412.

Fuel was stored and transferred in accordance with procedures specified
in Section XI of Exhibit C of Contract No. 68-03-2412. A single analysis of
each drum was made prior to its use. Each drum was considered within specifica-
tion if the vendor's batch analysis, and the contractor's drum analysis agreed
with the tolerances listed in Table 3-3. The Task Officer approved testing
even though the initial batch of fuel was outside the indicated specifications
as shown previously in Table 3-2.

Vehicles with invalid tests of either exhaust or evaporative emissions
were retested. Vehicles for which the first test sequence was aborted or
invalid were returned to their owner for at least 10 calendar days. Vehicles
for which subsequent test sequences were aborted or invalid were given the
specified preconditioning (either dynamometer or road) and retested. Invalid
tests were based on the following criteria:

Soak period (12 to 36 hours).
Soak or test temperatures outside of 68°F to 86°F.
Driver error.

Excessive delays between key elements of the test sequence.
Dynamometer or instrumentation calibration error or malfunction.

oo000

In some cases, which are documented in the test log, procedural violations
were accepted ly the Task or Project Officer when they did not introduce
significant error.

-1l2-


Section 2

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions were based on this project:

°

The evaporative emission control systems representative of 1978
model-year systems were within the 6 grams per test standard effective
with the 1978 model-year.

There were no significant differences in either evaporative or
exhaust emissions at the 95 percent confidence level between dynamom-
eter (1975 FTP) and road preconditioning (10-minute road route).

There were no significant differences in exhaust emissions at the
95 percent confidence level between no-preconditioning and either
dynamometer or road preconditioning.

No-preconditioning did result in statistically higher evaporative
emissions at the 95 percent confidence level than either dynamometer
or road preconditioning.

Evaporative emissions from vehicles which have not been preconditioned
were not clearly related to the quantity of fuel in the fuel tank,
or the duration and type of drive to the test laboratory.


Section 4

RESULTS

4.1 EFFECT OF PRECONDITIONING ON EVAPORATIVE AND EXHAUST EMISSIONS

Table 4-1 presents composite evaporative and exhaust emission data for
each vehicle. Summaries showing the average, minimum, and maximum value of
the evaporative emissions are shown in Table 4-2. Based on these results, it
can be seen that no preconditioning resulted in higher diurnal evaporative
emissions than either dynamometer or road preconditioning. These results were
significant at the 95 percent confidence level for the 1977 model-year vehicles
and for all vehicles excluding Fords. Dynamometer preconditioning did not
result in significantly different evaporative emissions at 95 percent or
higher confidence levels than did road preconditioning.

Table 4-3 summarizes cold transient and composite FTP exhaust emissions
in grams per mile. Exhaust emissions were not significantly affected by the
type of preconditioning at 95 percent confidence levels although no precondi-
tioning resulted in slightly higher HC (Bag 1) and CO (Composite) emissions
than either road or dynamometer preconditioning.

Diurnal evaporative emission data were plotted in Figures 4-1 through
4-3 for the actual diurnal emissions in grams per test and in Figures 4-4
through 4-6 for the ratio of first test divided by second test. No clear
trends were determined between any of the as-received vehicle characteristics
(fuel-level, ambient air temperature, and distance driven to the laboratory) .
Four vehicles, however, were clearly higher than the other 16 in all cases.
These vehicles were not the Ford vehicles.

4.2 ANALYSIS OF FAILED EVAPORATIVE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS

Three vehicles had evaporative emissions which were significantly higher
than the other 17 vehicles. All three of these vehicles had evaporative
emissions between 15 to 20 grams per test. All of these vehicles were 1976
Fords; two were 250-CID Mavericks, and one was a 302-CID Granada. All three
vehicles had similar Carter carburetors without float chamber emission control.
The emission tests indicated high hot soak emissions. The Granada and both
Mavericks were subjected to a "sniffer" test to evaluate the source of emis-
sions. Both vehicles showed very high levels at the base of the carburetor
shortly after completing the LA-4 driving cycle. These data are presented in
the Appendix. One vehicle (the Granada with 302-CID engine) was selected for
further testing. Figure 4-7 shows the engine compartment and the location of
the area with high evaporative emissions. The air cleaner was removed
(Figure 4-8) revealing the passage in the carburetor casting for the choke
linkage. This passage allowed fuel vapors from the float chamber equalizer
vent tube to escape from the air cleaner housing. The relatively low emissions
during the diurnal heat build suggested that the carbon canister was performing

-18-


EPA-460/3-77-013
August 1977

ii
stl

| EFFECT OF PRECONDITIONING
| ON IN-USE VEHICLE TESTING
| AND FAILURE ANALYSIS
| OF EVAPORATIVE EMISSION

CONTROL SYSTEMS

Ne
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management

Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Contro)
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105


CAR

MAKE MoD NO. INRT ROAD ast
NO. DATE code VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIu TR Cv CYL AC WT HP Sum
3004 77/04/25 09 SS2257R146706 77 CHRY CORD 2 300 1 4 8 1 4500 14.0 L
» EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «
CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NC. RUN NOw DATE
DIURNAL 4.78 1 1228 426/17
HOT SOAK 3.55 1 1226 4/26/17
COMPOSITE 8.33 1 1228 4126/17
1 DIURNAL 4022 2 1231 4/cT/TT
é HOT SOAK 1.55 2 1231 4427/17
' COMPOSITE 5.77 2 1231 4/20/77
DIURNAL 3.00 3 1234 4/28/77
HOT SOAK 1.62 3 1234 4/28/77
COMPOSITE 4.62 3 1234 4/28/7T
DIURNAL 1.19 4 1282 o/15/71T
HOT SOAK 2.18 4 1282 o/ 15/77
COMPOSITE 3.37 4 1282 b/id/TT

uu 0M
4036


3.2 VEHICLE TEST SEQUENCE

Figure 3-1 summarizes the flow path of each vehicle during testing.
Figure 3-2 shows, in detail, the elements of the Evaporative/Exhaust Emission
Test. Separate paragraphs discuss the following elements of the test sequence:

° Vehicle preconditioning

° Evaporative emission tests
° FTP exhaust emission tests
° Quality assurance procedures

3.2.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

Vehicle preconditioning was performed as follows:

° Preconditioning for the initial test sequence was the vehicle owner's
drive to Olson. The vehicle was driven to the soak area after a
short (less than 30 minutes) engine-off period during which the
vehicle was accepted into the program. The vehicles could not
always be driven immediately into soak because of interfering with
tests in progress.

