# Final Report:



# The Effect of Fuel Sulfur on NH 3 

# and Other

Emissions from 2000-2001 Model Year Vehicles

CRC Project No. E-60

Prepared for:

Coordinating Research Council

3650 Mansell Road, Suite 140

Alpharetta, GA 30022

and

CONCAWE

(the oil companies’ european organization

for environment, health, and safety)

Submitted:

May 2003

Thomas D. Durbin, Principal Investigator

J. Wayne Miller, Co-Investigator

John T. Pisano

Theodore Younglove

Claudia G. Sauer

Sam H. Rhee

Tao Huai

College of Engineering-Center for

Environmental Research and Technology

University of California

Riverside, CA 92521

(909) 781-5797

(909) 781-5790 fax Gervase I. MacKay, Collaborator

UNISEARCH Associates Inc.

96 Bradwick Drive

Concord, Ontario, Canada, L4K 1K8

02-VE-59971-E60-04

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# i 

# Table of Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... vi

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1

2. Experimental Procedures ..................................................................................... 2

2.1 Test Vehicles............................................................................................... 2

2.2 Fuels and Lubricants ................................................................................... 2

2.3 Catalyst and Oxygen Sensor Aging ............................................................ 3

2.4 Test Sequence.............................................................................................. 3

2.5 Vehicle Emissions Measurements............................................................... 5

2.6 Statistical Analysis ...................................................................................... 9

3. Results .................................................................................................................. 12

3.1 FTP Emissions Results.............................................................................. 12

3.2 US06 Emissions Results ........................................................................... 34

3.3 European Vehicle Emissions Results........................................................ 46

4. Summary and Conclusions.............................................................................. 54

5. Acknowledgments................................................................................................ 56

6. References ............................................................................................................ 57

Appendices

Appendix A. Properties of the Test Fuel

Appendix B. Description of Catalyst Aging

Appendix C. Sulfur Removal Protocol

Appendix D. Processing of the TDL Signal

Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission Results

Appendix F. FTP Statistical Analysis Results

Appendix G. THC Emissions Results

Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission Results

Appendix I. US06 Statistical Analysis Results

Appendix J. Detailed NEDC Emission Results

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# ii List of Figures

Figure 1. Flowchart for CRC Project No. E-60.............................................................................. 4

Figure 2. Configuration of the TDL Sampling System ................................................................. 7

Figure 3. Comparison of FTIR and TDL NH 3 

# Measurements .................................................... 10

Figure 4. Fleet Average FTP Emissions ...................................................................................... 15

Figure 5. FTP Individual Vehicle NH 3 

# Emissions ...................................................................... 16

Figure 6. NH 3 

# Interaction Plot for Vehicle by Catalyst Effects................................................... 17

Figure 7. NH 3 

# Emissions by Bag ................................................................................................. 18

Figure 8. Real-Time NH 3 

# Emissions over the FTP for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck .................... 19

Figure 9. FTP Individual Vehicle NMHC Emissions .................................................................. 21

Figure 10. NMHC Emissions by Bag .......................................................................................... 22

Figure 11. FTP Individual Vehicle CO Emissions....................................................................... 24

Figure 12. CO Emissions by Bag................................................................................................ . 25

Figure 13. FTP Individual Vehicle NO

x 

# Emissions ..................................................................... 27

Figure 14. NO

x 

# Emissions by Bag ............................................................................................... 28

Figure 15. FTP Individual Vehicle N 2 

# O Emissions .................................................................... 31

Figure 16. N 2 

# O Emissions by Bag ............................................................................................... 32

Figure 17. Real-Time N 2 

# O Emissions over the FTP for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck .................. 33

Figure 18. Fleet Average US06 Emissions .................................................................................. 35

Figure 19. Real-Time NH 3 

# Emissions over the US06 for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck................ 36

Figure 20. US06 Individual Vehicle NH 3 

# Emissions................................................................... 37

Figure 21. US06 Individual Vehicle NMHC Emissions.............................................................. 39

Figure 22. US06 Individual Vehicle CO Emissions .................................................................... 41

Figure 23. US06 Individual Vehicle NO

x 

# Emissions................................................................... 43

Figure 24. US06 Individual Vehicle N 2 

# O Emissions................................................................... 45

Figure 25. Renault Megane NEDC Emissions Results................................................................ 47

Figure 26. VW Bora NEDC Emissions Results........................................................................... 48

Figure 27. Renault Megane ECE Emissions Results ................................................................... 49

Figure 28. VW Bora ECE Emissions Results ............................................................................. 50

Figure 29. Renault Megane EUDC Emissions Results................................................................ 51

Figure 30. VW Bora EUDC Emissions Results........................................................................... 52

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# iii List of Tables

Table 1. Description of Test Vehicles ........................................................................................ ... 2

Table 2. FTP NH 3 

# Emissions Results........................................................................................... 12

Table 3. FTP NH 3 

# Emissions Results for Individual Bags ......................................................... 13

Table 4. FTP NMHC Emissions Results ..................................................................................... 20

Table 5. FTP NMHC Emissions Results for Individual Bags ..................................................... 20

Table 6. FTP CO Emissions Results ........................................................................................... 2 3

Table 7. FTP CO Emissions Results for Individual Bags ........................................................... 23

Table 8. FTP NO

x 

# Emissions Results........................................................................................... 26

Table 9. FTP NO

x 

# Emissions Results for Individual Bags ......................................................... 26

Table 10. FTP N 2 

# O Emissions Results ........................................................................................ 29

Table 11. FTP N 2 

# O Emissions Results for Individual Bags ....................................................... 30

Table 12. US06 NH 3 

# Emissions Results ...................................................................................... 34

Table 13. US06 NMHC Emissions Results ................................................................................. 38

Table 14. US06 CO Emissions Results ....................................................................................... 40

Table 15. US06 NO

x 

# Emissions Results ..................................................................................... 42

Table 16. US06 N 2 

# O Emissions Results ..................................................................................... 44

Table 17. FTP Emissions Results Including European Vehicles................................................. 53

Table 18. US06 Emissions Results Including European Vehicles............................................... 53

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# iv List of Appendices

Appendix A. Properties of the Test Fuel ..................................................................................... 6 2

Appendix B. Description of Catalyst Aging ............................................................................... 63

Appendix C. Sulfur Removal Protocol ........................................................................................ 65

Appendix D. Processing of the TDL Signal................................................................................. 66

Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission Results .............................................................................. 69

Appendix F. FTP Statistical Analysis Results ............................................................................. 83

Appendix G. THC Emissions Results.......................................................................................... 91

Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emissions Results .......................................................................... 92

Appendix I. US06 Statistical Analysis Results ........................................................................... 106

Appendix J. Detailed NEDC Emissions Results........................................................................ 107

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# v Disclaimer

This report was prepared by the University of California-Riverside, College of EngineeringCenter for Environmental Research and Technology (CE-CERT) as an account of work

sponsored by the Coordinating Research Council (CRC) and CONCAWE. Neither the CRC,

members of the CRC, CONCAWE, CE-CERT, nor any person acting on their behalf: (1) makes

any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the use of any information, apparatus, method,

or process disclosed in this report, or (2) assumes any liabilities with respect to use of, inability

to use, or damages resulting from the use or inability to use, any information, apparatus, method,

or process disclosed in this report.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# vi 

# Executive Summary

The reduction of fuel sulfur levels in gasoline is considered to be an important factor in attaining

present and future vehicle emissions standards and air quality goals. Numerous studies have

shown that sulfur reduces the efficiency of the catalytic converter and increases regulated

emissions. Although catalysts reduce most emissions, some pollutants, such as ammonia (NH 3 

# ),

can be formed over the catalyst surface. Since NH 3 

# is primarily formed on the catalyst surface, it

has been suggested that sulfur could inhibit NH 3 

# formation on the catalyst by inhibiting reaction

sites for NH 3 

# formation, leading to increases in NH 3 

# emissions as fuel sulfur levels are

decreased.

To date, information about the effects on fuel sulfur on emissions such as NH 3 

# is very limited,

especially for low emission vehicles representative of present and future vehicle technologies.

For this study, the emissions impact of fuel sulfur and catalyst age was evaluated for 14 vehicles.

The 14 vehicles included 12 California-certified Low-Emission Vehicles (LEV) to Super-UltraLow-Emission Vehicles (SULEV) vehicles and 2 European vehicles certified to Euro 3

standards. Each vehicle was evaluated with 3 fuels (5, 30, and 150 ppmw sulfur) and using asreceived and aged catalysts. Vehicles were tested on each fuel/catalyst configuration over the

Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and US06 test cycles. The two European vehicles were also tested

over the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) on each of the fuel/catalyst configurations. For

the primary analyses, the European vehicles were excluded from the data set since the European

vehicles are certified to different limits and procedures.

In addition to making measurements of bag and modal regulated emissions, a tunable diode laser

(TDL) was developed and successfully used to measure engine-out and tailpipe NH 3 

# in real-time.

The TDL offers both the detection limits and the response time necessary to investigate low-level

concentrations of NH 3 

# in vehicle exhaust. Additionally, the TDL has the important advantage

that it can make measurements in-situ using raw exhaust gases. The combination of these

advantages allows the measurement of highly time-resolved NH 3 

# emissions with sensitivity

levels of better than 0.5 ppmv at two standard deviations, or minimum detection limits of

roughly 0.5 mg/mi.

For the California-certified vehicles, NH 3 

# emissions over the FTP were generally lower than

those of the regulated emissions. Fleet average FTP NH 3 

# emissions averaged between 14 and 21

mg/mi depending on the fuel/catalyst combination. Five of the test vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions

below 5 mg/mi for most of the test configurations. Only 4 vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions over 20

mg/mi when averaged over all test configurations. Measurements of engine-out NH 3 

# emissions

indicated that NH 3 

# emissions were formed primarily over the catalyst. The highest FTP NH 3 

# emissions were found during bag 1 of the FTP after catalyst light-off. NH 3 

# emissions over the

US06 were considerably higher than those found for the FTP and were comparable with or

greater than those of non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC) and nitrogen oxides (NO

x 

# ) over the

US06.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# vii Fuel sulfur effects on fleet average NH 3 

# were found to be statistically significant over the US06

cycle but not over the FTP. Fleet average NH 3 

# emissions over the US06 for the 150 ppm fuel

were 27% higher than those for the 5 ppm and 12% higher than those for the 30 ppm fuel.

Catalyst aging effects on NH 3 

# emissions were found to be statistically significant for both the

FTP and US06 cycles for NH 3 

# emissions, with higher emissions for the aged catalyst. Fleet

average NH 3 

# emissions were 50% higher for the aged catalysts over the FTP and 17% higher for

the aged catalysts over the US06. The interaction between vehicle and catalyst age effects was

found to be statistically significant, however, for both the FTP and US06 cycles.

For the FTP, fleet average NO

x 

# emissions were higher at a statistically significant level for the

150 ppm fuel compared with both the 5 and 30 ppm sulfur fuels, although the interaction

between vehicle and fuel effects was also statistically significant. For fleet average NMHC,

emissions were higher at statistically significant levels for the 150 ppm fuel compared with the

30 ppm fuel, although the magnitude of this fuel effect was small.

The effects of catalyst age were found to be statistically significant for fleet average CO

emissions, with higher emissions observed for the aged catalysts.

Similar to NH 3 

# , the N 2 

# O emissions over the FTP were generally lower than those of the regulated

pollutants. The results showed there was a statistically significant increase in N 2 

# O emissions for

150 ppm fuel compared to both the 30 and 5 ppm fuels. This trend is consistent with previous

studies that have shown that higher N 2 

# O emissions are generally observed for higher sulfur fuels.

The highest N 2 

# O emissions for the FTP were found in bag 1, as the catalyst was warming up to

operational temperatures.

The effects of fuel sulfur on both fleet average NMHC and NO

x 

# emissions were found to be

statistically significant over the US06 cycle, although the interaction between vehicle and fuel

effects was statistically significant for NMHC. A pair-wise comparison showed that fuels with 5,

30 and 150 ppm sulfur were all different from one another at a statistically significant level for

both NO

x 

# and NMHC emissions over the US06 cycle. The magnitude of the fuel sulfur effects

over the US06 for NMHC and NO

x 

# was also found to be relatively larger than that found for the

FTP cycle. For fleet average CO emissions over the US06 cycle, only the differences between

the 5 and 150 ppm fuels were found to be statistically significant at the 90% confidence level.

