APPENDIX A (cont'd)

Fuel tank

Ignition

Ignition timing

Engine oil

Fuel injectors

Fue! pump

Fuel lines and filter

Catalytic converter

Stainless steel construction;
capacity 14.5 gals.

Spark ignition; spark plugs
are ND W27ESR-U, gapped at .8
mm, torqued to 13 ft-Ib.
Toyota recommends changing
spark plugs after 9,000 miles
of vehicle operation.

With check connector shorted,
ignition timing should be set
to 10°BTDC at idle. With
check connector unshorted,
ignition timing advance should
be set to 15°BTDC at idle.
Idle speed is approximately
550-700 rpm.

10W-30(SF). Toyota recommends
oil change interval! of 3,000
miles.

Fuel injectors (main and cold
start) capable of high fuel
flow rates are used. The fuel
injector bodies have been
nickel-plated, and the
adjusting pipes constructed of
stainless steel.

In-tank electric fuel pump
with brushless motor is
installed to prevent brushes
and commutators from
corrosion. The body is nickel
plated and its capacity to
deliver fuel (flow rate) has
been increased.

The tube running from the fuel
tank to the fuel filter has
been nickel plated. The fuel
filter, located in the engine
compartment, has also been
nickel plated. The fuel
delivery rail has been plated
with nickel-phosphorus.

1 liter total volume, Pt:Rh
loaded. Catalyst is close
coupled to the exhaust
manifold.


Table 6

Toyota LCS-M Carina, FTP Test Results
M85 Fuel, Bést Driveability PROM, Evap/FTP Sequence

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co cO, . NOx

Date (km) (mg/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) _Comments
09/11/86 2528. 8.90 .105 .86 234. .68 Stall in

Bag 1
09/12/86 2565. 5.19 -115 .73 228. .65
09/16/86 2595. 4.56 «102 .80 226. 67
Averages 6.22 .107 .80 229. -67
Std. Dev. 2.35 .007 -065 4.2 016
Table 7

Toyota LCS-M Carina, FTP Test Results
M100 Fuel, Maximum Lean Limit PROM, Evap/FTP Sequence

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx

Date (km) (mg/mi ) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) _Comments

09/17/86 2626 6.01 .O7t .76 222. -56

09/18/86 2655 6.45 162 .79 212. .53 Start probs
cold start

09/19/86 2685 7.28 -170 75 222. -55 Hot, cold
start probs

Averages 6.58 +134 77 219. .55

Std. Dev. .64 .055 -02 5.8 .016


The vehicle fuel system was drained and a fresh fill of
M85 was added following the receipt of the Carina by EPA.
Three FTP/HWFE/idle, 10 and 30 mph steady-state tests were then
conducted using the:,best driveability PROM. . The results of
this testing are presented in Tables 1 through 5S.

A direct comparison of hydrocarbon levels would be
difficult to make as Toyota does not state in SAE Paper 860247
their procedure for calibration of the FID or any adjustments
made to the data for methanol operation. NOx emissions
measured by EPA over the FTP cycle appeared high when compared
to the .39 g/mi level reported by Toyota in SAE Paper 860247.
Measured CO also appears high compared with .56 g/mi reported
in the same paper. Pollutant levels other than aldehydes
correlated fairly well between MVEL and the Toyota Technical
Center testing. This engine/vehicle configuration appears to
meet current regulated U.S. emissions standards with a
substantial margin for error. Aldehyde levels over the FTP, an
average 7.3 mg/mi, appear high when compared with the 3.3 mg/mi
reported by Toyota.

HWFE test results at EPA are presented in Table 2. Test
results from idle, 10 and 30 mph steady state testing are given
in Tables 3, 4, and 5 respectively. Steady-state sampling is
conducted over a 10-minute period of operation, and an average
during that time period is reported. These data provide a more
complete characterization of the emissions profile of the
vehicle during various modes of operation.

Vehicle driveability on M85 fuel and the best driveability
PROM was excellent. Only relatively minor driving problems
occurred during this initial testing and none were serious
enough to invalidate a test. Most of these problems were
related to driver unfamiliarity with the right-hand drive
system of the vehicle.