° Preconditioning for the second test sequence was the first emission
test; i.e., a 1975 FIP driving schedule. The vehicle was pushed

from the SHED into the soak area after completion of the first hot
soak test.

° Preconditioning for the third test was the 10-minute road route (see
Appendix) used for Emission Factors Test Programs. The vehicle was
driven out of the SHED after the second hot soak test, preconditioned
and driven to the soak area.

° Preconditioning for the tests performed as part of the failure
analyses was a UDDS (LA-4) dynamometer cycle. The vehicle was
driven to the soak area.

All vehicles were in ghe soak area for 12 to 36 hours at temperatures
between 68°F (15°ey and 86°F (30°C).
20e

3.2.2 Evaporative Emission Tests

Evaporative emission tests were performed in accordance with 40 CFR
86.133-78 for the diurnal loss test and 40 CFR 86.138-78 for the hot soak
test. A Horiba Model V SHED, modified to include a water-chilled heat exchanger,
was used in this program. Figures 3-3 and 3-4 show the SHED. Figures 3-5
and 3-6 show the instruments for recording hydrocarbons (Scott Model 116 FID),
fuel temperature, and SHED temperature. Fuel temperature was measured using
Type-J thermocouples inserted through an OEM replacement test cap. The inner
and outer penetration of the cap was sealed with a quick-setting epoxy. SHED
temperatures were recorded using thermistors.

Vehicle fuel systems were initially pressure tested prior to the first

test. The pressure test consisted of applying 14 to 15 inches of water pressure
to the fuel system through the fuel tank vapor line leading into the carbon

“Se


Table 3-1. VEHICLES SELECTED FOR TESTING
Task Order 3 - Contract 68-03-2412

VEHICLE MODEL ENGINE SIZE ENGINE
NUMBER YEAR Cid Cyl Carb FAMILY MAKE
3001 1977 225 6 1 CD~225-1-EP Plymouth
3002 1977 225 6 1 CD-225-1-EP Plymouth
3003 1977 360 «8 4 CD-360-4-GP Dodge
3004 1977 360 8 4 CD-360-4-GP Chrysler
3005 1977 360 «8 4 CD-360-4-GP Dodge

3006 1977 360 8 4 CD-360-4-GP Dodge

3007 1977 140 4 2 710 C2 Vega

3008 1977 140 4 2 710 C2 Vega

3009 1977 151 4 2 720X 2E Astre

3010 1977 151 4 2 720X 2E Astre
3011 1977 168 6 FI L-280-C Datsun 2802
3012* 1977 168 6 FI L-280-C Datsun 280Z
3013 1977 231 466 2 740E 2LU Cutlass
3014 1976 250 6 1 250-1CEF Maverick
3015 1976 250 6 1 250-1CEF Maverick
3016 1976 140 4 2 11 c2 Vega

3017 1976 140 4 2 ll c2 Vega

3018 1975 350 8 4 31 543 Oldsmobile
3019 1975 350 8 4 31 943 Oldsmobile
3020 1976 97 4 FI 2 vw Beetle
3021 1976 302 8 2 302A-1CEF Granada

*Task Officer allowed substitution of vehicle 3021 for
one Datsun 2802.



CAR MAKE McD NO. INRT RObv AsO
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ ClO TR Cv CYt AC WT HP sin ou0M
3018 77/05/04 04 2J57K5R157191 75 OLDS CUTL 2 350 2 4 8 1 4000 13-2 1 22997

« EVAPO. VE TE. .
CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NQ. RUN NO. DATE
DIURNAL 0.93 1 1242 S/ OTT
HOT SOAK 1.45 1 1242 S/ 5/77
COMPOSITE 2.38 1 1242 5/5/77
D DIURNAL 0.73 2 1243 af 6/77
= HOT SOAK 1.32 2 1243 S/ 6/77
' COMPOSITE 2.05 2 1243 5/6/17
DIURNAL 4.06 3 1244 S/ 9/77
HOT SOAK 1.44 3 1244 5/ 9/77
COMPOSITE 5-50 3 1244 5/9/77



004 CARL LISTING
VEHICLE USE INFORMATION

CAR 000 Ovo cco FUEL AMB
NO- 25 26 27 23 START FINISH CHANGE AMT TIME TEMP

3001 Ll 2 222212 2 4164 4179 1s 4 O745 57
3002 Lo o2 222212 2 10933 103943 10 1 0809 65
3003 1 2 222212 2 17752 #17787 35 3 osoc 57
3004 1 2 222212 2 04029 04036 7 2 0800 68
3005 1 2 222212 2 10252 10255 3 7 0820 04
3006 Ll 2 222212 2 01087 01707 20 2 1100 78
3007 1 2 222222 2 7249 7259 10 3 1o0c 70
3008 4 2 222212 3 06100 06107 7 2 0830 65
3009 1 2 122222 2 03224 03239 15 1 1045 75
13010 4 2 222212 2 02354 02366 12 2 0845 72
$3011 1 2 222212 2 2132 2146 14 z 0925 76
13013 1 2 222212 2 5130 5135 5 2 0830 58
3014 1 2 222221 2 16068 16083 15 1 1715 71
3015 21 1222212 2 11139 11149 ic 3 1215 70
3016 L 2 222212 2 063740 03760 20 2 1205 68
3017 1 2 222212 2 4692 4702 10 3 osoc 56
3018 1 2 222212 2 35969 35957 26 7 1200 74
3019 1 2 222212 2 13501 13521 20 3 090C 70
3020 12 2 222212 2 4337 4339 2 6 1215 69
3021 1 2 222212 2 7291 7321 30 3 1445 80