Catalyst effects over the US06 were found to be statistically significant for fleet average NMHC,

CO, and NO

x 

# emissions, with higher emissions for the aged catalyst. The vehicle by catalyst

interaction was statistically significant, however, for both NMHC and CO emissions.

Fleet average N 2 

# O emissions over the US06 were lower than those obtained over the FTP. N 2 

# O

emissions showed trends of higher emissions with increasing fuel sulfur level. Pair-wise

comparisons showed that the 5, 30 and 150 ppm fuels were all different from each other for N 2 

# O

emissions over the US06 cycle at a statistically significant level.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# viii European Vehicle Results

Overall, the fleet average FTP and US06 results with the inclusion of the European vehicles were

very similar to those obtained with just the California-certified vehicles. Over the NEDC cycle,

CO, NO

x 

# and NH 3 

# for the Renault Megane were all found to be higher for the tests conducted on

the aged catalyst in comparison with the as-received catalyst. For the VW Bora, fuel sulfur and

catalyst effects generally did not have a significant impact on emissions over the NEDC cycle.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 1 

# 1. Introduction

The reduction of fuel sulfur levels in gasoline is considered to be an important factor in attaining

future emissions standards and air quality goals. The impact of gasoline sulfur levels has been

the subject of numerous studies over the years, and it is well documented that higher sulfur

reduces the efficiency of the catalytic converter, resulting in increases in regulated emissions [1-

14]. Some of these studies show the effects to be more pronounced, on a percentage basis, for the

more advanced ULEV and LEV vehicles [6].

Although catalysts provide reductions for most emissions, from studies as early as the 1970s it

was known that other emissions, such as ammonia (NH 3 

# ), can be formed over the catalyst

surface [15,16]. Recently, there has been increased interest in NH 3 

# emissions since NH 3 

# is

known to be an important precursor to the formation of secondary particulate matter (PM) and

since studies have indicated that NH 3 

# emission levels may be greater than originally thought [17-

19]. One of the important issues regarding NH 3 

# emissions is the potential effect of changing fuel

sulfur levels on the NH 3 

# emissions found in the tailpipe exhaust. In some early studies, it was

suggested that sulfur could inhibit NH 3 

# formation on the catalyst by deactivating reaction sites

for NH 3 

# formation [20-22]. Some initial chassis dynamometer emissions results were also

consistent with these conclusions, showing higher NH 3 

# emissions for fuels with lower fuel sulfur

levels, but for a limited number of tests and only one vehicle [23]. In a more recent study of 10

late model vehicles, NH 3 

# emissions did not show any consistent trends as a function of fuel

sulfur level over the Federal Test Procedure (FTP), but showed lower emissions for higher sulfur

levels over the US06 [24]. Other chassis dynamometer measurements on two vehicles, however,

showed that decreasing fuel sulfur content resulted in lower NH 3 

# emissions for one vehicle and

had little effect on NH 3 

# emissions for the second vehicle [25]. To better understand how reduced

fuel sulfur levels will affect future NH 3 

# emissions inventories, it was important to conduct a

more comprehensive study and utilize more advanced experimental techniques capable of

measuring the low NH 3 

# emission levels found in late model vehicles.

The objective of this project was to evaluate the impact of different fuel sulfur levels on NH 3 

# emissions, as well as regulated and N 2 

# O emissions for a fleet of present and future technology

gasoline vehicles. For this project, 12 vehicles certified to California’s Low Emission Vehicle

(LEV) requirements and 2 European vehicles certified to Euro 3 standards were tested on fuels

with nominal sulfur levels of 5, 30, and 150 ppmw. The fleet was designed to represent some of

the latest technology vehicles currently available in the market. Each vehicle was tested with the

as-received catalyst and an aged catalyst. The vehicles were tested using the FTP and US06

cycles. The European vehicles were also tested over the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC).

NH 3 

# emissions were measured using a novel approach, tunable diode laser (TDL) spectroscopy.

The TDL offers the detection limits and the response time necessary to investigate low-level

concentrations of exhaust gases as well as the ability to make in-situ measurements of raw

exhaust gases. The results of this study are discussed in the following report.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 2 

# 2. Experimental Procedures

2.1 Test Vehicles

A total of 14 vehicles were recruited and tested for this study. This included 4 low-emission

vehicle (LEV), 6 ultra-low-emission vehicle (ULEV) and 2 super-ultra-low-emission vehicle

(SULEV) California-certified vehicles and 2 European vehicles certified to Euro 3 standards

[26]. The LEV and ULEV vehicles were recruited from a combination of different rental car

agencies and private parties. The 2 SULEV vehicles were obtained on loan from a major

automobile manufacturer. The European vehicles were obtained on loan from CONCAWE.

Table 1 describes the vehicles and shows whether each is certified over the US06. It should be

noted that vehicles 5-7 and 10-12 in Table 1 were also used in a separate program to investigate

the effects of lubricant sulfur levels and other properties on emissions [27]. Prior to entering the

program, all vehicles were inspected using a standard checklist to ensure that they were in sound

mechanical and operational condition.

Table 1. Description of Test Vehicles

# MY OEM Model Certification US06

Certified Engine

Size Mileage Engine Family

1 2001 Ford Taurus LEV No 3.0 L 23,553 1FMXV03.0VF9

2 2001 Chevrolet Cavalier LEV No 2.4 L 22,482 1GMXV02.4022

3 2001 Chevrolet Silverado LEV No 5.3 L 8,380 1GMXA05.3183

4 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee LEV No 4.7 L 29,571 YCRXT0287231

5 2001 Buick LeSabre ULEV Yes 3.8 L 20,164 1GMXV03.8044

6 2001 Dodge Neon ULEV No 2.0 L 18,634 1CRXV0122V40

7 2001 Toyota Camry ULEV Yes 2.2 L 22,055 1TYXV02.2JJA

8 2001 Chrysler Sebring ULEV No 2.4 L 19,677 1CRXV0148V40

9 2001 Acura CL ULEV No 3.2 L 20,523 1HNXV03.2K88

10 2001 Ford Windstar ULEV No 3.8 L 21,261 1FMXT03.82J*

11 2000 Honda Accord SULEV No 2.3 L 11,958 YHNXV02.3NL5

12 2001 Nissan Sentra CA SULEV Yes 1.8 L 6,592 1NSXV01.852A

13 2000 VW Bora Euro 3 No 2.0 L 6,741 APK026895

14 2001 Renault Megane** Euro 3 No 2.0 L 5,493 C006106F5RD740

* = 5 or 6, L = liter, ** equipped with a stoichiometric direct–injection gasoline engine

2.2 Fuels and Lubricants

The test matrix for this program involved 3 test fuels with nominal sulfur levels of 5 ppm, 30

ppm, and 150 ppm. The base fuel for these tests was an in-use California Phase 2 gasoline

obtained from Chevron with a 5 ppm sulfur level. The properties of this fuel included 14.0 vol%

aromatics, and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of 6.7 pounds per square inch (psi), and no

oxygenates. A more detailed listing of the fuel properties is provided in Appendix A. The

nominal 30 ppm and 150 ppm fuels were obtained by doping the base fuel with a threecomponent sulfur mixture including dimethyl disulfide, thiophene, and benzothiophene. This

mixture has been used in previous studies of fuel sulfur effects [28].

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 3 A specially formulated zero-sulfur lubricant was used in this test program to ensure the effects of

sulfur from the lubricant would be negligible. This oil had a synthetic base containing ashless,

zero-sulfur antiwear and antioxidant additives. The effect of varying oil sulfur levels on

regulated emissions was investigated in a separate study using the same zero-sulfur oil as the

baseline oil [27].

2.3 Catalyst and Oxygen Sensor Aging

For this program, each vehicle was tested using the original as-received catalyst and a bench

aged catalyst system. All catalyst aging was conducted at the Southwest Research Institute

(SwRI) in San Antonio, TX. The catalyst systems were obtained new from local dealerships for

each of the California-certified vehicles, and were supplied by CONCAWE on a similar basis for

the European vehicles. This included the underfloor catalyst(s), any close-coupled catalyst(s),

and pre- and post-catalyst oxygen sensors. The catalyst systems were aged for 90 hours (120,000

mile equivalent) using the Rapid Aging Test-A (RAT-A) protocol [29]. Catalysts were

configured for the SwRI aging cell at CE-CERT prior to shipment. All catalysts were aged in

pairs using a single engine with the RAT-A temperature profile maintained for each catalyst. The

aged catalysts for 6 of the test vehicles were used in a companion program to investigate oil

sulfur effects [27]. All catalyst systems were aged using a specially formulated ultra-low 0.2

ppmw sulfur gasoline and a zero-sulfur oil [27]. The aging protocol is discussed in greater detail

in Appendix B.

2.4 Test Sequence

A flow chart for the E-60 project is provided in Figure 1 and is outlined briefly below.

Prior to testing on any of the fuel/catalyst combinations, a sequence including an oil change to

the low-sulfur oil and a multiple drain and fill for the fuel was conducted. The multiple drain and

fill procedure was used for the fuel to ensure the in-use fuel in the vehicle’s tank at the time it

was received was fully purged from the system [30]. After completion of the drain and fill

sequence, a cycle to remove residual sulfur from the catalyst was run, consisting of 10 wide-open

throttle (WOT) events. This cycle is described in greater detail in Appendix C.

The vehicles were conditioned on each test fuel over a period of approximately 10 back-to-back

LA4 cycles. This driving was conducted on the surface streets near the Bourns College of

Engineering Center for Environmental Research and Technology (CE-CERT) facility. The route

was designed to have similar driving conditions to the LA4 including a number of stops and

similar speed ranges. After completing the 10 LA4 equivalents on the road, a final LA4 was

conducted on the dynamometer. The vehicle was then soaked for a period of 12-36 hours prior to

running the emissions test sequence.

The test cycles for this project were the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and US06 cycles for the

California-certified vehicles. The test cycles were run in duplicate with a third test conducted if

the emissions between the two FTPs differed by more than the following criteria: HC 33%, NO

x

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 4 No

No No

Yes

Repeat for Phase 2

Aged cat. Has 5 pp m

(nominal) S tes t

fuel been run?

Has 30 pp m

(nominal) S tes t

fuel been run?

Has 150 pp m

(nominal) S tes t

fuel been run? Yes

Yes

Yes

Have 2 vali d

FTPs been ru n

and p ass Q C? Drain and 80% fill with

desired test fuel

Run 10 back-to-back LA4s (on-road)

12

– 36 hour soak

Run with canister

in as

- received state

Run FTP

(record tailpipe & engineout emissions, NH 3 

# before

and after cat., F/A, and 3WC

tem p erature )

Run US06

(record tailpipe & engineout emissions, NH 3 

# before

and after cat., F/A, and 3WC

temperature) No Collect a fuel sample

before first test on fuel Run 1 LA4 on Dyno

Drain and 40% fill with

desired test fuel R

u

n at i d l e f o r 2 min utes

Run 10-WOT cycles with

3WC tem p > 700C and lambda < 0.9 Dri ve 1 0 mil es Run at idle for 2 minutes

Drain and 40% fill with

5 pp m sulfur fuel Start

Test Phase 1 – As rec’d cat.

Test Phase 2

– A g ed cat.

Drain and fill with

low sulfur oil

Drain and fill with 4 gallons of

5 ppm (nominal) CaPh 2 fuel

Drive 10 miles

Drain and fill with 4 gallons

of 5 pp m CaPh 2 fuel

Drain and fill with 4 gallons of

5 ppm CaPh 2 fuel 

# Figure 1. Flow Chart for CRC Project No. E-60

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 5 29%, and CO 70%. The European vehicles were tested over a similar test sequence, although the

NEDC cycle was run in place of the FTP cycle and was followed by the US06. Following the

NEDC test sequence, duplicate FTPs were also run on the European vehicles at each test matrix

point, with a third test run where the testing criteria were exceeded. For 3 of the 168 FTP test

sequences and 3 of the 12 NEDC test sequences, triplicate tests were not conducted for vehicles

exceeding the test criteria. This was due in part to logistical and other reasons, including the need

to return vehicles to their owners. Although these specific paired sequences may have slightly

more variability than other pairs, these differences did not have any significant impacts on the

overall results.