The testing over the period May 21-23, 1986 was conducted
using a flexible steel tube connection between the tailpipe of
the vehicle and the CVS. The tests conducted from June 6-11,
1986 utilized an insulated stainless steel tube for the car to
CVS connection. The insulating cover was fitted with a heat
blanket, but during this portion of testing power was not
supplied to the heating element. The primary purpose of the
blanketed tube is to prevent the condensation of aldehydes in
the exhaust. Aldehyde levels did not appear to be
significantly influenced by this change in test procedure.

This portion of Phase ! was interrupted by the transfer of
the methanol test capability from one test cell to another at
MVEL. Testing resumed on September 10, 1986 with preparation
of the vehicle for evaporative emissions/FTP cycle testing.
No significant departures from gasoline car test procedures
were allowed with respect to the evaporative emissions
testing.


APPENDIX B

Specifications for M85 Test Fuel

Test Min. Max. Result

Composition

Methanol, vol. % 85.0

Unleaded base gasoline, vol .% 15.0
Distillation, °F

Isp 103 117 103

10 percent 133 143 139

50 percent 140 149 148

90 percent 140 150 148

End point 152
Reid vapor pressure, psi* 9.0 9.2 8.8

Gravity, °API 48.3 49.1 48.7


Table 15

Fuel Economy Results
M85 Fuel - Best Driveability PROM

Gasoline
Test City Highway Composite Equivalent
Date MPG MPG MPG MPG
05/21/86 21.7 30.1 24.8 45.1
08/22/86 22.1 30.5 25.2 45.9
05/23/86 21.8 30.1 24.9 45.3
Average, 21.9 30.2 25.0 45.4
by category
Std. Dev. by -21 3 .21 +42
category
Table 16
Fuel Economy Results
M100 Fuel - Maximum Lean Limit PROM
Gasoline
Test City Highway Composite Equivalent
Date MPG MPG MPG MPG
12/09/86 17.8 25.5 20.6 41.6
12/10/86 17.9 25.5 20.7 41.8
12/11/86 17.9 26.1 20.8 42.0
Average, 17.9 25.7 20.7 41.8
by category
-
Std. Dev. bg -07 .35 -10 -20

category


References

1. "Development of Toyota Lean Combustion System,"
Kobayashi, N., et al., Japan Society of Automotive Engineering
Review, July 1984, pp. 106-111.

2. "Development of Methano! Lean Burn System," Katoh,
K., Y. Imamura and T. Inoue, SAE 860247, February 28, 1986.

3. Formaldehyde Measurement In Vehicle Exhaust At MVEL,
Memo from R. L. Gilkey, OAR, OMS, EOD, Ann Arbor, MI, 1981.

4. Memo from Karl H. Hellman, OAR, OMS, ECTD, CTAB to
Charles L. Gray, Jr., ECTD, November 20, 1986.


vehicle was brought to the Toyota Technical Center for
diagnosis of the fuel system problem. The problem was
determined by Toyota to be related to the electrical lead to
the tank fuel pump, ‘and this pump was replaced. On December 2,
1986, the vehicle was returned by Toyota to MVEL.

Over the period December 9-11, 1986, the LCS-M was tested
three times over FTP and HWFE cycles, utilizing M100 fuel and
the M100 maximum fean PROM. Results from this testing are
presented in Tables 10 and 11.

FTP HC levels from this phase of M100 testing were
significantly lower than those measured during the September
M100 testing. The high HC levels measured during September
were probably caused by the start difficulties with the faulty
fuel pump. The vehicle did not experience a start problem
during December testing after the pump had been changed. CO
levels from these 2 phases of testing were similar, but the NOx
levels measured during December were approximately 40 percent
higher than NOx levels measured during the September M100
testing. , :

As the M100 testing in December was unaffected by
performance problems it would be particularly useful to compare
these results with M85 test results from similar cycles. HC
emissions from this phase of M100 testing are 10 to 15 percent
tower than HC levels measured under M85 fuel operation. co
emission levels appear slightly lower under M100 conditions
while NOx emissions appear relatively unaffected by the change
in fuels. Aldehyde results have not yet been processed for
this phase of M100 testing.

Total Vehicle HC Emissions Per Day

Another way to characterize a vehicle's HC emissions
profile is to describe total vehicle emissions in grams of HC
per vehicle per day. This recognizes the fact that HC
emissions are a function of evaporative losses as well as
exhaust emissions. This characterization may be particularly
important in the case of vehicles whose powerplants differ only
in the type of fuel used to power them.