KEY: See sample questionnaire for Columns 25, 26, 27, and 28.
obo Start, ODO Finish, ODO Change = Qdometer readings from test vehicle prior to
first test (no-preconditioning) .
FUEL AMT = Approximate quantity of tank fuel upon receipt of vehicle prior to
first test (in eights of tank).
Time of result of vehicle prior to first test (24-hour clock).
Ambient temperature in the shade when vehicle was received (°F).

TIME
AMB TEMP


-Sz=

AIR TEMPERATURE CF

80

75

70

65

60

55

50

15 06 Figure 4-2. DIURNAL EMISSIONS VERSUS AIR TEMPERATURE
{o)
0°
he 8 oO
10
[O} 14
19 il 07, to)
r© o) [o}
16 @20 é
02 6
bo (o} as
17
(o}
r 13
©
Gq 02
r
a i 1 1 1 4 —L. A at 1 1 1 iY i 1
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 lo 11 12 13 14 15 16

EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS (GRAMS HC)


CAR MAKE MOD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYt AC wr HP Sid
3005 77/05/23 09 CL41U70113953 77 CHRY NeEwP 1 360 1 4 8 1 5000 14.7 1
TEST S! Se
CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NOw RUN NOe DATE
DTURNAL 3.16 1 1262 5/24/77
HOT SOAK 1.84 1 1262 5/24/77
COMPOSITE 5-00 1 1262 5/24/77
1 OIURNAL 2016 2 1265 5/25/77
He} HOT SOAK 1.42 2 1205 5/25/77
' COMPOSITE 3.58 2 1265 5/25/77
OLURNAL 1.70 3 1268 5/26/77
HOT SOAK 2.25 3 1268 5/26/17
COMPOSITE 3.95 3 1268 5/26/77

JOOM
10255


-p7-

FUEL LEVEL 1/8 TANK)

Figure 4-1. DIURNAL EMISSIONS VERSUS FUEL LEVEL

18 os
+ oO o}
20
a ©
ol
r ©
Q7
bed O°? °
6 1 8 04 1p
‘was 6 r
13,06
14
09g 02
L © (o}
m1 1 ms 1. 1 L 1 1 i 1 [oo rf 1 1
1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS (GRAMS HC)


SHED TASK ORDER
FID SNIFFER TEST

VEHICLE NO, 302)" DATE pic a |/
Deflections Range Concentration
Measure HC through
FID at each location
before LA-4:
Fuel Cap 16 sO &
Inside Trunk LL SO Ss
Carbon Canister LV exe) Z
Carb. Air Horn YO £0 Y
Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister
Foe fe 32
Measure HC through
FID at each location
immediately after LA-4
Fuel Cap L& (02 Z&
Inside Trunk é £22 G
Carbon Canister ra LOD ca
Carb. Air Horn 5 100 a
Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister
3G Zoe (66
Measure HC through
FID at each location
15 minutes after LA-4:
Fuel Cap Q 100 vA
Inside Trunk bk fo9 Z
Carbon Canister Z | fo &
Carb. Air Horn 7A feu A
Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister wee [06d 700

r6l1l-


Section 1

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

This final report is submitted by Olson Laboratories, Inc., to the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA), to document the conduct and findings of Task
Order 3 of Contract No. 68-03-2412.

This task order was originally divided into two separate parts: A) effect
of different preconditioning procedures on exhaust and evaporative emissions,
and B) failure analysis of failed evaporative emission control systems. For
Part A, 20 vehicles were each tested 3 times in accordance with the Federal
Register dated August 23, 1976, entitled Final Evaporative Emission Regulations
for Light-Duty Vehicles and Trucks (the SHED procedure). Different precondi-
tioning, however, was used prior to each of the three test sequences. Data,
in punched card format defined by the EPA, has been submitted to the EPA
Project Officer.

Of the 20 vehicles tested, 10 high emitters were to have been selected

for a failure analysis. However, all 1977 vehicles were generally within the
expected evaporative emission levels (4 grams per diurnal test and 6 grams per
hot soak test). Those vehicles which showed high emission levels were equipped
with evaporative emission controls which were not designed to control evapora-
tive emissions as measured by the SHED procedure. None of the systems exhibited
defective components which were correctible by repair or replacement with OEM
components.

In general, the 1975 Federal Test Procedure (FTP) exhaust emissions did
not significantly depend upon preconditioning prior to testing. Evaporative
emissions, however, did depend upon preconditioning with “as received" vehicles
typically showing higher evaporative emissions than either dynamometer (1975
FTP driving schedule) or road (10-minute city street route used in Emission
Factor Test Programs) preconditioning. There were no significant differences
in evaporative emissions between the dynamometer or road preconditioning.
Diurnal evaporative emissions, however, were considerably more sensitive to
lack of preconditioning than were hot soak emissions.

-l-


In addition, some tests which otherwise complied with routine quality
audit procedures were rejected by the Program Manager if the results appeared
unreasonable. ‘This occurred on two vehicles in which fuel losses appeared to
be excessive even though the fuel system was found to be pressure tight.