For each vehicle, the fuels were tested in order of ascending fuel sulfur level, moving

sequentially from the 5 ppm level to the 30 ppm level to the 150 ppm sulfur level. This test

sequence minimized the possibility of sulfur carry-over from one test to the next. Keeping repeat

tests to the minimum necessary to produce reliable results, allowed the maximum number of test

vehicles to be evaluated. Although the procedure does not incorporate true long term repeat tests,

or randomization of test fuel order, the fact that each fuel was tested on a number of vehicles

allows consistent trends to be identified. The statistical analyses of the data should be evaluated

bearing these factors in mind.

The vehicles were tested on both the as-received and aged catalysts. In each case, tests on all

fuels were completed before changing the catalyst configuration. The order in which the catalyst

configurations were tested was determined in part by the logistics of the project. The 6 vehicles

tested in the E-61 program were already configured with the aged catalyst and hence were tested

on the aged catalysts first [27]. The two European vehicles were also tested on the aged catalyst

first so they were configured for return shipment following testing. The remaining vehicles were

tested with the as-received catalyst first followed by the aged catalyst.

2.5 Vehicle Emissions Measurements

2.5.1 Regulated Pollutants

All tests were conducted in CE-CERT’s Vehicle Emissions Research Laboratory (VERL)

equipped with a Burke E. Porter 48-inch single-roll electric dynamometer. For these tests,

standard bag measurements were obtained for total hydrocarbons (THC), non-methane

hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO

x 

# ) and carbon dioxide

(CO 2 

# ). Modal tailpipe and engine-out measurements were also taken for THC, NMHC, NO

x 

# , CO,

and CO 2 

# . Bag measurements were conducted with a Pierburg AMA-4000 bench while the preand post-catalyst emissions were made with a Pierburg AMA-2000 emissions bench. Both the

AMA-4000 and the AMA-2000 emission benches incorporate a separate methane (CH 4 

# ) analyzer

for the determination of the NMHC.

2.5.2 NH 3 

# Tunable Diode Laser Measurements

The primary NH 3 

# measurements were made for both engine-out and tailpipe emissions on a realtime basis using a tunable diode laser infrared absorption spectrometer (TDL). The TDL

provides significant advantages over other methodologies in quantifying low levels of NH 3 

# from

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 6 vehicle exhaust. Previous studies have used techniques such as citric acid coated filters [31] or

Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy [23] typically through a dilution tunnel. While

these techniques provide some information about the integrated NH 3 

# emissions from vehicles,

the adsorption/desorption of NH 3 

# to and from surfaces in the lines transferring to the tunnel and

the dilution tunnel itself complicate these measurements. The dilution process itself also reduces

the NH 3 

# concentration levels in the tunnel, making it difficult to measure NH 3 

# from vehicles with

low emission rates.

An important step in reducing the adsorption/desorption effects for NH 3 

# is measurement in the

raw exhaust. Both citric acid coated filters and FTIR have disadvantages in this regard. Citric

acid coated filters can be used to determine integrated concentrations from the raw exhaust, but

over transient cycles, these concentration levels can not be correlated with the exhaust flow rate

to enable determination of the mass emission rate. FTIR can be used for raw exhaust

measurements, but to obtain comparable detection limits, the FTIR requires a considerably larger

sample cell. With the large sample cell and corresponding longer sample residence time, it again

becomes more difficult to obtain an accurate concentration vs. time profile that can be correlated

with the exhaust flow. This is further illustrated in Section 2.5.3.

TDL has already been applied to measurements of vehicle exhaust for the measurement of other

infrared absorbing gases such as CO, CO 2 

# , and formaldehyde (HCHO) [32-33]. The distinction

here is that the other measurements were done via extraction and dilution into a multi-path

reflective cell at mid-infrared wavelengths, whereas the system constructed and developed for

this project employed measurements of the raw exhaust, without modification, in the near

infrared wavelength region. TDL spectroscopy offers the specificity, sensitivity and response

time necessary to investigate low-level concentrations of exhaust gases. Additionally, the TDL

has the important advantage that it can make measurements in-situ using raw exhaust gases [34].

The combination of these advantages in the configuration described below allowed the

measurement of highly time-resolved engine-out and tailpipe NH 3 

# emissions with sensitivity

levels at two standard deviations of better than 0.5 ppmv, or minimum detection limits of

roughly 0.5 mg/mi.

The TDL optics were installed in conjunction with the existing exhaust sampling lines for

measuring raw pre- and post-catalyst emissions. This was done by installing a short 2-meter

section into the sample line, basically making the TDL sampling system a part of the line. Figure

2 is a picture of the installation. The 2-meter sections were fabricated using 1-inch inner diameter

stainless steel tubes that were electroplated with a Ni alloy to passivate the surface. The

corresponding sampling cell volume is approximately 1 liter. The sampling system was heated at

temperatures between 120 and 130°C to prevent condensation or adsorption in the sampling

lines. With a constant sampling rate of 20 liters per minute (lpm), this sampling configuration

has a residence time for the sample gas in the cell of just over 2 seconds. Sealed quartz windows

were placed at diametrically opposed ends of the section.

The optical system was configured in a monostatic mode with a transmitting/receiving assembly

on one side and a retroreflector on the other side. This was done to enhance sensitivity by

doubling the effective optical pathlength of the 2-meter section to 4-meters. With the 4-meter

pathlength, the signal noise at two times the standard deviation was found to be better than 0.5

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 7 ppmv for a 2-second averaging time. The transmitter/receiver assembly contained a variable

focal length grin lens with a perforated, off-axis parabolic mirror (OAP) as the collector. The

laser beam was sent via fiber optic cable (FC-APC 9 micrometer) that connected to the lens

assembly. The divergent beam was then slightly focused so that it was 0.5-inch in diameter when

hitting the surface of the retroreflector and continued to expand to 1-inch when returning to the

collecting OAP. The beam traveled through the optical center of the OAP where there was a

small 1/8-inch diameter perforation. The GaAS detector was placed at the focal point of the OAP

and received the raw modulated signal. The subsequent output was returned to the controller via

coaxial cable and analyzed employing signal processing techniques.

Figure 2. Configuration of the TDL Sampling System

The single mode laser light for the TDL was created by running an electrical current through a

diode crystal to create light with a specific wavelength in the near infrared spectral region. For

NH 3 

# , a GaAs diode laser was used to optimize the radiation to a wavelength near 1.512 μm. The

GaAs laser can be operated at room temperature. The TDL system employed for the study was a

UNISEARCH Associates LasIR. The instrument was configured with a three-way optical beam

splitter that sent 45% of the total laser energy to each of the two channels, allowing for the

measurement of both engine-out and tailpipe emissions at these levels. The 10% third channel

was used to locate and lock the emission wavelength of the laser by passing it through a small

cell that contains a high concentration of the target gas (NH 3 

# ).

An important characteristic of the tunable diode laser is that the wavelength at which it emits

changes very slightly over a small spectral range (1 nm) with the electric current passing through

it. This makes it possible to scan across the entire selected absorption line of the target gas as

well as the region where the target gas does not absorb. By scanning the absorption feature prior

to the target gas absorption, deviations in overall laser intensity can be measured, providing

enhanced sensitivity. The TDL performs each such scan in a period of 1/60 th 

# of a second. Two-

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 8 tone FM modulation techniques were used to filter out any stray signals and to improve the

signal-to-noise resolution. More details on the signal processing for the TDL can be found in

Appendix D.

Verification of the TDL accuracy was done using calibration gas levels between 10 and 150

ppmv. A calibration curve is provided in Appendix D. Although some calibration gases are

certified from the producer with accuracies of better than ±5%, it has been suggested that

accuracies of <10% are difficult to achieve with NH 3 

# [35]. The calibration gas used for most of

the verification tests and daily testing calibrations was certified with an accuracy of ±10%. The

TDL readings were compared with measurements obtained from citric acid-coated filters at

various positions in the sampling train. The results showed agreement within 10% for an NH 3 

# calibration gas level of 150 ppm, as shown in Appendix D. Daily test calibrations were

conducted in-situ by injecting the calibration gas into the raw exhaust stream under idle

conditions.

In calibrating the TDL measurements, it was also important to evaluate temperature and pressure

effects. This is primarily important for the more aggressive portions of driving cycles such as the

US06 where pressures and temperatures can increase in the sampling lines. At higher pressures

and temperatures, the TDL lineshape can broaden, affecting the measured intensity. Since the

sample cell is of a fixed volume, pressure and temperature also can affect the number of

molecules in the sampling cell, which in turn can affect the measured intensity. Plots of the

pressure and temperature dependence of the TDL signal over a full range of conditions are

provided in Appendix D.

The dual channel capability of the TDL allowed the measurement of engine-out and tailpipe

emissions simultaneously. The TDL was configured to provide data once every 2 seconds for

both the engine-out and tailpipe emissions. For each channel, data were integrated over a 2-

second dwell time, with sampling alternating between engine-out and tailpipe measurements

each second. Second-by-second NH 3 

# concentrations were obtained from the 2-second TDL

readings using a linear extrapolation. The concentrations were then converted into mass

emissions rates by multiplying by the density of NH 3 

# and the time-aligned exhaust flow rate.

Similar procedures have been used previously in analysis of second-by-second data for regulated

pollutants for the development of CE-CERT’s Comprehensive Modal Emissions Model

(CMEM) [36]. The exhaust flow rate was determined on a second-by-second basis using the CO 2 

# tracer method. Temperature and pressure corrections were applied to the TDL data based on

second-by-second measurements made in the sampling cell.

2.5.3 Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy Measurements

A Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) system was also used to measure NH 3 

# and N 2 

# O emissions.

This instrument samples through the dilution tunnel. The instrument collects one set of values

every 3 seconds. The absorption cell for the FTIR has a volume of approximately 5 liters and a

residence time of approximately 10 seconds. Other pollutants such as formaldehyde,

acetaldehyde, benzene, and 1,3-butadiene are also available with the FTIR, but the detection

limits for these compounds exceed the diluted concentration levels for the vehicles tested in this

program.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 9 A comparison of real-time measurements made using the FTIR and TDL instruments is

presented in Figure 3 for bag 1 of an FTP. To compensate for the 3-second sampling time for the

FTIR, a 3-second average was applied to the data. The results show that the FTIR measurements

are considerably broader than the TDL measurements. Typically, the FTIR measurements

underestimate the maximum NH 3 

# emission rates but have an extended tail after the peak in NH 3



# emissions. It should be noted the NH 3 

# mass emission rates for these two measurements were very

similar at 88 mg/mi for the TDL and 84 mg/mi for the FTIR.

The observed differences in Figure 3 can be attributed to the longer residence time in the FTIR

sampling cell as well as adsorption/desorption effects that occur as the sample travels through the

dilution tunnel. A well-mixed cell model can be used to mathematically adjust for the differences

in the residence times for the two instruments [37]. The FTIR measurements become sharper

when the well-mixed cell model is used, but they are still more diffuse than those of the TDL

signal and exhibit a tail. Overall, the comparisons between the TDL and FTIR are reasonably

good. Some differences can be attributed to differences in the sampling methodologies. For

lower-emitting vehicles (i.e., below 10 mg/mi), the FTIR was typically found to underestimate

the NH 3 

# concentration since the peak NH 3 

# emissions could not be measured as accurately and the

emission levels in the tail region fell below the detection limits. For cycles with aggressive

driving segments near the end of the test, such as the US06, an additional problem occurs in that

the tail cannot be fully quantified prior to the conclusion of the test cycle. It should be noted that

since the FTIR is designed to make measurements from the dilution tunnel, the transfer tube was

wrapped with a heating pad that was maintained at a temperature of 120oC. This helps to

minimize the loss of ammonia in the transfer tube between the exhaust pipe and the dilution

tunnel.

2.6 Statistical Analysis

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were performed for each pollutant to determine the

statistical significance of fuel sulfur and catalyst age effects and any corresponding interactions

between the design test variables (vehicle, fuel, and catalyst age). The data were analyzed using

the average data values for repeat tests on each vehicle/fuel/catalyst combination. The analysis

approach used was a 3-way ANOVA using fuel sulfur level and catalyst age as fixed effects and

vehicles as a random effect. The ANOVA analyses were conducted using a PC/SAS system from

SAS Institute, Inc.