One method [4] combines into a _ single equation the
evaporative and running HC losses using diurnal and hot soak
evaporative tests and the FTP driving cycle. Driving losses
are recognized as having cold start and warm driving
components." The cold start portion may be approximated as Bag
1 and Bag 2 emissions, the result multiplied by the number of
cold starts in a driving day. The warm driving component may
be approximated by the sum of Bag 2 and Bag 3 emissions divided
by 7.5 miles (the number of miles driven over this portion of
the cycle) and this entire quantity multiplied by the number of
miles driven per day. Evaporative losses may be recognized as


While no significant driving difficulties were noticed during
the M85 phase of this testing, vehicle performance problems
were experienced shortly after the car was configured to
operate on M100 fuel. An extended crank period, 60 to 70
seconds over four attempts was necessary to start the vehicle
on September 18, 1986. This long crank period probably
accounted for the more than doubling of HC emissions from the
FTP conducted the previous day. The start problems continued
during the following day, during both the cold and hot start
portions of the FTP. Upon completion of the hot soak
evaporative loss test that day the driver was unable to restart
the vehicle, and it had to be manually pushed out of the
evaporative test enclosure.

FTP test results are given in Tables 6 and 7 for M85 and
M100 fuels, respectively. Evaporative emissions results are
reported in Tables 8 and 9 for M85 and M100 fuels respectively.
The results from an evaporative emission test conducted at
Toyota, using M85 fuel are given in Table 8 for comparison.
The evap HC losses were also obtained by FIO and were not
adjusted for FID response factor to methanol nor for -use of
methanol rather than unleaded gasoline.

: The only procedural change from the FTP testing conducted
previously was that during the September testing the vehicle to
CVS connection was heated to 250°F before the start of
testing. This is a minimum temperature maintained throughout
the test; exhaust gas heating may cause the tube connection
temperature to rise above 250°F during the test.

HC levels from the M85 FTP testing in September did not
change significantly from the testing conducted previously.
Consistently lower CO and NOx levels were noted during the
September testing, however. M100 FTP HC levels are not
consistent from test to test. The higher levels of the second
and third FTP tests may have resulted from the start
difficulties experienced. NOx levels should have been
relatively unaffected by any start difficulties; the average
level of .55 g/mi was a significant reduction from the M85 FTP
NOx levels reported by EPA earlier.

M85 evaporative emissions from the vehicle appear low; it
would appear that this vehicle would meet the gasoline vehicle
evaporative ~ emissions standards with a substantial safety
margin. The M100 evaporative emissions levels were even lower,
averaging omly 0.27 g/test.

Following the conclusion of the M100 evap tests the
vehicle was drained, flushed and refilled with M85. The PROM
was changed to the M85 best driveability unit and an attempt to
test the vehicle over the FTP cycle was made. Serious
driveability problems resulted, and on October 8, 1986, the


- APPENDIX A

Description of Toyota LCS-M Test Vehicle

Vehicle Identification Number:

Curb weight

Inertia weight

Odometer reading at del.

Transmission

Shift speed code

Dynamometer horsepower
Engine:

Fuel

Number of cylinders
Displacement
Camshaft

Compression ratio

Combustion chamber
Fuel Metering

Bore

Stroke

Calibrations

AT15102264700000
2015 Ibs

2250 Ibs

1358 miles
Manual, 5 speed
15-25-40-45 mph
8 HP

M8S or M100 (see
"Calibrations")

4, in-line
97 cubic inches
Single, overhead camshaft

11.5, pistons with flat heads
are used

Wedge shape

Electronic port fue! injection

3.19 inches
3.03 inches

Three separate calibrations
(PROMS) are available for use
with M85 fuel blend:

1) calibration optimized for
performance and driveability;
2) calibration enabling the
vehicle to run at the maximum
lean fimit of operation; and
3) a calibration intermediate
between the first two.

One PROM is available for use
with M100 (neat methanol!)
fuel: a calibration enabling
vehicle operation at the
maximum lean limit.


M85 fuel economy was calculated using an equation supplied
by Toyota:

MPGnes = 1315 grams carbon/gallon of fuel
+4428 (HC, g/mi) + .4288 (CO g/mi) + .2729
(CO, g/mi)

M100 fuel economy was calculated using the formula:

MPGn 1 oo= 1120.88 grams carbon/gal lon
-375(HC, g/mi) + .429(CO, g/mi) + .273(CO, g/mi)

The derivation of this equation appears in Appendix C, as
well as the calculation of gasoline equivalency for M100 fuel.
Fuel economy results are presented in Tables 15 and 16 for M85
and M100 fuels, respectively.