Regular daily, weekly, and monthly calibrations and calibration checks
were performed in accordance with the contract requirements. Daily start-ups
included propane recovery tests; analyzer span, zero, and tune recordings or
adjustments; and NO_ converter efficiency checks on the 100 ppm and 1,000 ppm
ranges. Weekly caltbrations included the daily start-ups plus checks of all
analyzer calibration curves using +1 percent precision gas standards. Any
point out of specification (+5 percent of point or +1 percent of full-scale,
whichever was less) required generating new calibration curves. The dynamometer
coastdown times were checked every 2 weeks. Monthly calibration checks included
dynamometer coastdowns, analyzer curves, and a leak check of the SHED.

In addition to tests performed at Olson, three tests on vehicle #3021
were performed at the California Air Resources Board laboratory in El Monte,
California. The preconditioning used by the ARB was slightly different than
specified in the Task Order. In spite of these differences, good correlation
was obtained between the ARB and Olson test results. Table 3-4 summarizes the
results of the correlation tests.

3.3 FAILURE ANALYSIS

The Task Order included a failure analysis (Part B) of evaporative emission
control systems with emissions which were judged to be excessive. Vehicles
were immediately selected for the failure analysis if their diurnal evaporative
emissions exceeded 4 grams per test or hot soak emissions exceeded 6 grams per
test on the third test sequence. Two other vehicles were also selected and
recalled for subsequent failure analysis when the evaporative emissions appeared
to deviate significantly from vehicles with similar emission control systems.

The failure analysis consisted of detection and diagnosis of failed or
defective components followed by corrective repair, if warranted. Two vehicles
on which corrective repairs were performed were subjected to a final Evaporative/
Exhaust Emission Test sequence described in Section 3.2. However, no vehicles
were actually detected with defective evaporative emission control systems.

Vehicles with high emissions were subjected to a “sniffer” test using a
flame ionization detector (FID) in conjunction with a visual inspection to
identify the source of the excess emissions. A visual examination of components
was made to determine the reasons for failure. The “sniffer" test consisted
of measuring hydrocarbon concentrations near suspected sources of evaporative
emissions before, immediately after, and 15 minutes after an LA-4 driving
schedule. The suspected sources included the following: fuel cap, carbon
canister, air cleaner snorkel, and base of carburetor.

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS

Data analysis for Task Order 3 included recording, reduction, and inter-
pretation of test results and descriptive information.

-15-


CAR
NO.

MAKE MOD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
DATE CIDE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYL AC wT HP SIM

3016 77/05/23 03 1¥7786U126154 76 CHEVY VEGA 4 140 1 2 4 1 2750 10.9 a

-tg-

« EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NOw RUN NO. OATE
DIURNAL 0.55 1 1264 424/77
HOT SOAK 0.93 L 1264 5/24/77
COMPOSITE 1.48 L 1264 5/24/77
CIURNAL 0.66 2 1267 5/25/77
HOT SOAK 0.79 2 1267 5/25/77
COMPOSITE 1.45 2 1267 5/29/77
DIURNAL 0.73 3 1270 5/26/77
HOT SOAK 0.84 3 1270 5/26/77
COMPOSITE 1.57 3 1270 5/26/77

JuoM
3760


SHED TASK ORDER
FID SNIFFER TEST

VEHICLE NO. Based DATE f-RE- 77 rc Waentue

Deflections Range Concentration
Measure HC through
FID at each location
before LA-4:
Fuel Cap C fe.0 (eo L7e4
Inside Trunk 2 Vo (xa fAA28.
Carbon Canister \o Fro ZO. 3BLF74
Carb. Ai
ir Horn Ce fe Lew LAr2

Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister

C&.a a) Cho

Measure HC through
FID at each location
immediately after LA-4;

Fuel Cap | en (ONO) SOD (20
Inside Trunk _je 4. oO Sod LA.
Carbon Canister Bt AO.~ Boo 200)

_ Carb. Air Horn oe D.o Soo ‘Fo

Around Base of
Air Cleaner

Canister 6-fO.0 (300 PZ)

Measure HC through
FID at each location
15 minutes after LA-4:

Fuel Cap PA

2
nk to) Boo | fA

Lap 532 L2. .
Inside Trunk @ ZF.
Carbon Canister lo ZG a) _|fo0 __ <2

Carb. Air Horn fle) Seo FS

a
Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister 85-0 S000) 2ss/

-59-


satisfactorily in controlling fuel tank emissions. Since this carburetor was
not designed to control carburetor evaporative emissions, there was no correc~
tive maintenance which could be performed, however, to determine whether there
were any additional vapor losses passed: the gasket which seals the carburetor
and the base of the air cleaner canister. The gasket was covered with silicone
stopcock grease and a hot soak diurnal test was then performed. There was no
differences between the evaporative emissions performed with the sealing
gasket as compared to the original gasket (11.15 grams versus 12.6 grams) .
Since the two Ford Mavericks were also equipped with carburetors of similar
design, they were not analyzed further.

Two vehicles (#3004 and #3010) showed relatively high diurnal emissions.
Both vehicles were recalled and their carbon canisters were replaced with OEM
equivalent units. A final evaporative emission test (Number 4 in the Appendix)
was performed on each vehicle following an LA-4 dynamometer preconditioning
and cold soak. Vehicle #3004 (Chrysler Cordoba 360 CID) showed reduced diurnal
emissions but increased in hot soak emissions. An FID sniffer test was per-
formed on this vehicle since hot soak emissions which would be detected during
the sniffer test were shown to be low. As shown in the Appendix, this vehicle's
hot soak emissions after the carbon canister replacement were lower than the
initial as-received emissions, but were higher than the hot soak emissions
after preconditioning. The reason for the high hot soak emissions could not
be determined.