The ANOVA analyses were run using up to four different data set versions. The primary

conclusions from the statistical analyses were based on a data set using the natural logarithm of

the arithmetic averages for each vehicle/fuel/catalyst combination. For this data set only the

California-certified vehicles were used since the European vehicles are certified over the NEDC,

as opposed to the FTP. Separate analyses were also conducted using the entire fleet including the

European vehicles. From a statistical point of view, analyses using the logarithmic transform of

the data were used since previous studies have shown that emissions variance is relatively

constant as a percentage of the emission level. In other words, vehicles with higher emission

levels will tend to have a higher variability on an absolute basis than those with lower emissionsUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles10Figure 3. Comparison of FTIR and TDLNH3Measurements0123456789100 100 200 300 400 500Time (sec) 

# NH 3 

# Emissions (mg)0102030405060708090



# Velocity (mph)TDL -NH3FTIR - NH3Velocity

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 11 levels. Taking the logarithm of the data helps to provide a more constant variability across the

range of the data set. For this data set, outlier tests were also removed based on the HawkinsPerold test. A similar technique was used in previous Auto/Oil Air Quality Research Programs

where similar data sets were investigated [38]. The Hawkins-Perold test was applied to run sets

where triplet or quadruplet data were obtained. Using the Hawkins-Perold test, an entire FTP test

was rejected as an outlier if at least two of the three composite emissions, i.e., NMHC, CO, and

NO

x 

# , for that test fell outside the limits specified by the Hawkins-Perold two-sided test at the

probability of p=0.10. This methodology is described in greater detail in ref. 38. On the basis of

the Hawkins-Perold test, only 2 FTP and 2 US06 tests were found to be outliers for 2 or more

regulated emissions.

The ANOVA analyses were also run using different data sets to ensure the conclusions were

consistent. Other data sets examined included a data set using the arithmetic averages for each

vehicle/fuel/catalyst combination with the outliers removed, a data set using the arithmetic

averages with outliers not removed, and a data set using the natural logarithm of the arithmetic

averages with outliers not removed. In most cases, statistically significant effects observed for

the base analysis case were also found for the other analysis cases.

The statistical significance of the fuel effects between the 5, 30, and 150 ppm fuel sulfur levels

was also examined using pair-wise difference comparisons. The pair-wise comparisons were

conducted using a least squares means test with a Tukey adjustment. Pair-wise comparisons that

were statistically significant at the 90% confidence level (p=0.10) are included as well as those

that were statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (p=0.05). Instances where

comparisons are only statistically significant at the 90% confidence level are noted in the text.

In cases where statistically significant interactions were found between different factors, such as

vehicle and catalyst, some additional analyses were conducted. In particular, statistically

significant interactions between factors such as vehicle and catalyst indicate that the catalyst

effects can differ for different vehicles. In such cases, interaction plots were developed showing

the catalyst/fuel effects for each of the individual vehicles, as discussed further below. For cases

where specific vehicles showed different trends than those of other vehicles, additional ANOVA

analyses were sometimes conducted with those vehicles eliminated to determine the sensitivity

of the analysis to that particular vehicle.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 12 

# 3. Results

3.1 FTP Emissions Results

The fleet average FTP results for NH 3 

# , NMHC, CO, NO

x 

# and N 2 

# O are presented in Figure 4.

This Figure shows the average emission results on each fuel/catalyst combination for each of the

12 California-certified test vehicles. As discussed in section 2.6, the main results and analyses

are presented using only the California-certified fleet, since the California-certified and European

vehicles are not certified to the same standard. Some additional analyses with the European

vehicles included are also provided in Section 3.3.2. The averages in Figure 4 and throughout the

results section also exclude tests determined to be outliers by the Hawkins-Perold test. In Figure

4, the CO emissions are divided by 10 to allow the changes for all emissions to be more clearly

presented. The TDL NH 3 

# measurements were used for all analysis of NH 3 

# emissions since these

measurements are more representative of the actual tailpipe NH 3 

# emissions, as discussed in

Section 2.5. The error bars in Figure 4 and other figures presenting fleet average results represent

half of the least significant difference, as determined from the statistical analysis. More complete

test results are provided in Appendix E. Complete ANOVA analysis results are provided in

Appendix F for the FTP.

3.1.1 FTP NH 3 

# Emissions

The FTP NH 3 

# emissions results are presented in Table 2 for each of the test fuels and the two

catalyst configurations. The individual vehicle results for NH 3 

# emissions are presented in Figure

5. NH 3 

# emissions over the FTP were generally lower than those of the regulated pollutants. Fleet

average FTP NH 3 

# emissions averaged between 14 and 21 mg/mi depending on the fuel/catalyst

combination. Five of the test vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions below 5 mg/mi for most of the test

configurations, although NH 3 

# emissions for some of these vehicles were slightly higher for the

150 ppm fuel sulfur with aged catalyst configuration. Only 4 vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions over 20

mg/mi when averaged over all test configurations.

Table 2. FTP NH 3 

# Emissions Results (mg/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 16 OE 14*

30 16 Aged 21*

150 19

*: Statistically significant catalyst differences.

The NH 3 

# emissions for the aged catalysts were found to be 50% higher than those for the asreceived catalysts. The difference in NH 3 

# emissions for the different catalysts was found to be

statistically significant (p=0.0212). The vehicle by catalyst interaction was also statistically

significant at the 90% confidence level, indicating that there were differences in catalyst age

effects for different vehicles. To examine the vehicle by catalyst interaction, an interaction plot

of catalyst effects vs. vehicle was developed. The interaction plot is presented in Figure 6 and

shows the paired catalyst results for each of the individual vehicles. The interaction plots show

that for most vehicles the emissions on the as-received catalyst were either similar to or higher

than those for the aged catalyst. For vehicles that are relatively insensitive to catalyst age, some

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 13 tests and vehicles could have slightly higher emissions for the as-received catalysts due to

variability between test runs. Thus, the vehicle by catalyst interaction can be attributed to a

subset of vehicles in the fleet whose NH 3 

# emissions were relatively insensitive to catalyst age or

showed a reverse effect. Of these vehicles, the Jeep showed the most significant deviation from

the expected trend of higher emissions for the aged catalyst. To evaluate the sensitivity of the

ANOVA analyses to the results for the Jeep, an additional ANOVA was conducted with the Jeep

results excluded. Interestingly, with the removal of the Jeep, the vehicle by catalyst interaction

was no longer statistically significant (p=0.1672), while the catalyst effect remained statistically

significant (p=0.0021).

Fuel effects were not found to be statistically significant over the fleet for NH 3 

# emissions. This is

in contrast with some previous studies that have shown NH 3 

# emissions can have a tendency to

decrease with increasing fuel sulfur levels [20-23]. More recent studies have shown fuel sulfur to

have mixed effects on NH 3 

# emissions over the FTP or other similar cycles, however [24,25].

Since the FTP is composed of individual segments of driving comprising cold start conditions

(bag 1), hot stabilized driving (bag 2), and hot start driving (bag 3), separate analyses were

conducted for each of the individual bags to examine the differences in driving on fuel sulfur and

catalyst effects. NH 3 

# emissions for individual FTP bags are presented in Figure 7. Interestingly,

NH 3 

# emissions are highest for bag 1, similar to other emissions. A plot of real-time NH 3 

# emissions, as shown in Figure 8, indicates that the peak in NH 3 

# emissions does not occur prior to

catalyst light-off, but rather immediately after catalyst light-off. The real-time NH 3 

# emissions

plot also shows that NH 3 

# emissions are transient in nature, with emission peaks corresponding to

periods of acceleration.

In general, the data for all three bags show higher emissions for the aged catalysts, similar to the

trends observed for the weighted emissions. The average NH 3 

# results for individual bags for the

three test fuels and two catalyst configurations are presented in Table 3. Statistically significant

catalyst effects were found for bags 1 and 2, but not for bag 3. The vehicle by catalyst interaction

was also found to be statistically significant at the 90% confidence level for bag 1. Fuel sulfur

effects were not found to be statistically significant for any of the FTP bags.

Table 3. FTP NH 3 

# Emissions for Individual Bags (mg/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 37 12 9 

# OE 32* 10* 8



# 30 34 13 10 

# Aged 40* 17* 14



# 150 38 14 14



# *: Statistically significant catalyst differences.

Measurements of engine-out NH 3 

# emissions were consistent with the idea that NH 3 

# emissions are

formed primarily over the catalyst. Engine-out emissions profiles for a number of vehicles did

show a few small peaks, on the order of 2-5 ppm, but the contribution of the peaks was typically

below 1 mg/mi. The Toyota Camry did show some higher peaks in NH 3 

# emissions, but these

generally occurred during deceleration. The engine-out mass emission rates for the Toyota were

around 5 mg/mi or less. It is possible that NH 3 

# could build up on surfaces in and around the

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 14 closed coupled catalyst during other portions of the cycle and subsequently degas during

deceleration. It is also possible that some other catalytic surface may be upstream of the closed

coupled catalyst. Higher NH 3 

# emissions were also observed for the Dodge Neon, which had

engine-out emissions in the range of 3 to 14 mg/mi. In order to better understand the nature of

the engine out emissions observed for the Toyota Camry or Dodge Neon further experimentation

would be required. In general, it can be concluded that for most vehicles NH 3 

# is not formed in

appreciable amounts during the combustion process.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles15Figure 4. Fleet Average FTP EmissionsValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant differenceUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles16Figure 5. FTP Individual Vehicle NH3EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles17Figure 6. NH3Interaction Plot for Vehicle by Catalyst EffectsValues are the average of all fuel combinations at the conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles18Figure 7. NH3Emissions by BagValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant differenceUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles19Figure 8. Real-Time NH3Emissionsover the FTP for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck0246810120 500 1000 1500 2000 2500Time (sec) 

# NH 3 

# Emissions (mg/s)010203040506070



# Velocity (mph)TDL-NH3Velocity

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 20 3.1.2 FTP NMHC Emissions

FTP NMHC emissions results are presented in Table 4 for each of the test fuels and the two

catalyst configurations. Similar results for THC are also provided in Appendix G. Average

NMHC emissions for each vehicle at each of the fuel/catalyst test matrix points are presented in

Figure 9. Although a statistically significant difference was observed between the fleet average

NMHC emissions for the 150 ppm sulfur fuel compared with the 30 ppm fuel, the magnitude of

this difference was small. The effects of catalyst age were not statistically significant for the

fleet.

Table 4. FTP NMHC Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.044 OE 0.043

30 0.042 c 

# Aged 0.044

150 0.045 b



# b: Statistically significant difference from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant difference from 150 ppm;

A comparison of NMHC emissions for the different bags is presented in Figure 10. The bag 1

NMHC emissions are divided by 20 to allow the results for all three bags to be presented on the

same plot. Table 5 presents the average FTP NMHC emissions by bag for the three test fuels and

two catalyst configurations. Some statistically significant fuel differences were found for bag 2

between the 5 and 150 ppm fuels and for bag 3 at the 90% confidence level between the 30 and

150 ppm fuels, but these differences were relatively small in magnitude. Catalyst effects were

only found to be statistically significant for bag 3, although again the difference was small on an

absolute basis. The vehicle by fuel and vehicle by catalyst interactions were both statistically

significant for the bag 3 results.

Table 5. FTP NMHC Emissions Results for Individual Bags (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 0.189 0.004 c 

# 0.009 

# OE 0.185 0.005 0.009*



# 30 0.180 0.004 0.009 c 

# Aged 0.188 0.004 0.011*



# 150 0.190 0.005 a 

# 0.012 b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant difference between catalysts.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles21Figure 9. FTP Individual Vehicle NMHC EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles22Figure 10. NMHC Emissions by BagValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant difference

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 23 3.1.3 FTP CO Emissions

FTP CO emissions are presented in Table 6 for each of the test fuels and the two catalyst

configurations. The FTP CO emissions for individual vehicles are shown in Figure 11.

Table 6. FTP CO Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.654 OE 0.626*

30 0.639 Aged 0.702*

150 0.699

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.

On a fleet average basis, CO emissions were approximately 12% higher for the tests conducted

on the aged catalysts than on the as-received catalysts. The ANOVA analyses showed that the

effects of catalyst age on CO emissions were statistically significant. Fuel effects on CO

emissions were not found to be statistically significant for the fleet average.

The results of FTP CO emissions for individual bags are presented in Figure 12 and in Table 7.