The composite city/highway MPG was calculated from the
formula:

MPG = 1 1
-55 + 45
City MPG Highway MPG

As expected, M100 city and highway fuel economies are
lower than M8S fuel economies. After adjusting for heat value,
average M85 gasoline equivalent composite mpg was 45.4, while
average M100 gasoline equivalent composite mpg was 41.8.

Acknowledgments

The author gratefully acknowledges the efforts of James
Garvey, Ernestine Bulifant and the other members of the Test
and Evaluation Branch, Emission Control Technology Division,
who conducted the driving tests mentioned here.

The author also gratefully acknowledges the efforts of
Lottie Parker and other members of the Engineering Operations
Division, who conducted the evaporative emissions’ testing
mentioned in this report.


EPA/AA/CTAB/86-06

Technical Report

Phase | Testing of Toyota
Lean Combustion System (Methanol)

by

Gregory K. Piotrowski

December 1986

NOTICE

Technical’ Reports do not necessarily represent final. EPA
decisions or positions. They are intended to present technical
analysis of issues using data which are currently available.
The purpose in the release of such reports is to facilitate the
exchange of technical information and to inform the public of
technical developments which may form the basis for a final EPA
decision, pgsition or regulatory action.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Mobile Sources
Emission Control Technology Division
Control Technology and Applications Branch
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105


Table 2

Toyota LCS-M Carina, HWFE Test Results
M85 Fuel, Best Driveability PROM

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx
Date (km) (mg/mi)  (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) _Comments
05/21/86 2236. N/A -015 .08 160. 54
05/22/86 2315. 3.87 015 .04 158. -47
05/23/86 2378. N/A 019 .03 160. «$3
Averages 3.87 016 -05 159. .51
Std. Dev. -002 026 1.2 04

N/A signifies aldehyde levels not available due to technical problems.

Table 3

Toyota LCS-M Carina, Idle Mode Test Results
M85 Fuel, Best Driveability PROM

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx

Date (km) (mg/min) (g/min) (g/min) (g/min) (g/min)
05/21/86 2252. N/A -001 0.0 15.1. -001
05/22/86 2350. -81 -002 0.0 12.5 .O11
05/23/86 2411. N/A .001 0.0 15.3 .O11
Average .81 -001 0.0 14.3 .O11
Std. Dev. : -- -- -- 1.6 --

N/A signifies aldehyde levels not available due to technical problems.


Table 1

Toyota LCS-M Carina, FTP Test Results
M85 Fuel, Best Driveability PROM

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co C02 NOx
Date (km) (mg/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) Comments
05/21/86 2200. N/A 128 1.17 220. -82 Minor gear
change error
05/22/86 2280. 7.92 094 1.03 216. 74 Bag 2 stall
05/23/86 2360. N/A +126 1.12 219. .79 Bag 1 stall
06/06/86 2440. 5.83 -115 1.41 223. .69 No problems
noticed
06/10/86 2469. 6.76 -090 0.86 222. -72  20-sec crank
to start,
Bag 1
06/11/86 2493. 8.77 .121 1.13 223. .75 Gear change
error, Bag 2
Averages 7.32 +112 1.07 221. .75
Std. Dev. 1.29 016 0.11 -002 .05

N/A signifies aldehyde levels not available due to technical problems.

LSC-M System FTP Cycle Results
Test Conducted At Toyota Technical Center (Ann Arbor)

Test HC co co, NOx
Type Aldehydes (q/mi ) (g/mi_) (g/mi) (g/mi)

FTP N/A .121 -93 220. -69


having separate diurnal and hot soak components. The diurnal
component can be viewed as a once-a-day occurrence, and the hot
soak losses multiplied by the number of trips taken per driving
day.