The second vehicle (#3010) was a 1977 Pontiac Astre 151 CID. This vehi-
cle's emissions were not affected by installation of the new canister. Both
diurnal and hot soak emissions after the canister replacement were similar to
the dynamometer preconditioning results obtained on Test 2. The reason for
the increase in diurnal emissions could not be determined. However, it is
possible that dynamometer preconditioning did not fully purge the carbon

canister since the third emission (after road preconditioning) test was very
low.

-32-


APPENDIX

-33-


CAR
NO.
3011

-97-

MAKe MUD NO. INRT CAD A/C
DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CIO TR CV CYL AC wT HP SIM
77/04/26 «14 HLS30363522 77 DATS 2802 4 168 1 0 6 1 3000 11.3 1

« EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NOw RUN NJ. vate

OTURNAL 1.72 1 1230 af 2/77
HOT SOAK 2044 1 1230 4/21/70
COMPCSITE 4015 1 1230 4/27/17
OIURNAL 0.70 2 1233 4/28/71
HOT SOAK 0.89 2 1233 4/28/7T
COMPOSITE 1.59 2 1233 4/28/77

DIURNAL 0.68 3 1235 4129/77
HOT SOAK 0.93 3 1235 4/29/77
COMPCSITE 1.60 3 1235 4/29/77

JuOM
2146


-Tz-

Table 4-1. COMPOSITE EVAPORATIVE AND EXHAUST EMISSIONS (Continued)

EVAP CUM REPORT CALIFORNIA
FUEL
VEHICLE MODEL w7-7 EMISSION RESULTS (GMS/MI) ---- ECON TEST
NUMBER YEAR MAKE cic TEST TYPE KC co C32 NOXC (MPG)
EVAP TsT 17.69 GRAMS OF HC see 2
Evap TST 20622 GRAMS GF HC wee . 3
3016 1976 CHEV 140 1975 FIP 0.27 5696 426.5 4255 20.32 1
1S75 FIP C.25 58h 41728 4.5T 20.75 2
1S75 FTP 0.23 4.15 416.9 4047 20.93 3
EVAP TST 1248 GRAMS OF HC 1
EVAP TST 1.45 GRAMS OF HC 2
EvaP TST 1.57 GRAMS OF HC 3
3017 1976 CHEV 140 1975 FTP 0.53 7.00 461.1 1.47 18.73 1
1975 FTP C62 6286 497.6 1.66 17.39 2
1975 FTP 0.41 €.02 503.5 1.69 17.26 3
EvAP TST 1.17 GRAMS CF HC . 1
EVAP TST 1.57 GRAMS GF HC . 2
EVAP TST 1.60 GRAMS OF HC . 3
3018 1975 OLoS 350 1975 FTP 1.12 19.32 611.1 3.60 13.76 1
1975 FTP lelo 36.35 621.5 3.75 13.01 2
1975 FTP C297 12.33 685.9 4054 12.53 3
EvaP TST 2.38 GRAMS OF HC see eeceesee eee 1
EVAP TST 2.05 GRAMS OF HC seeee . 2
EVAP TST 5.50 GRAMS GF HC ee eeevccccenae wees 3
3019 1975 CcLOS 350 1975 FIP 0.37 3647 722.7 1.34 12.17 1
1975 FTP 0645 3.03 724.3 1.21 12.15 2
1$75 FIP 0643 3046 72662 1.23 12.11 3
EvAP TST 1.54 GRAMS OF HC eee ee sc cresccesces . 1
EVAP TST 2-05 GRAMS OF HC seer eee ecee . 2
EVAP TST 2621 GRAMS OF HC cece cere reer scseccscece 3
3020 15876 VOLK oT 1975 FTP 0.77 12.65 35904 1.14 23.25 1
1S75 FTP 0.77 12.44 360.9 1.21 23.18 2
1975 FTP 0.71 10.68 361.2 1644 23.34 3
eVAP TST 2468 GRAMS CF HC L
EVAP TST 3.96 GRAMS UF HC 2
EVAP TST 3.32 GRAMS CF HC sees 3
3021 1976 FORD 302 1975 FTP 1.34 6042 1.52 14.15 L
1975 FTP 4.27 7.52 1.50 13.87 2
1$75 FIP 1.24 8.05 1.42 14.15 3
EVAP TST 15.96 GRAMS OF HC 1
EVAP TST 15.56 GRAMS OF HC 2
EVAP TST 16.832 GKAMS OF HC 3


CAA MAKE McD NO. INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MOOL SIZ CIO TR Cv Crt AC wT HP SIK yUOM
3015 77/05/17 06 FOK91L154923F 76 FORD “AVE 3 250 1 1 6 1 3000 11.43 i 11149

Pee cece scccccnccccscsccece

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NC. RUN ND. DATE
DIURNAL 0.35 1 1258 5/18/77
HOT SOAK 14.85 1 1258 5/18/77
COMPOSITE 15.20 1 1258 S/1LasTT
1 OIURNAL 2.25 2 1260 5/20/77
2 HOT SOAK 15.42 2 1260 5/20/77
' COMPOSITE 17.69 2 1260 5/20/77
DIURNAL 1.17 3 1261 5/23/77
HOT SOAK 19.11 3 1261 5/23/77
COMPOSITE 20.28 3 1261 5423/77



SHED TASK ORDER
FID SNIFFER TEST

VEHICLE NO. Ser 7 DATE_- “@ 4-24 1¢_Voeeautin —

Deflections Range Concentration
Measure HC through
FID at each location
before LA-4:
Fuelcap CAT 700 4EE
Inside Trunk 4S (00 ASS
Carbon Canister SS lo 2 SFe
Carb. Air Horn LO leo iw ko)

Around Base of
Air Cleaner

Canister 450 /ooe 4S 0

Measure HC through
FID at each location
immediately after LA-4:

Pat
Fuel Cap e @.0 |_/e2. E96
Inside Trunk 5, ° f0.2__|_ 5.39
Carbon Canister 6.6 foo. 6-46
Carb. Air Horn 5.0 {2.0 S.37

Around Base of
Air Cleaner

Canister Sho Vek. JBGR g

Measure HC through
FID at each location
15 minutes after LA-4:

0 (22 Lo2e
oe %: 2] [22 PGE —
Carbon Canister [2.2 02. | fart
Carb. Air Horn “20 | Zo _| Po 5 3
Around Base of
Air Cleaner
Canister /&: fo) Pole LLY

-60-


Foreword

Assessment of vehicle emissions in the in-use vehicle population depends
upon a reliable and repeatable test procedure. This task order was initiated
to investigate the effect of various preconditioning techniques on evaporative
and exhaust emissions. This information will be useful in determining the
appropriate test procedure for use in emission-factor test programs.


CAR MAKE McO Nue INRT ROAD A/L
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR Cv CYL AC wT HP olm vv0mM
3003 77/05/C9 10 WL46J7A110126 77 VODG MONO 1 360 21 4 8 1 4500 1440 1 17787

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NU. DATE
OLURNAL 0.94 1 1247 5/10/77
HOT SOAK 1.48 L 1247 S/10/77
COMPOSITE 2042° 1 1247 5/10477
1 DIURNAL 0.80 2 1253 S/le/TT
3 HOT SOAK 1.38 2 1253 S/l2/TT
1, COMPOSITE 2.18 2 1253 5/12/77
OLURNAL 0.85 3 1255 5/13/77
HOT SOAK 1.67 3 1255 5/13/77
COMPOSITE 2.52 3 1255 5/13/77


CAR MAKE MID NO. INRT KUAU A/U
NO. DATE CIDE VIN YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR Cv Crt AC wr HP Sin JvoM
3001 77/05/09 10 NL45C7G137289 77 DODG ASPE 3 225 21 1 ° 2 4000 l2.u 2 4779

« EVAP3RaTL

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TeST NG. RUN NO. vate
DIURNAL 1.16 1 1245 Sliv/Tl
HOT SOAK 5.82 1 1245 a/lv/77
COMPGSITE 6.98 1 1245 S/10/T7
OIURNAL 0.98 2 1248 a/LL/TT
o HOT SOAK 4.79 2 1248 SAAT?
° COMPOSITE 5.76 2 1248 S/LL/T7
OLURNAL 1.05 3 1254 5/13/77
HOT SOAK 3.92 3 1254 5/13/17
COMPOSITE 4097 3 1254 S/13/TT




CAR MAKE MOD NIJ. INRT ROAD Ase
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MOOL SIZ CID TR Cv CYL AC wT HP Sim

3014 77/04/20 06 FOKIIL17T2869F 76 FORD MAVE 3 259 21 1 6 2 3000 10.3 <

» EVAPIRATIVE TEST RESULTS «

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NIe DATE
OLURNAL 12.90 1 1224 4/2177
HOT SOAK 11.89 1 1224 4/2 iT
COMPOSITE 24.80 1 1224 @/217T
a DIURNAL 4.04 2 1225 4/22/77
° HOT SOAK 12.55 2 1225 4422077
' CCMPQSITE 16.59 2 1225 4/22/77
CIURNAL 7.27 3 1229 4/20/17
HOT SOAK 13.30 3 1229 4/26/77
COMPOSITE 20.57 3 1229 4/20/17

yo0M
16583


CAR MAKE Lats) Noe INRT ROAD A/C
NO. DATE CODE VIN YR MAKE MUDL SIZ CID TR Cv CYL ac KT HP oi
3020 77/03/07 16 1102160836 76 VOLK SEDA 4 97 4 i) 4 2 2000 Bes 2

« EVAPORATIVE TcST RESULTS .

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) {Test NO. RUN NOw DATE
DIURNAL 1.66 1 1201 3/ BsTl
HOT SOAK 2.02 1 1201 3/ 3/17
COMPOSITE 3.68 1 1201 3/ 8/77
' OLURNAL 2.30 2 1202 3/ 9/77
a HOT SOAK 1.66 2 1202 3/ 9/77
‘ CCMPOSITE 3.96 2 1202 3/ 9/717
DIURNAL 1.35 3 1203 3/10/77
HOT SOAK 1.98 3 1203 3/10/77
COMPOSITE 3.32 3 1203 3/10/77

uvoM
4339


Figure 3-5. INSTRUMENT SYSTEM AND CALIBRATION GASES FOR
MEASURING HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION



This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from the
Library Services Office (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical Information Service,

5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by Olson
Laboratories, Inc., 421 East Cerritos Ave., Anaheim, California 92805, in
fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-2412, Task Order No. 3. The contents

of this report are reproduced herein as received from Olson Laboratories, Inc.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the

author and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mention of company or product names is not to be considered as an endorsement
by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Publication No. EPA-460/3-77-013

ii


Figure 4-8. 1976 FORD CARBURETOR SHOWING PASSAGE FOR CHOKE
LINKAG!|

E



-6T-

VEHICLE
NUMBER

3001

3002

3003

3004

3005

3006

3007

EVAP CUM REPURT

MODEL

YEAR

1977

1977

1977

1977

1977

1977

1977

MAKE

DODG

PLYM

0906

CHRY

CHRY

DODG

CHEV

cID

225

360

360

360

360

140

Table 4-1.