In Figure 12, bag 1 CO emissions are divided by a factor of 20. ANOVA analyses showed that

statistically significant catalyst effects were found for bags 1 and 3, although the vehicle by

catalyst interaction was found to be statistically significant at the 90% confidence level for bag 1.

Fuel differences were only found to be statistically significant for bag 2 between the 5 and 150

ppm fuels. It should be noted in Figure 12 that the steep increase in emissions for the 150 ppmaged configuration for bag 3 CO emissions is due in part to high bag 3 emissions for the Buick

LeSabre on this test configuration.

Table 7. FTP CO Emissions Results for Individual Bags (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 2.890 0.070 c 

# 0.065 

# OE 2.758* 0.075 0.056*



# 30 2.818 0.079 0.053 

# Aged 3.042* 0.085 0.100*



# 150 2.992 0.091 a 

# 0.115



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles24Figure 11. FTP Individual Vehicle CO EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles25Figure 12. CO Emissions by BagValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant difference

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 26 3.1.4 FTP NO

x 

# Emissions

FTP NO

x 

# emissions are presented in Table 8 for each of the test fuels and the two catalyst

configurations. Individual vehicle results for FTP NO

x 

# are presented in Figure 13. Fleet average

NO

x 

# emissions showed an increase in emissions with increasing fuel sulfur level, as shown in

Figure 4 and Table 8. Pair-wise tests comparing the three fuel sulfur levels indicated that

statistically significant differences were found between the 150 ppm fuel and the 5 ppm fuel.

Statistically significant differences for NO

x 

# emissions were also found between the 150 and 30

ppm fuels, but only at the 90% confidence level. Fleet average NO

x 

# emissions for the 150 ppm

fuel were 45% higher than those for the 5 ppm fuel and 29% higher than those for the 30 ppm

fuel. A statistically significant vehicle by fuel interaction was found, however, indicating some

difference in the sensitivity of individual vehicles to fuel sulfur level. The effect of catalyst age

on fleet average NO

x 

# emissions was not statistically significant.

Table 8. FTP NO

x 

# Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.049 c 

# OE 0.053

30 0.055 c 

# Aged 0.064

150 0.071 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

Fleet average NO

x 

# emissions for the individual bags are presented in Figure 14. For this Figure,

bag 2 NO

x 

# emissions were multiplied by a factor of 5 to allow all of the bags to be presented in

the same plot. The results of FTP NO

x 

# emissions for individual bags are presented in Table 9 for

the three test fuels and two catalyst configurations. For fuel effects, the statistical analysis for the

individual bags was similar to the results for the weighted emissions, with statistically significant

fuel effects, but also statistically significant vehicle by fuel interactions. Statistically significant

differences in NO

x 

# emissions between the 5 and 150 ppm were found for all three bags. The

differences between the 150 and 30 ppm fuels for bag 2 were also statistically significant, but

only at the 90% confidence level. A statistically significant vehicle by fuel interaction was found

for bags 1 and 2. Catalyst effects were not statistically significant for the individual bags,

consistent with the FTP weighted results.

Table 9. FTP NO

x 

# Emissions Results for Individual Bags (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 0.120 c 

# 0.016 c 

# 0.057 c 

# OE 0.131 0.014 0.068



# 30 0.126 0.019 c 

# 0.070 

# Aged 0.129 0.029 0.081



# 150 0.143 a 

# 0.029 a,b 

# 0.095 a



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles27Figure 13. FTP Individual Vehicle NOxEmissionsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles28Figure 14. NOxEmissions by BagValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant difference

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 29 3.1.5 FTP N 2 

# O Emissions

The individual vehicle results for N 2 

# O are presented in Figure 15. Similar to NH 3 

# , the N 2 

# O

emissions over the FTP were generally lower than those of the regulated pollutants. Only three

vehicles had N 2 

# O emissions over 10 mg/mi averaged for most of the test configurations. Several

other vehicles also had N 2 

# O emissions over 10 mg/mi, but only for tests conducted on 150 ppm

fuel. It is worth noting that no N 2 

# O emissions are available for the Renault for the aged

catalyst/30 ppm fuel configuration due to a problem with the FTIR at the time of the test.

FTP N 2 

# O emissions are presented in Table 10 for the three fuel sulfur levels and the two catalyst

configurations. The results show an increase in N 2 

# O emissions with increasing fuel sulfur level

that was statistically significant. Pair-wise comparisons showed that the N 2 

# O emissions for the

150 ppm fuel were higher at a statistically significant level compared to the 30 and 5 ppm fuels.

This is trend is consistent with previous studies that have shown that higher N 2 

# O emissions are

generally observed for higher sulfur fuels [24,25]. Statistically significant differences in N 2 

# O

emissions were not found between the as-received and the aged catalyst.

Table 10. FTP N 2 

# O Emissions Results (mg/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 6 c 

# OE 9

30 7 c 

# Aged 11

150 17 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

N 2 

# O emissions for individual FTP bags are presented in Figure 16. N 2 

# O emissions were found to

be the highest for bag 1 followed by bag 3 of the FTP. Although N 2 

# O is considered to be a by

product of reactions on the catalyst, previous studies have shown that N 2 

# O it is more readily

formed at intermediate temperatures in the range of ~250°C-450°C [39-43]. Since such

temperatures are typically found when the catalyst is warming up to operational temperatures, it

is not surprising that N 2 

# O emissions are highest during bags 1 and 3, which include a start-up

component. A plot of real-time N 2 

# O emissions is provided in Figure 17. Consistent with the

results for the weighted FTP, statistically significant fuel effects were found for bags 1 and 3.

Pair-wise comparisons showed that for N 2 

# O emissions the 150 ppm fuel was higher at a

statistically significant level compared to the 5 and 30 ppm fuels for bags 1 and 3, although the

vehicle by fuel interaction was statistically significant for bag 3. Fuel effects for bag 2 were

statistically significant between the 30 and 150 ppm fuels, but only at the 90% confidence level.

Statistically significant catalyst effects on N 2 

# O emissions were only found for bag 3.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 30 Table 11. FTP N 2 

# O Emissions for Individual Bags (mg/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 14 c 

# 1 7 c 

# OE 18 5 12*



# 30 16 c 

# 2 c 

# 10 c 

# Aged 19 4 16*



# 150 27 a,b 

# 10 b 

# 24 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles31Figure 15. FTP Individual Vehicle N2O EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles32Figure 16. N2O Emissions by BagValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant differenceUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles33Figure 17. Real-Time N2O Emissionsover the FTP for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck0.0001.0002.0003.0004.0005.0006.0000 500 1000 1500 2000 2500Time (sec) 

# N 2 

# O Emissions (mg/s)0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.00



# Velocity (mph)N2O EmissionsVelocity

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 34 3.2 US06 Emissions Results

The fleet average US06 emissions for NH 3 

# , NMHC, CO, NO

x 

# , and N 2 

# O are presented in Figure

18. This Figure shows the average emission results on each fuel/catalyst combination for each of

the 12 California-certified test vehicles. These averages exclude tests determined to be outliers

by the Hawkins-Perold test. The CO emissions are divided by 50 to allow the details for the other

emissions to be more clearly seen in the figure. More complete test results for the US06 are

provided in Appendix H. Complete ANOVA analysis results are provided in Appendix I for the

US06. It is worth noting that of the test vehicles, only the Buick LeSabre, Toyota Camry, and

Nissan Sentra were certified over the US06 cycle.

3.2.1 US06 NH 3 

# Emissions

As shown in Figure 18, NH 3 

# emissions over the US06 were considerably higher than those found

for the FTP and showed slightly higher fleet averages for the tests conducted with higher fuel

sulfur levels and aged catalysts. The fleet average results for NH 3 

# emissions by fuel and by

catalyst for all test configurations are presented in Table 12. The higher NH 3 

# emissions over the

US06 cycle can primarily be attributed to higher emissions during periods of aggressive

acceleration. This is shown in Figure 19, which shows a plot of NH 3 

# vs. time for the US06 for

one of the test vehicles.

Table 12. US06 NH 3 

# Emissions Results (mg/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 74 c 

# OE 77*

30 83 c 

# Aged 90*

150 94 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant catalyst differences at 90% confidence level.

ANOVA analyses showed that the fuel effects were statistically significant. Pair-wise tests

showed that the differences between NH 3 

# emissions for the 150 ppm fuel compared with both the

30 and 5 ppm fuels were statistically significant. Fleet average NH 3 

# emissions for the 150 ppm

fuel were 27% higher than those for the 5 ppm fuel and 12% higher than those for the 30 ppm

fuel. The individual vehicle results are presented in Figure 20 for US06 NH 3 

# emissions. It is

interesting to note that in a previous study of fuel sulfur effects in our laboratory on NH 3 

# emissions over the US06, it was found that a majority of the vehicles showed an opposite trend

of decreasing NH 3 

# emissions with a higher sulfur fuel [24]. In the previous study, however, at a

number of the test matrix points only single tests were performed. The vehicle conditioning for

that study was also less rigorous than that used in the present work.

NH 3 

# emissions for the aged catalysts were 17% higher than those for the as-received catalysts.

The effects of catalyst age were statistically significant, although at only the 90% confidence

level. The vehicle by catalyst interaction was also statistically significant, indicating that the

effects of catalyst age differed between vehicles, as shown in Figure 20.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles35Figure 18. Fleet Average US06 EmissionsValues are the average of all vehicle/fuel combination for the 12 U.S. vehicles at conditionError bars represent half of the least significant differenceUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles36Figure 19. Real-Time NH3Emissionsover the US06 for a ULEV Light-Duty Truck051015202530354045500 100 200 300 400 500 600Time (sec) 

# NH 3 

# Emissions (mg/s)0102030405060708090



# Velocity (mph)TDL-NH3VelocityUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles37Figure 20. US06 Individual Vehicle NH3EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 38 3.2.2 US06 NMHC Emissions

US06 fleet average NMHC emissions are presented in Table 13 for the three test fuels and two

catalysts. The individual vehicle data for the US06 NMHC emissions are presented in Figure 21.

NMHC emissions over the US06 showed more consistent trends for fuel sulfur level and catalyst

age. NMHC emissions were found to increase with increasing fuel sulfur levels. Overall, the fuel

sulfur trends were stronger over the US06 cycle compared to the FTP. Fleet average NMHC

emissions were found to increase by 64% from the 5 to 30 ppm fuels and by 178% from the 5 to

150 ppm fuels. NMHC emissions for tests conducted on the aged catalyst were approximately

22% higher than those for the as-received catalyst.

ANOVA analyses showed that fuel sulfur effects were statistically significant, although a

statistically significant vehicle by fuel interaction was also found. Pair-wise comparisons showed

that the 5, 30 and 150 ppm fuels were all different from each other for NMHC emissions over the

US06 cycle at a statistically significant level. Catalyst effects were also statistically significant at

the 90% confidence level, although the vehicle by catalyst interaction was statistically

significant.

Table 13. US06 NMHC Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.014 b,c 

# OE 0.023*

30 0.023 a,c 

# Aged 0.028*

150 0.039 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles39Figure 21. US06 Individual Vehicle NMHC EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 40 3.2.3 US06 CO Emissions

US06 CO emission results are shown in Table 14 for the three test fuels and the two catalyst

configurations. The individual vehicle results for CO are presented in Figure 22. CO emissions

for the aged catalysts were approximately 21% higher for the tests conducted on the aged

catalysts compared with the as-received catalysts. ANOVA analyses indicate that the differences

between catalysts were statistically significant at the 90% confidence level. A statistically

significant vehicle by catalyst interaction was also found, however, indicating some differences

in the effect of catalyst age for different vehicles. Fuel sulfur level effects were statistically

significant at the 90% confidence level between only the 5 and 150 ppm fuels.

Table 14. US06 CO Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 4.999 c 

# OE 4.796*

30 5.310 Aged 5.789*

150 5.568 a



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles41Figure 22. US06 Individual Vehicle CO EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 42 3.2.4 US06 NO

x 

# Emissions

Fuel effects on NO

x 

# emissions over the US06 were relatively strong as shown in Figure 18 and

Table 15. The individual vehicle data for the US06 NO

x 

# emissions are presented in Figure 23.

Fleet average NO

x 

# emissions compared with the 5 ppm fuel were 79% higher for the 30 ppm fuel

and 243% higher for the 150 ppm fuel. The ANOVA analysis results showed that fuel effects

were statistically significant. Pair-wise comparisons showed that the 5, 30, and 150 ppm fuels

were all different from each other at a statistically significant level.