The above may be condensed into the following equation:

g/car/day = NCS(Bag 1 HC - Bag 3 HC) + -
diurnal toss + TPD (Bag 2 HC + Bag 3 HC) + TPD
(hot soak losses)
Where:
NCS = The number of cold starts per day
TPD = The number of trips per day

Two cold starts per day are assumed here, as well as 4.7
trips per day of 7.5 miles each. The equation above, therefore
reduces to:

g/car/day = 2 (Bag 1 HC - Bag 3 HC) + diurnal, + 4.7
(Bag 2 HC + Bag 3 HC) + 4.7 (hot soak)

Data from Tables 12 and 8, FTP by bag and evaporative
emissions results from M85 testing have been used to calculate
the g/vehicle/day data presented for M8S in Table 14. Data
from Tables 13 and 9 were used to calculate the M100 figures
presented in Table 14. The M100 results by bag from the
December 9-11 FTP testing were used instead of the M100 FTP
results from testing conducted on September 17-19. The
September FTP test results may have been adversely impacted by
the fuel pump problems experienced at that time.

M100 neat methanol appears to possess a_ substantially
lower total HC emissions profile than M85 methanol blend by
this approach. The lower M100 emissions profile is due to
comparatively lower HC emissions in both exhaust = and
evaporative emissions. HC levels from M100 operation are lower
in each FTP bag category than HC levels from M85 testing.
Evaporative emissions for both the diurnal and hot soak tests
for M100 are substantially below those obtained for M85 fuel.
The LCS-M Carina then, would appear to offer lower HC emissions
if the system was operated with M100, rather than M85 methanol
fuel. .

Fuel Esonomy Testing

Fuel economy data is published for all testing that was
conducted using an FTP/HWFE test sequence on the same date.
Both city and highway fuel economy numbers are calculated,
enabling the computation of a composite city/highway fuel
economy figure.


APPENDIX C

Derivation of Fuel Economy Equation
+M100 Neat Methanol Fuel

1 gallon of methanol! weighs 2,989 grams
12.011, molecular weight of carbon

32.043, molecular weight of methano! (CH;0H)
Weight percent of carbon in methanol:

12.011 = .3748, 37.5 percent carbon
32.043

2,989 grams methanol x (.375) = 1120.88 grams carbon/gal lon
gation methanol

Assume:
Exhaust HC is methanol composition,
-429, weight fraction of carbon in CO.
+273, weight fraction of carbon in CO..

MPG = 1120.88 grams carbon/gallon methanol
.375 (HC, g/mi) + .429 (CO, g/mi) + .273 (CO2z, g/mi)

Gasoline equivalency:

32.16 MJ
15.90 MJ

1 liter of gasoline
1 liter of methanol

32.16 MJ = 2.02,
15.90 MJ

factor by which M100 methanol fuel economy must be
multiplied to obtain equivalent gasoline fuel economy on a heat
energy basis.


methanol rather than unleaded gasoline for fuel. NOx emissions
were measured by chemiluminescent technique utilizing a Beckman
Model 8501-SCA.

Exhaust formaldehyde was measured using a dinitropheny!
hydrazine (DNPH) technique.[3] Exhaust carbony!s including
formaldehyde- are bubbled through ONPH solution forming
hydrazone derivatives. These derivatives are separated from
the remaining unreacted solution by high performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC). Quantization is accomptished by
spectrophotometric analysis of the LC effluent stream. :

Evaluation Process Description

Toyota has published emissions test results from the LCS-M
system in SAE Paper 860247. Regulated pollutant levels over
FTP, Federal Highway Fue! Economy (HWFE) and Japanese 10-mode
cycles were presented in this paper, as well as aldehyde
emissions data collected over the FTP cycle by a 2-4 DNPH
method.

Phase ! of the EPA evaluation sequence, the results of
which are presented here, sought to confirm Toyota's results
over the FTP sequence and provide emissions performance data
over several unreported parameters. Phase | testing began with
a series of six FTP tests utilizing M85 test fuel supplied by
Howell Hydrocarbons of San Antonio, Texas. The M85 best
driveability PROM was used in this series of tests. These
tests were followed by three evaporative emissions/FTP tests
conducted jointly by ECTD and Engineering Operations Division
(EOD) personne!. This sequence consisted of a diurnal heat
build conducted in an EOD sealed evaporative emissions test
enclosure (SHED) followed by FTP and hot soak evaporative loss
tests. Following completion of this set of tests, the vehicle
was drained and refueled with M100 neat methanol and the PROM
replaced with the M100 maximum lean limit PROM. The sequence
of three evaporative emissions/FTP tests was then repeated for
operation of the vehicle on M100 fuel. Following replacement
of a fuel pump by Toyota, three additional FTP/HWFE tests were
completed on the vehicle, also using M100 fuel.