TEST

1575
1397>
17>
EVAP
EvaP
EvAP
1975
1975
1975
EVAP
EVAP
EVvAP
1975
1975
1S75
Evae
EvAP
EVAP
1975
1975
1975
1975
EVAP
EVAP
EvaP
EVAP
1975
1975
1975
EVvAP
evap
EVAP
1975
1975
1975
EVAP
evap
EVAP
1975
1975
1975
EVAP
EVAP

COMPOSITE EVAPORATIVE AND EXHAUST EMISSIONS

TYPE

FTP
FTP
FTP
TST
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
TST
TST
1st
ETP
FTP
FTP
TST
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
FTP
TST
TST
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FIP
TST
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
TST
TST
TST
FTP
FTP
FTP
TST
1ST

CALIFORNIA
FUEL
wore EMISSIIN RESULTS (GMS/MI) ---~- ECON
HC co co2 NIXC (MPo)
0.26 2.69 275.8 1.55 15228
0.28 1.41 536.8 1.61 15.05
C.29 3.08 567.7 1.58 15-48
6.98 GRAMS OF HO aoe oe .
5.76 GRAMS OF HC eeeeeee
4.97 GRAMS OF HC oe eee eee
0.30 3.69 521.0 0.87 16.82
0.23 3.30 537.0 1.41 16.35
0.33 3.69 534.3 1.22 16.40
3.35 GRAMS OF HC cee
2210 GRAMS OF HC
3.60 GRAMS OF HC
0.84 26.10 1.63 10.59
0.68 23.05 79204 1.62 10.68
0.84 26.14 788.6 1.76 10.66
2242 GRAMS OF HC wees .
2.18 GRAMS CF HC eee .
2.52 GRAMS OF HC wees
0.83 14.04 726.0 1.58 lleal
0645 5.60 724.7 1.72 12.08
0.79 15.37 72804 1.69 11.75
0.68 10.59 736.5 1.68 11.75
8.33 GKAMS OF HC
5.77 GRAMS OF HC
4.62 GRAMS OF HC
2.37 GRAMS OF HC .
1.82 59.31 683.5 1.35 11.27
1.52 55.05 703.9 1624 11.16
1.76 62.93 689.0 1.28 i1.19
5.00 GRAMS OF HC
3.58 GRAMS OF HC
2.95 GRAMS OF HC eee
0.37 9.86 799.0 0.80 10.88
C.40 7.85 801.1 0.83 10.89
0.42 5.79 7193.7 0.82 11.04
2679 GRAMS SF HC
2.51 GRAMS OF HC
2.607 GRAMS OF HC
0.66 22.62
C.60 19.89 1.34 17.18
0.69 21.96 1.18 17.89
15.85 GRAMS OF HC
3434 GRAMS UF HC

TEST

NGe

NE UNE WNP UNEP UNE UNE RUNES UN RUN UN RB UNE UN EON BUN


EPA-460/3-77-013

EFFECT OF PRECONDITIONING
ON IN-USE VEHICLE TESTING
AND FAILURE ANALYSIS
OF EVAPORATIVE EMISSION
CONTROL SYSTEMS

by
Richard R. Carlson

Olson Laboratories, Inc.
421 East Cerritos Ave.
Anaheim, California 92805

Contract No. 68-03-2412
Task Order No. 3

EPA Task Officer: Gary M. Wilson

Prepared for

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105

August 1977


CAR MAKE
NO. DATE CODE
3006 77/06/01 10

VIN

WL46J7TALT4297

YR MAKE
77 = DODG MIND

+ EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS «

MOD
SIZ

TEST NO.

No.
CYL
8

ROAD
HP
14.0

Ase
SIM

L

CYCLE GRAMS CHC)
DIURNAL 1.27
HOT SOAK 1.52
COMPOSITE 2.79

‘ DIURNAL 0.69

bad HOT SOAK 1.82

1 COMPCSITE 2.51
OLURNAL 1.22
HOT SOAK 1.45
CCMPCSITE 2267

o/
of
o/

2/it
2/7T
2siT

asi7
8/77
B/TT

OTT
OTT
TT

000M
1707


NORMALIZED EMISSIONS VERSUS FUEL LEVEL

Figure 4-4.

ge
03
1°)
4
o)

Be

5.0

4.0

1.0

on vt ” N

(ANWL 8/T) ‘THAT Tana

-27-


-9e-

CAR
NO.

3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021

Key:

ee ee ee ee ee ee

41444
14444
23444
23434
14444
23444
33344
42344
43244
41444
32344
33344
42344
23444
32444
13344
41444
33444
13444
33334

NN WUE NUNNEN ENR ENANAN
NUNUSWWUUNNNNNNENYWY

See sample

1444
1444
2344
1444
4441
4144
3424
2344
2444
4243
1444
3343
1444
1444
1444
1343
4243
3344
3441
3424

oA

WHR WU NUE RE ORE eee ee

68

414444
414444
324444
144444
414444
441444
333444
144444
234444
441444
144444
334444
144444
144444
144444
134444
414444
144444
324444
234444

questionnaire.

VEHICLE USE INFORMATION

8

03

02
02
02
04
10
02
03
02

03

04
04
03
02

03
05

Ss

RUPE RENE RNUNU ER Re

003 CARC LISTING

16

15
182015
15
161511
151712

232820

16
161115
161715

131510
20

192114
141814
151814
232518

11

222222221
222222221
222222221
222222221
222222221
222222221
222222221
221212222
222222221
121212222
222222221
222222121
221222221
122222222
221222221
222222221
222212222
222222221
222222221
222222221