Table 15. US06 NO

x 

# Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.042 b,c 

# OE 0.071*

30 0.075 a,c 

# Aged 0.102*

150 0.144 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*: Statistically significant differences between catalysts.

The fleet average NO

x 

# emissions for the aged catalysts were 44% higher than those for the asreceived catalysts for the US06. These catalyst age effects were found to be statistically

significant.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles43Figure 23. US06 Individual Vehicle NOxEmissionsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 44 3.2.4 US06 N 2 

# O Emissions

US06 N 2 

# O emission results are presented in Table 16 for the three fuels and the two catalyst

configurations. The individual vehicle results are presented in Figure 24 for US06 N 2 

# O

emissions. N 2 

# O emissions over the US06 were lower than those obtained over the FTP. This is

not surprising since N 2 

# O is more readily formed at intermediate catalyst temperatures, as

opposed to the higher temperatures observed over the US06 cycle. The ANOVA analysis results

showed that fuel effects were statistically significant for N 2 

# O emissions over the US06, while

catalyst effects were not. Pair-wise comparisons showed that the 5, 30 and 150 ppm fuels were

all different from each other for N 2 

# O emissions over the US06 cycle at a statistically significant

level. The absolute difference between the 5 and 30 ppm fuels was relatively small, however.

Table 16. US06 N 2 

# O Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

5 0.001 b,c 

# OE 0.004

30 0.003 a,c 

# Aged 0.006

150 0.011 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles45Figure 24. US06 Individual Vehicle N2O EmissionsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 46 3.3 European Vehicle Emissions Results

3.3.1 NEDC Emissions Results

The NEDC results for the VW Bora and Renault Megane are presented in Figures 25 and 26,

respectively, for NMHC, CO, NO

x 

# , and NH 3 

# . Complete NEDC results are provided in Appendix

J. For these graphs, the CO emissions for the Renault are divided by 5, the CO emissions for the

VW Bora are divided by 10, and the NH 3 

# emissions for the VW Bora are multiplied by 5 to

allow the features for all emissions to be presented in the Figures. In comparison with the other

cycles used in this project, the NEDC cycle is more similar to the FTP in that it includes a cold

start test portion and is not as aggressive as the US06 cycle.

For the Renault Megane, CO, NO

x 

# and NH 3 

# were all found to be higher for the tests conducted

on the aged catalyst in comparison with the as-received catalyst. NH 3 

# emissions also showed a

trend of lower emissions with decreasing fuel sulfur level for the Renault over the NEDC. It is

worth noting that a similar trend in NH 3 

# emissions was also observed for the aged catalyst over

the FTP (see Figure 5). For the VW Bora, fuel sulfur and catalyst effects generally did not have a

significant impact on emissions over the NEDC cycle, although it was found that NO

x 

# emissions

for the tests on the aged catalyst with the 5 and 30 ppm fuel were slightly higher than those for

the as-received catalysts.

The emissions results for the ECE and EUDC (Extra Urban Driving Cycle) segments of the

NEDC cycle are presented in Figures 27-30 for the VW Bora and the Renault Megane. The ECE

portion of the cycle is the first part that includes four iterations of the ECE driving trace and a

cold start. Since the cold start is the largest component of the overall emission rate, a majority of

the emissions are generated during the ECE portion of the cycle. The trends for the ECE cycle

are similar to those found for the total NEDC emissions.University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles47Figure 25. Renault Megane NEDC Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles48Figure 26. VW Bora NEDC Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles49Figure 27. Renault Megane ECE Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles50Figure 28. VW Bora ECE Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles51Figure 29. Renault Megane EUDC Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at conditionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles52Figure 30. VW Bora EUDC Emissions ResultsValues are the average of all tests at condition

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 53 3.3.2 FTP and US06 Emissions Including European Vehicles

Since the European vehicles were excluded from the averages and statistical analyses discussed

above, some additional analysis was done with these vehicles included. The results in Tables 17

and 18 show the FTP and US06 emissions for the NMHC, CO, NO

x 

# , NH 3 

# , and N 2 

# O with the

European vehicles included. Overall, the results with the inclusion of the European vehicles were

very similar to those obtained with just the U.S. vehicles. Statistical analyses for the results were

also similar for the cases where the European vehicles were excluded or included, as shown in

Appendices F and I. It is worth noting that over the FTP and US06, the European vehicles

generally fell within the range of emission levels found for the remaining vehicles in the fleet.

Table 17. FTP Emissions Results Including the European Vehicles (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

NMHC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O NMHC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

5 0.049 0.639 0.053 c 

# 0.016 0.005 c 

# OE 0.048 0.610 * 

# 0.055 0.013 * 

# 0.009

30 0.048 c 

# 0.629 0.059 c 

# 0.016 0.007 c 

# Aged 0.050 0.691 * 

# 0.067 0.020 * 

# 0.010

150 0.052 b 

# 0.682 0.072 a,b 

# 0.018 0.016 a,b



# Table 18. US06 Emissions Results Including the European Vehicles (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages

NMHC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O NMHC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

5 0.013 b,c 

# 4.564 0.043 b,c 

# 0.068 c 

# 0.001 b,c 

# OE 0.022 * 

# 4.229 * 

# 0.066 * 

# 0.071 0.003

30 0.021 a,c 

# 4.676 0.072 a,c 

# 0.076 c 

# 0.003 a,c 

# Aged 0.027 * 

# 5.233 * 

# 0.100 * 

# 0.082 0.006

150 0.038 a,b 

# 4.953 0.134 a,b 

# 0.086 a,b 

# 0.010 a,b



# a: Statistically significant different from 5 ppm;

b: Statistically significant different from 30 ppm;

c: Statistically significant different from 150 ppm;

*:Statistically significant differences between catalysts.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 54 

# 4. Summary and Conclusions

For this study, the emissions impact of fuel sulfur and catalyst age was evaluated for 14 vehicles.

The 14 vehicles included 12 California-certified LEV to SULEV vehicles and 2 European

vehicles. Each vehicle was evaluated using 3 fuels (5, 30, and 150 ppm sulfur) and using the asreceived and aged catalysts. Vehicles were tested on each fuel/catalyst configuration over the

FTP and US06 test cycles. The two European vehicles were also tested over the NEDC cycle on

each of the fuel/catalyst configurations. It should be noted that for the primary analyses, the

European vehicles were excluded from the data set since the European vehicles are certified to

different limits and procedures.

A tunable diode laser was developed and successfully used to measure engine-out and tailpipe

NH 3 

# in real-time. The TDL offers both the detection limits and the response time necessary to

investigate low-level concentrations of exhaust gases. Additionally, the TDL has the important

advantage in that it can make measurements in-situ using raw exhaust gases. The combination of

these advantages allows the measurement of highly time-resolved NH 3 

# emissions with sensitivity

levels of better than 0.5 ppmv at two standard deviations, or minimum detection limits of

roughly 0.5 mg/mi.

The major results of this study are:

NH 3 

# Emissions for the FTP and US06

• For the California-certified vehicles, NH 3 

# emissions over the FTP were generally lower than

those of the regulated emissions. Fleet average FTP NH 3 

# emissions averaged between 14 and

21 mg/mi depending on the fuel/catalyst combination. Five of the test vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions below 5 mg/mi for most of the test configurations. Only 4 vehicles had NH 3 

# emissions over 20 mg/mi when averaged over all test configurations. The highest NH 3 

# emissions were found during bag 1 of the FTP after catalyst light-off.

• NH 3 

# emissions over the US06 were considerably higher than those found for the FTP with

levels comparable with or greater than US06 emissions of other regulated emissions such as

NMHC and NO

x 

# .

• Measurements of engine-out NH 3 

# emissions indicated that NH 3 

# emissions were formed

primarily over the catalyst.

• Fuel sulfur content did not affect fleet average NH 3 

# emissions over the FTP. Over the US06

cycle, on the other hand, fuel sulfur effects were found to be statistically significant with

higher fleet average NH 3 

# emissions observed for increasing fuel sulfur level. Fleet average

NH 3 

# emissions over the US06 for the 150 ppm fuel were 27% higher than those for the 5

ppm and 12% higher than those for the 30 ppm fuel.

• 

# Catalyst aging effects on NH 3 

# emissions were found to be statistically significant for the FTP

and for the US06, with higher emissions for the aged catalysts. Fleet average NH 3 

# emissions

were 50% higher for the aged catalysts over the FTP and 17% higher for the aged catalysts

over the US06. A statistically significant vehicle by catalyst interaction was found, however,

for both the FTP and US06 cycles.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 55 Regulated and N 2



# O Emissions for the FTP

• For the FTP, fleet average NO

x 

# emissions were higher at a statistically significant level for

the 150 ppm fuel compared with both the 5 and 30 ppm sulfur fuels, although the vehicle by

fuel interaction was also statistically significant. For fleet average NMHC, emissions were

higher at statistically significant levels for the 150 ppm fuel compared with the 30 ppm fuel,

although the magnitude of this fuel effect was small.

• The effects of catalyst age were found to be statistically significant for fleet average CO

emissions, with higher emissions observed for the aged catalysts.

• Similar to NH 3 

# , the N 2 

# O emissions over the FTP were generally lower than those of the

regulated pollutants. The results showed there was a statistically significant increase in N 2 

# O

emissions for the 150 ppm fuel compared to both the 30 and 5 ppm fuels. This trend is

consistent with previous studies that have shown that higher N 2 

# O emissions are generally

observed for higher sulfur fuels. The highest N 2 

# O emissions for the FTP were found in bag 1,

as the catalyst is warming up to operational temperatures.

Regulated and N 2



# O Emissions for the US06

• The effects of fuel sulfur on both fleet average NMHC and NO

x 

# emissions were found to be

statistically significant over the US06 cycle, although a statistically significant vehicle by

fuel interaction was also found for NMHC. A pair-wise comparison showed that fuels with 5,

30 and 150 ppm sulfur were all different from one another at a statistically significant level

for both fleet average NO

x 

# and NMHC emissions over the US06 cycle. The magnitude of the

fuel sulfur effects over the US06 for NMHC and NO

x 

# was also found to be larger on a

relative basis than those found for the FTP cycle. For fleet average CO emissions, only the

fuel effects between the 5 and 150 ppm fuels were found to be statistically significant at the

90% confidence limits.

• Catalyst effects over the US06 were found to be statistically significant for fleet average

NMHC, CO, and NO

x 

# emissions, with higher emissions for the aged catalyst. The vehicle by

catalyst interaction was statistically significant, however, for both NMHC and CO emissions.

• Fleet average N 2 

# O emissions over the US06 were lower than those obtained over the FTP.

N 2 

# O emissions showed trends of higher emissions with increasing fuel sulfur level. Pair-wise

comparisons showed that the 5, 30 and 150 ppm fuels were all different from each other for

N 2 

# O emissions over the US06 cycle at a statistically significant level.

Emission Results for the European Vehicles

• 

# Overall, the fleet average FTP and US06 results with the inclusion of the European vehicles

were very similar to those obtained with just the U.S. vehicles.