Phase 11! will consist of more extensive evaluation
techniques as well as attempts to further reduce pollutant
emissions by means of advanced technology.

Vehicle Emissions Testing
1%

Upon its arrival at the Toyota Technica! Center Ann Arbor,
the Carina was tested for regulated emission levels over FTP
and evaporative emissions cycles. The fuel used by Toyota for
this testing was M85 fuel borrowed from the EPA laboratory, and
the best driveability PROM was utilized. The results of this
testing (Table 1) were given to EPA when the car was delivered
for evaluation.


Table 8

Evaporative Test Results, EPA Laboratory
Toyota LCS-M Carina M85 Fuel

Diurnal Loss Hot Soak Total
Test Date (q) (g) _(g)
09/11/86 -32 -20 -52
09/12/86 -49 21 -70
09/16/86 -66 .25 91
Average -71

Evaporative Test Results, Toyota Technical Center
Toyota LCS-M Carina M85 Fuel

Diurnal Loss Hot Soak Loss Total

(gq) (g) (q)

24 .47 -71
Table 9

Evaporative Test Results, EPA Laboratory
Toyota LCS-M Carina M100 Fuel

Diurnal Loss Hot Soak Total
Test Date (g) (g) (gq)
09/17/86 -13 19 .32
09/18/86 +10 16 -26
09/16/86 .09 +13 .22

Average 27


Table 12

FTP Test Results, HC By Bag
M85 Fue!, Best Driveability PROW

Test® Bag 1 HC Bag 2 HC Bag 3 HC Test HC

Date (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi )

09/11/86 -387 027 .039 +105

09/12/86 453 027 .027 2415

09/16/86 .389 027 027 +102
Table 13

FTP Test Results, HC By Bag
M100 Fuel, Maximum Lean Limit PROM

Test Bag 1 HC Bag 2 HC Bag 3 HC Test HC

Date (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)

12/09/86 .330 012 .022 -080

12/10/86 .389 - 006 -021 .089

12/11/86 .330 019 +116 +110
Table 14

Emissions Of g HC/Vehicle Day
Toyota LCS-M Carina

M85 Fuel M100 Fuel
Test (g/veh day) (q/veh day)
1: 2.27 1.80
2 2.58 1.71
3 2.81 1.76
Average 2.55 1.76

Std. Dev. 27 05


Toyota also provided a single M100 calibration, for
maximum lean operation.

Several meetings, between EPA and Toyota personnel through
the spring of 1986 provided EPA personnel with technical
details and updates not included in SAE Paper 860247,[2] a
technical paper describing the development of the system.

Early” in May of 1986, the LCS-M vehicle arrived at the
Toyota Technical Center in Ann Arbor. While at the Toyota
facility the vehicle was tested for evaporative emissions and
over the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) cycle, utilizing M85
fuel. On May 9, 1986 the Carina LCS-M was delivered to the EPA
Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory for evaluation.

Vehicle Description

The test vehicle is a 1986 Toyota Carina, a vehicle sold
in Japan but currently not exported to the United States. The
power plant is a 1587 cc displacement, 4-cylinder, single-
overhead camshaft engine. The engine has been modified for
operation on methanol in a lean burn mode, incorporating the
lean mixture sensor, swirl control valve and timed sequential
fuel injection found on the Toyota lean combustion system
(T-LCS). Modifications to the fuel system included the
substitution of parts resistant to methanol corrosion for stock
parts.

The car may be operated on M100 neat methanol as well as
M85 methanol/unleaded gasoline blend. Fuel changeover is
accomplished by draining and flushing the fuel system and
changing the electronic control unit (PROM, for programmed read
only memory) to a unit compatible with the desired fuel. The
exhaust catalyst is a close-coupled manifold catalyst. Details
of the vehicle description are provided in Appendix A and fuel
specifications for the M85 blend are given in Appendix B.

Test Facilities And Equipment

Emissions testing at EPA was conducted on a Clayton Model
ECE-50 double-roll chassis dynamometer, using a direct-drive
variable inertia flywheel unit and road load power control
unit. The Philco Ford CVS used has a nominal capacity of 350
cfm. .