12 13 14 15 lo

RRR RE ENE RERUN NNER ee ee

NEN UEP ROR YUP UR RUE

RR ENE EN UE ER ER RENE NN

REN UE RUE EE RE ewe

ME RUE ER OE RR RRP RNR N

17:18 19 20 21 22 23

001
002
ool
ool
018
ooL
001
001
ool
001
001
ool
002
010
001
001
040
001
001
001

PPR Be Pe RP RPP ee er eee

PUNUNSUNVUNUYURNULUNY

PUN ENEUNUUNUFSENNUENS

PUNNNNUNYWYNUNNNNUNNND

peperrenerer reno neme ten ttre one

NUNNNRNANNNANNNNNNNNN

24

SHELL SUPER REG
MOBIL CLEAR
MOBIL UNLD
UNION UNLD
SHELL UNLD
EXXON UNLD
CHEVRON UNLEADED
FIRECHIEF
TEXACO

MOBIL UNLD
TEXACO UNLEADED
SHELL

FIRECHIEF

UNION UNLD
FEOCO

EXXON UNLD
STANDARD UNLD
CHEVRON UNLD
UNIIN 76 REG
CHEVRON UNLD


-2%7-

Table 4-2. EFFECT OF PRECONDITIONING ON EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS
TYPE OF PRECONDITIONING
NONE DYNO-1975 FIP ROAD-10_ MINUTE ROUTE
DESCRIPTION Hot Hot Hot
Diurnal Soak Comp. Diurnal Soak Comp. Diurnal Soak Comp.

All Vehicles

Number 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Average 3.07 3.80 6.88 1.92 3.41 5.33 1.99 3.81 5.80

Minimum 0.29 0.90 1.17 0.35 0.63 1.29 0.34 0.84 1.52

Maximum 12.91 14.85 24.81 5.57 15.43 17.69 7.27 19.11 20.59
1977 MY

Number 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Average 3.37 2.58 5.95 1.92 1.87 3.80 1.68 2.00 3.68

Minimum 0.95 1.29 2.42 0.40 0.89 1.29 0.51 4.54 1.59

Maximum 12.56 5.83 15.86 5.57 4.79 7.13 3.72 0.93 5.99
Excluding Fords

Number 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17

Average 2.60 2.19 4.80 1.66 1.68 3.34 1.60 1.84 3.42

Minimum 0.29 0.70 1.17 0.35 0.63 1.29 0.34 0.84 1.57

Maximum 12.56 4.54 15.86 5.57 4.79 7.13 3.72 4.54 5.99



Subtask 3A | Subtask 38
Effect of | Failure Analysis
Preconditioning
i SELECT NOT
VEHICLE REJECTED
|! OWNER
PROCURE ROCURE - |
VEHICLE SELECTED
VEHICLE
COLD |
SOAK PER
VISUAL
>) INSPECTION/
PRESSURE_TEST

EXHAUST
EMISSION TEST.

DEFECT
DETECTED
?

COLD
SOAK

EXHAUST
EMISSION TEST

>| DYNO PRE-
CONDITIONING
0) >
CONDITIONING
HOT SOA
FID SNIFFER

COLD
SOAK

ABNORMA
SOURCES

REPAIR,
REPLACEMENT
PERFORMED

YES

EVAPORATIVE
EXHAUST
EMISSION TEST

|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
|
EVAPORATIVE7 —] ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

NO
AIL \_ YES
EVAP
2
; REPLATET
| CORRECT EXHAUST
NO EMISSION TEST
|
[RETURN DYNO PRE- {RETURN
VEHICLE t CONDITIONING VEHICLE
HOT SOAK/
| ““"|_FID SNIFFER
l

Figure 3-1. VEHICLE FLOWCHART (EPA Contract 68-03-2412 - Task Order 3)
-6-


10-MINUTE ROAD ROUTE

Task Order - EPA Contract No. 68-03-2412

Cerritos Avenue west to Anaheim Boulevard. Anaheim Boulevard
north to Ball Road. Ball Road east to State College Boulevard.
State College Boulevard south to Katella Boulevard. Katella
Boulevard west to Lewis Street. Lewis Street north to Cerritos
Avenue, Cerritos Avenue west to Olson facility. Total elapsed
distance is 4.5 miles.

-S8-


CAk
NO.
3007

=vp-

MAKE MOD NO. INRT ROAD as
DATE cObE VIN YR MAKE MODL SiZ CIO TR CV CYt AC wT HP SLi
T7/04/25 93 1%27372106656 77 CHEV ONL 4 149 5 2 4 2 3009) 11.63 1

ST RCSUL .

CYCLE GRAMS (HC) TEST NO. RUN NOw vaTc
DIURNAL 12.55 1 1226 4/260/TT
HOT SOAK 3429 1 1226 4/20/77
CCMPOSITE 15.85 1 1226 4/26/77
GIURNAL 1.83 2 1232 4/28/77
HOT SOAK 1.50 2 1232 4/23/77
COMPOSITE 3034 2 1232 4/28/71
DIURNAL 3444 3 1236 4/29/77
HOT SOAK 2.55 3 1236 4/29/77
COMPOSITE 5.99 3 1236 4/29/77

yuoM
7259


CAR
NO.

-9D-

MAKE
DATE CODE
3009 TI/05/17

CYCLE

OTURNAL
HOT SOAK
COMPOSITE

DIURNAL
HOT SOAK
COMPOSITE

DIURNAL
HOT SOAK

05

2CT7V7U511414

MOD

YR MAKE MODL SIZ CID TR Cv

Nae IN@T RCAU w/e
cyL AC wT HP SIM

77 PONT ASTR 4 151 1 2 4 1 3000 11.3 4
» EVAPORATIVE TEST RESULTS .

GRAMS (HC) TEST NCe RUN NO} vaTec
1.31 1 1271 o/ 1/77
1.55 1 1271 o/ 1/TT
2.86 1 1271 o/ 1/77
3076 2 1273 6/ 2/77
1.55 2 1273 of 2/77
5-31 2 1273 of 2/77
3.71 3 1276 of 3/17
1.48 3 1276 o/ 3/717
5.20 3 1276 6/ 3/77

COMPOSITE

Ou0M
$239