• 

# Over the NEDC cycle, CO, NO

x 

# and NH 3 

# for the Renault Megane were all found to be higher

for the tests conducted on the aged catalyst in comparison with the as-received catalyst. For

the VW Bora, fuel sulfur and catalyst effects generally did not have a significant impact on

emissions over the NEDC cycle.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 56 

# 5.0 Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the contribution and support of the following individuals during the

course of this project. Dave Martis, Joseph Calhoun, Ross Rettig, Joe Gil, and Joe Valdez of the

Vehicle Emissions Research Laboratory (CE-CERT) performed the emissions testing on the

vehicles. We thank David Karecki of UNISEARCH Associates, Inc. for his assistance in the

verification of the TDL instrument. We thank Honda Research and Development America, Inc.,

and CONCAWE for providing test vehicles for this program. We thank the Coordinating

Research Council and CONCAWE for their financial support of this program under CRC

contract E-60.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 57 

# 6.0 References

1. Benson, J.D.; Burns, V.; Gorse, R.A.; Hochhauser, A.M.; Koehl, W.J.; Painter, L.J.; and

Reuter, R.M. (1991) Effects of Gasoline Sulfur Level on Mass Exhaust Emissions –

Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. SAE Paper 912323. Society of

Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

2. Koehl, W.J.; Gorse, R.A. Jr.; Knepper, J.C.; Rapp, L.A.; Benson, J.D.; Hochhauser, A.M.;

Leppard, W.R.; Reuter, R.M.; Burns, V.R.; Painter, L.J.; and Rutherford, J.A. (1993)

Effects of Gasoline Sulfur Level on Exhaust Mass and Speciated Emissions: The Question

of Linearity-Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Program, SAE Paper No. 932727. Society

of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

3. Leppard, W.R.; Burns, V.R.; Painter, L.J.; Reuter, R.M.; Koehl, W.J.; Hochhauser, A.M.;

Rapp, L.A.; Rutherford, J.A.; Benson, J.D.; Knepper, J.C.; and Ribbon, B.H. (1995) Effects

of Gasoline Properties (T 50 

# , T 90 

# , and Sulfur) on Exhaust Hydrocarbon Emissions of Current

and Future Vehicles: Modal Analysis – The Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research

Program. SAE Paper No. 952504. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

4. Leppard, W.R.; Burns, V.R.; Painter, L.J.; Reuter, R.M.; Koehl, W.J.; Hochhauser, A.M.;

Rapp, L.A.; Rutherford, J.A.; Benson, J.D.; Knepper, J.C.; and Ribbon, B.H. (1995) Effects

of Gasoline Properties (T 50 

# , T 90 

# , and Sulfur) on Exhaust Hydrocarbon Emissions of Current

and Future Vehicles: Speciation Analysis – The Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement

Research Program. SAE Paper No. 952505. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale,

PA.

5. Rutherford, J.A.; Burns, V.R.; Leppard, W.R.; Ribbon, B.H.; Koehl, W.J.; Hochhauser,

A.M.; Painter, L.J.; Reuter, R.M.; Benson, J.D.; Knepper, J.C.; and Rapp, L.A. (1995)

Effects of Gasoline Properties on Emissions of Current and Future Vehicles –T 50 

# , T 90 

# , and

Sulfur– The Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. SAE Paper No.

952510. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

6. AAMA/AIAM (1997) AAMA/AIAM Study on the Effects of Fuel Sulfur on Low

Emission Vehicle Criteria Pollutants. Report by the American Automobile Manufacturers

Association (AAMA) and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers

(AIAM), December.

7. Schleyer, C.H.; Gunst, R.F.; Eckstrom, J.; Freel, J.; Gorse, R.A.; Barnes, G.J.; Eng, K.D.;

Natarajan, M.; and Schlenker, A.M. (1998) Effect of Fuel Sulfur on Emissions in

California Low Emission Vehicles. SAE Paper No. 982726. Society of Automotive

Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

8. AAM/AIAM (2001) Industry Low-Sulfur Test Program. Presented to the California Air

Resources Board by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) and the Association

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 58 of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM),

ww.arb.ca.gov/cbg/meeting/2001/mtg2001.htm, September.

9. Mayotte, S.G., et al. (1994) Reformulated Gasoline Effects on Exhaust Emissions: Phase 1;

Initial Investigation of Oxygenate, Volatility, Distillation, and Sulfur Effects. SAE Paper

No. 941973. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

10. Mayotte, S.G., et al. (1994) Reformulated Gasoline Effects on Exhaust Emissions: Phase

II; Continued Investigation of Oxygenate Content, Oxygenate Type, Sulfur Olefins, and

Distillation Parameters. SAE Paper No. 941974. Society of Automotive Engineers,

Warrendale, PA.

11. Korotney, D.J.; Rao, V.; Lindhjem, C.E.; and Sklar, M.S. (1995) Reformulated Gasoline

Effects on Exhaust Emissions: Phase III; Investigation on the Effects of Sulfur Olefins,

Volatility, and Aromatics and the Interactions Between Olefins and Volatility of Sulfur.

SAE Paper No. 950782. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

12. Lindhjem, C.E. (1995) The Effect of Gasoline Reformulation and Sulfur Reduction on

Exhaust Emissions from Post-1983 but Pre-1990. SAE Paper No. 950778. Society of

Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

13. Sztenderowicz, M.L.; Bandy, W.J.; Most, W.J.; Jetter, J.J.; Sprik, T.L.; Doherty, H.; and

Eng, K.D. (1995) Effects of Fuel Sulfur on Emissions from Transitional Low Emission

Vehicles. SAE Paper No. 952561. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

14. Palmer, F., (1995) European Programme on Emissions, Fuels, and Engine Technology –

EPEFE Report. Final reported prepared for ACEA and Europia. Published by Compugraf

SPRL.

15. Shelef, M., and Gandhi, H.S. (1974) Ammonia Formation in the Catalytic Reduction of

Nitric Oxide. III. The Role of Water-Gas Shift, Reduction by Hydrocarbons, and Steam

Reforming. Ind. Eng. Chem., Prod. Res. Develop.

, 13 , 80-85.

16. Pingent, M., and De Soete, G. (1989) Nitrous Oxide N 2 

# O in Engine Exhaust Gases - A First

Appraisal of Catalyst Impact. SAE Technical Paper No. 890492.

17. Fraser, M.P., and Cass, G.R. (1998) Detection of Excess Ammonia Emissions from In-Use

Vehicles and the Implications for Fine Particle Control. Environ. Sci. & Technol. 32, 1053-

1057.

18. Kean, A.J.; Harley, R.A.; Littlejohn, D.; and Kendall, G.R. (2000) On Road Measurement

of Ammonia and Other Motor Vehicle Exhaust Emissions, Environ. Sci. & Technol. 32,

3535-3539.

19. Baum, M.M.; Kiyomiya, E.S.; Kumar, S.; Lappas, A.M.; and Lord, H.C. III, (2000)

Multicomponent Remote Sensing of Vehicle Exhaust by Dispersive Absorption

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 59 Spectroscopy. 1. Effect of Fuel Type and Catalyst Performance. Environ. Sci. & Technol.

34, 2851-2858.

20. Gandhi, H.S., and Shelef, M. (1991) Effects of Sulphur on Noble Metal Automotive

Catalysts. Applied Catalysts

, 77 , 175-186.

21. Gandhi, H.S.; Piken, A.G.; Stepien, H.K.; Shelef, M.; Delosh, R.G.; and Heyde, M.E.,

(1977) SAE Technical Paper No. 770196.

22. Summers, J.C., and Baron, K. (1979) The Effects of SO 2 

# on the Performance of Noble

Metal Catalyst in Automotive Exhaust. Journal of Catalysis

, 57 , 380-389.

23. Durbin, T.D.; Wilson, R.D.; Norbeck, J.M.; Miller, J.W.; Huai, T.; and Rhee, S.H. (2002)

Estimates of the Emission Rates of Ammonia from Light-Duty Vehicles using Standard

Chassis Dynamometer Test Cycles. Atmospheric Environment

, 36 , 1475-1482.

24 Huai, T.; Durbin, T.D.; Rhee, S.H.; Miller, J.W.; and Norbeck, J.M. (2002) The Impact of

Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Levels on NH 3 

# and N 2 

# O Emissions. Proceedings of the 12 th 

# CRC OnRoad Vehicle Emissions Workshop, San Diego, CA, April.

25 Baronick, J.; Heller, B.; Lach, G.; and Ramacher, B. (2000) Impact of Sulfur in Gasoline

on Nitrous Oxide and Other Exhaust Gas Components. SAE Technical Paper No. 2000-01-

0857.

26. DIRECTIVE 98/69/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

of 13 October 1998 relating to measures to be taken against pollution by emissions from

motor vehicles and amending Council Directive 70/220/EEC.

27. Durbin, T.D.; Miller, J.W.; Pisano, J.T.; Sauer, C.; Rhee, S.H.; and Huai, T. (2002) Impact

of Engine Oil Properties on Emissions. Final Report for the Coordinating Research Council

Project E-61, by the University of California at Riverside’s Bourns College of Engineering

– Center for Environmental Research and Technology, August.

28. Kopp, V.R.; Furey, R.L., Cooper, J.H.; McNally, M.J.; Doerr, D.G.; and Schubert, A.J.

(1995) Test Fuel Blending and Analysis for Phase II Follow-Up Programs: The Auto/Oil

Air Quality Improvement Research Program SAE Technical Paper 952506. Society of

Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

29. Sims, G.S., and Johri, S. (1988) Catalyst Performance Study Using Taguchi Methods. SAE

Technical Paper 881589. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

30. Shoffner, B. (2001) A Vehicle Fuel Tank Flush Effectiveness Evaluation Program. Final

Report by the Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, for the Coordinating

Research Council under contract no. CM-138-01/1, August.

31. Graham, L. (1999) Gaseous and Particulate Matter Emissions from In-Use Light-Duty

Gasoline Motor Vehicles. Report #99-67, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 60 32. Mackay, G.I.; Nadler, S.D.; Karecki, D.R.; Schiff, H.I.; Butler, J.W.; Gierczak, C.A.; and

Jesion, G. (1994) Dynamometer Intercomparison of Automobile Exhaust Gas CO/CO 2 

# Ratios and Temperature Between On-Board Measurements and a Remote Sensing Near

Infrared Diode Laser System. UNISEARCH Interim Report 1b to the Coordinating

Research Council and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Contract VE-8-2

August.

33. Chanda, A.; Mackay, G.I.; Karecki, D.R.; and Schiff, H.I. (1999) Measurement of

Automotive Exhaust Using the LASIR Tunable Diode Laser Spectrometer System.

Proceedings from the SPIE International Symposium, Jul 19-23, 1999, Denver, Colorado.

34. Bartone, M.; Broek, S.; Fuller, A.; and Pisano, J.T. (2000) Measurement of HF in a High

Temperature Environment During the Recycling of Spent Potliner Using the Vortec

Cyclone Melting System. Proceedings from the Air and Waste Management Association

Annual Conference, June 2000, Salt Lake City, Utah.

35. Marrin, J., (2001) Personal communication. Scott-Marrin Gases, Riverside, CA.

36. Barth, M.; An, F.; Younglove, T.; Scora, G.; Levine, C.; Ross, M.; and Wenzel, T. (2000)

Development of a Comprehensive Modal Emissions Model. Final Report by the University

of California’s College of Engineering-Center for Environmental Research and

Technology, Riverside, CA for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program

under contract NCHRP 25-11.

37. Truex, T.J.; Collins, J.F.; Jetter, J.J.; Knight, B.; Hayashi, T.; Kishi, N.; and Suzuki, N.

(2000) Measurement of Ambient Roadway and Vehicle Exhaust Emissions-An Assessment

of Instrument Capability and Initial On-Road Test Results with an Advanced Low

Emission Vehicle. SAE Technical Paper No. 2000-01-1142, Society of Automotive

Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

38. Painter, L.J., and Rutherford, J.A. (1992) Statistical Design and Analysis Methods for the

Auto/Oil Air Quality Research Program. SAE Technical Paper No. 920319, Society of

Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

39. Pingent, M., and De Soete, G. (1989) Nitrous Oxide N 2 

# O in Engine Exhaust Gases - A first

Appraisal of Catalyst Impact. SAE Technical Paper No. 890492.

40. Jobson, E.; Smedler, G.; Malmberg, P.; Bernler, H.; Hjortsberg, O.; Gotterg, I.; and Rosen,

A. (1994) Nitrous Oxide Formation over Three-way Catalysts. SAE Technical Paper No.

940926.

41. Odaka, M.; Koike, N.; and Suzuki, H. (1998) Deterioration Effect of Three-way Catalyst

on Nitrous Oxide Emission. SAE Technical Paper No. 980676.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 61 42. Koike, N.; Odaka, M.; and Suzuki, H. (1999) Reduction of N 2 

# O from Automobiles

Equipped with Three-Way Catalyst – Analysis of N 2 

# O Increase Due to Catalyst

Deactiviation. SAE Technical Paper No. 1999-01-1081.

43. Hirano, H.; Yamada, T.; Tanaka, K.I.; Siera, J.; Cobden, P.; and Nieuwenhuys, B.E. (1992)

Mechanisms of the Various Nitric Oxide Reduction Reactions on a Platinum-rhodium

(100) Alloy single Crystal. Surface Science

. 292 , 97-112.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 62 Appendix A. Properties of the Test Fuel.