Exhaust hydrocarbon emissions were measured by flame
ionization @etection (FID) from a Beckman Model 400. This FID
was calibrated with propane; no attempt was made to adjust for
FID response factor to methanol. No corrections were made for
the difference in hydrocarbon composition due to the use of


Summar

The Toyota lean combustion system-methanol (T-LCS-M) is a
fean burn combustion system utilizing methanol fuel that is
designed to maximize fuel economy and driving performance while
minimizing pollutant emissions. Testing at the EPA Motor
Vehicle Emissions Laboratory (MVEL) indicates that this system
allows relatively low emissions of regulated pollutants and
aldehydes: when operated on either M100 and M85 methanol fuels
under transient driving and evaporative emissions test

conditions. Total vehicle hydrocarbon (HC) emissions levels
appear lower when the vehicle is operated on M100 rather than
M85 fuel. Fuel economy is slightly improved when the system is

operated on M85 rather than M100 fuel.

Background

The Toyota Lean Combustion System (T-LCS) was described in
a paper appearing in the Japanese Society of Automotive
Engineering Review for July, 1984.[1] This lean burn system
made use of three particular technologies. to achieve
improvements in fuel economy as well as comply with NOx
emission levels under the Japanese 10-mode cycle:

1. A lean mixture sensor was used in place of an oxygen
sensor to control air/fuel! ratio in the lean mixture range;

2. A swirl control valve before the intake valve was
adopted to improve combustion by limiting torque fluctuation at
increased air/fuel ratios; and

3. Sequential fuel injection with optimized injection
timing was used to complement the operation of the swirl
control valve.

EPA became interested in this system with regard to its
potential use with methanol fuel and requested that Toyota
provide a T-LCS system optimized and calibrated for operation
on methanol fuel.

Toyota provided a  Japanese-market-only vehicle, the
Carina. Vehicle details are provided in Appendix A; this
right-hand-drive automobile was not constructed to U.S. safety
specifications and therefore is not able to be driven over the
road in the U.S.

Toyota “equipped the engine for M85 methanol/gasoline blend
operation with three optimized calibrations:

1. A calibration optimized for driveability;

2. A calibration enabling operation of the vehicle at
its maximum lean limits; and

3. A calibration utilizing air/fuel ratios intermediate
between the first two.


Table 4

Toyota LCS-M Carina, 10 MPH Steady-State Cycle
M85 Fuel, Best Driveability PROM

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx

Date (km) (mg/mi ) (g/mi) (g/mi)  Cg/mi) (g/mi)
05/21/86 2253. N/A .023 0.0 338. -53
05/22/86 2375. 40.13 -012 0.0 337 .. -48
05/23/86 2412. N/A .026 0.0 329. -50
Average 40.13 .020 0.0 335. -50
Std. Dev. -- .007 -- 4.9 025

N/A signifies aldehyde levels not available due to technical problems.

Table 5

Toyota LCS-M Carina, 30 MPH Steady-State Cycle
M85 Fuel, Best Driveability PROM

Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx

Date (km) (mg/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
05/21/86 2258. N/A O11 0.0 157. .57
05/22/86 2390. 1.42 .004 0.0 153. -63
05/23/86 2420. N/A 014 0.0 152. .52
Average © 1.42 -010 0.0 154, -57

Std. Dev. -- -005 -- 2.6 -05

©

N/A signifies aldehyde levels not available due to technical problems.


Table 10

Toyota LCS-M Carina

FIP Testing, December 8-11, 1986

M100 Fuel, Maximum Lean Limit PROM

Test _Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx
Date : (km) (mg/mi ) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
12/09/86 2767. N/A 080 .69 230. -70.
12/10/86 2830. N/A .089 -80 228. .75
12/11/86 2893. N/A -110 :73 228. -82
Average .093 .74 229. .76
Std. Dev. -- 015 .056 1.2 -06
N/A indicates not available.
Table 11
Toyota LCS-M Carina
HWFE Testing, December 8-11, 1986
M100 Fuel, Maximum Lean Limit PROM
Test Odometer Aldehydes HC co co, NOx
Date (km) (mg/mi ) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
12/09/86 2785. N/A .007 .O1 161. .37
12/10/86 2865. N/A .007 -00 161. 42
12/11/86 2911. N/A .007 04 157. 56
Average .007 02 160. 45
Std. Dev. 7 -- .02 2.3 .098

N/A indicates not available.