Property Value Method

API Gravity 66.3 @ 60/60 D1298

Density 0.712 x 10 3 

# kg/m 3 

# @ 15.6°C

RVP 6.7 psi Mini RVP

Base Sulfur 5 ppmw Antek Sulfur

Benzene 0.1 wt %

Aromatics 14.0 vol. % D1319

Olefins 0.5 vol. % D1319

T50 214.3°F/101.3°C D86

T90 243.6°F/117.6°C D86

Sulfur doping levels:

Nominal 30 ppmw: 1 st 

# batch 30 ppmw and 2 nd 

# batch 31.6 ppmw

Nominal 150 ppmw: 1 st 

# batch 144 ppmw and 2 nd 

# batch 145 ppmw

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 63 Appendix B. Description of Catalyst Aging.

Catalyst aging was conducted on catalytic systems (including pre- and post oxygen sensors) for

the 14 test vehicles associated with the E-60 project. In total, 8 catalyst pairs were aged for a

period of 90 hours (generic 120K miles) using the RAT-A cycle. The aging was conducted using

a synthetic low-sulfur oil with a 0.01% sulfur content and an ultra-low sulfur gasoline with a 0.2

ppmw sulfur level. Catalyst aging was conducted at the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI).

The steps for the RAT-A aging cycle are summarized below and described in greater detail in

ref. 29. The more general steps used in the catalyst aging process are also provided below.

RAT-A Aging Protocol.

Step Description

1 Duration=40 seconds. Stoichiometric, closed loop exhaust conditions (A/F=14.3).

Catalyst inlet temperature ~ 800°C.

2 Duration= 6 seconds. Open loop, fuel injector pulse width same as used in Step 3.

3 Duration=10 seconds. Open loop, fuel injection pulse width increased from Step 1 to

achieve 2.9 percent CO at catalyst inlet with secondary air source supplying additional air

to achieve an oxygen concentration of 3.0 percent at the catalyst inlet. Typical catalyst

bed temperature= 975 - 1020°C (catalyst bed temperature measured one inch downstream

of catalyst front face).

4 Duration=4 seconds. Fuel control returned to closed-loop (stoichiometric conditions). Air

injection from Step 3 continues for duration (air injection point is located downstream of

oxygen sensor used to control the engine).

General Steps of Catalyst Aging Procedure Including Configuration for Testing

Step Description

1 CE-CERT provided SwRI with 8 sets of catalyst systems to age (i.e., 8 pair of catalysts).

Each catalyst was fabricated to make inlet and outlet inline, with 2.5" marmon flanges on

inlet and outlet.

2 SwRI installed thermocouples in the first catalyst substrate, and installed on test stand (no

fabrication or modification included).

3 The engine oil was drained and synthetic lubricating oil with low-sulfur (Lube 1

identified in the oil matrix) was used.

4 The RAT-A aging cycle was set up and cycle specifications were verified. If more than

one converter was in a system, then setup was performed on the first catalyst only. Flows

were adjusted to provide equal flows through each of the two catalyst systems being

simultaneously aged. Aging was conducted with an ultra-low sulfur gasoline provided by

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 64 CRC. Raw exhaust concentrations were monitored at the start of the aging (zero hours).

5 After 24 hours of aging, the exhaust conditions were verified to insure correct and stable

operating conditions.

6 After 48 hours of aging, the exhaust conditions were verified and the test parts were

rotated between the banks of the engine.

7 After 72 hours of aging, the exhaust conditions were verified to insure correct and stable

operating conditions.

8 After 90 hours of aging, a final emissions verification was made and the parts were

removed from the test stand.

9 Steps 3 through 8 were repeated for the next seven (7) sets of catalysts.

10 The catalysts were labeled and repackaged for return to CE-CERT.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 65 Appendix C. Sulfur Removal Protocol.

This procedure is designed to cause the vehicle to transiently run rich at high catalyst

temperature, to remove accumulated sulfur from the catalyst, via hydrogen sulfide formation.

The drive trace is shown below the descriptive protocol. The catalyst inlet temperature and the

exhaust A/F ratio must be monitored during this procedure. It is required to demonstrate that the

catalyst inlet temperature must exceed 700°C during the WOT accelerations and that rich fuel/air

mixtures are achieved during WOT. If these parameters are not achieved, increased loading on

the dynamometer should be added for this protocol (but not during the emissions test).

1. Drive the vehicle from idle to 55 mph and hold speed for 5 minutes (to bring catalyst to full

working temperature).

2. Reduce vehicle speed to 30 mph and hold speed for one minute.

3. Accelerate at WOT (wide-open throttle) for a minimum of 5 seconds, to achieve a speed in

excess of 70 mph. Continue WOT above 70 mph, if necessary to achieve 5-second

acceleration duration. Hold the peak speed for 15 seconds and then decelerate to 30 mph.

4. Maintain 30 mph for one minute.

5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 to achieve 5 WOT excursions.

6. One sulfur removal cycle has been completed.

7. Repeat steps 1 to 5 for the second sulfur removal cycle.

8. The protocol is complete if the necessary parameters have been achieved.



# WOT Acceleration must exceed 5 seconds duration, extended

by peak speed greater than 70 mph.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0 5 10 15 20 25

Test Time, minutesVehicle Speed, mph



# Monitor Catalyst inlet Temperature and Exhause A/F Ratio

Demonstrate that Cat. In. Temp > 700C

and A/F Ratio goes rich. 

# WOT Acceleration must exceed 5 seconds duration, extended

by peak speed greater than 70 mph.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0 5 10 15 20 25

Test Time, minutesVehicle Speed, mph



# Monitor Catalyst inlet Temperature and Exhause A/F Ratio

Demonstrate that Cat. In. Temp > 700C

and A/F Ratio goes rich.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 66 Appendix D. Processing of the TDL Signal.

a) A current ramp divided into 64 bits is applied to

the GaAs laser to vary the wavelength of

emission.

b) An additional sinusoidal modulation is

delivered to the diode. The modulation signal is

frequency doubled and the output amplified. The

detected signal is therefore the second derivative

of the absorption signal.

c) A quadratic equation is applied to the second

derivative signal. The signal is smoothed and the

ramp function is taken out via a deconvolution

procedure.

d) A stored calibration spectrum is compared to

each of the exhaust spectra bit by bit.

e) Linear regression of exhaust spectrum versus

calibration spectrum. The exhaust concentration

is obtained by multi-plying the concentration of

the calibration spectrum with the regression slope.

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 67 Appendix D. Cont.

TDL Pressure and Temperature Effects.

The following graphs show the temperature and pressure dependence of the NH 3 

# absorption

feature intensity for the TDL. The effects were incorporated into the calculations of the NH 3



# mass emission rates.

Temperature Dependence

of the NH 3 

# Absorption Feature Intensity

y = -1.02E-03x + 1.15

0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10

90 100 110 120 130 140 150

Temperature (oC)Relative Intensity



# Pressure Dependence

of the NH 3 

# Absorption Feature Intensity

y = 6.61E-07x 2 

# - 2.04E-03x + 2.32

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150

Pressure (mbar)Relative Intensity

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 68 Appendix D. Cont.

Results for Comparison Tests between TDL and Citric Acid Coated Filters

Recoveries for Injection of 150 ppm of calibration gas for 45 seconds at 20 lpm

TDL Citric Acid

Coated Filters Sampling Location

1590 μg 1700 μg In front of Sampling Line

1590 μg 1640 μg Behind Pre-Filter in

Sampling Line

1590 μg 1690 μg Immediately after TDL

sampling systemUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles69Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0204010OE50.1910.0030.0140.0452.3050.0010.0000.4790.0880.0000.0510.032450.2462.5385.0438.60.0040.004-0.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0100.004FordI0204014OE50.1820.0050.0130.0442.2890.0040.0000.4770.0920.0000.0570.035447.0456.9389.3436.20.0050.003-0.0010.002N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ATaurusaverage0.0450.4780.034437.40.0020.0000.004stdev0.0010.0010.0021.6800.001N/AN/AI0204020OE300.1960.0040.0110.0462.6910.0000.0000.5580.0950.0010.0490.034457.1461.4380.2438.20.0030.001-0.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0180.0000.0060.005I0204024OE300.1830.0070.0120.0452.3340.0060.0000.4860.1010.0010.0780.043442.3454.2375.3430.1-0.0010.002-0.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0190.0000.0120.007average0.0450.5220.039434.10.0010.0000.006stdev0.0010.0510.0065.7350.0000.0000.001I0204033OE1500.1700.0030.0110.0402.4770.0010.0000.5140.0920.0000.0830.042441.2459.3377.0432.90.0010.003-0.0020.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0240.0000.0190.010I0204036OE1500.1790.0110.0110.0461.9330.0300.0000.4160.1030.0050.0990.051441.6450.5382.0429.80.0010.003-0.0060.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0220.0010.0200.011average0.0430.4650.047431.40.0010.0000.010stdev0.0040.0690.0062.1660.0010.0000.000I0204048Aged50.2040.0050.0140.0492.5960.0020.0000.5380.0900.0010.0540.034447.6450.7378.7430.30.0030.0040.0000.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0170.0000.0070.005I0204050Aged50.1770.0050.0180.0442.3500.0000.0000.4870.1200.0000.0400.036443.7448.3376.6427.70.0060.005-0.0020.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0160.0000.0040.004average0.0460.5130.035429.00.0030.0000.005stdev0.0030.0360.0011.8650.0000.0000.001I0204057Aged300.1820.0060.0160.0452.9580.0000.0000.6130.1050.0000.0760.043447.0456.4378.8433.20.0020.0040.0030.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0190.0000.0090.006I0204059Aged300.1650.0030.0130.0392.5970.0000.0000.5370.0920.0000.0230.025455.6452.9378.0432.80.0030.003-0.0020.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0160.0000.0030.004I0204063Aged300.2030.0120.0140.0522.3610.0160.0000.4980.1070.0040.0270.040442.4457.4377.5432.30.0050.003-0.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0170.0000.0080.006average0.0460.5490.036432.80.0020.0000.005stdev0.0060.0580.0100.4060.0010.0000.001I0204068Aged1500.1820.0100.0140.0472.3000.0100.0000.4820.1230.0010.0760.047449.0459.5381.5435.90.0040.002-0.0050.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0220.0000.0170.009I0204074Aged1500.1770.0100.0150.0461.9980.0210.0000.4250.1370.0010.0870.053437.5453.5379.0429.70.0030.004-0.0040.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0240.0010.0200.011average0.0460.4540.050432.80.0010.0000.010stdev0.0010.0400.0044.3540.0010.0000.001TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles70Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0206012OE50.3220.0020.0120.0714.7310.0420.0891.0270.3370.0480.1390.133354.2360.7294.3341.10.0040.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0240.0000.0010.005ChevyI0206016OE50.1910.0020.0130.0444.9300.0120.1041.0590.1910.0380.0590.076351.6358.5293.6339.20.0020.0000.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0210.0000.0000.004CavalierI0206017OE50.1660.0020.0070.0374.0390.0390.0640.8750.1870.0590.0340.079351.0358.0294.1339.20.0010.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0200.0000.0000.004average0.0510.9870.096339.80.0010.0000.005stdev0.0180.0980.0321.10.0010.0000.001I0206024OE300.1790.0020.0110.0413.8400.0300.0920.8380.2090.0330.0580.076358.9358.2296.3341.30.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0270.0000.0010.006I0206029OE300.1900.0020.0040.0424.1780.0630.0610.9160.1670.0430.0410.068354.1356.1294.3338.70.0030.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0190.0000.0000.004average0.0410.8770.072340.00.0010.0000.005stdev0.0000.0550.0061.90.0010.0000.001I0206057OE1500.2480.0030.0200.0585.5550.0530.1301.2150.1960.0520.0790.089353.9358.4294.6339.90.0030.0010.0030.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0250.0030.0070.008I0206058OE1500.1900.0030.0230.0474.8710.0440.1861.0840.1390.0380.0870.072354.0358.9300.0341.70.0020.0010.0020.001N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.0531.1500.081340.80.0020.0000.008stdev0.0080.0930.0121.30.001N/AN/AI0206068Aged50.2350.0030.0150.0545.2000.0700.1111.1450.1200.0290.0430.052344.2342.8287.5327.90.0070.0000.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0240.0000.0010.005I0207003Aged50.1720.0020.0140.0414.3840.0680.1370.9820.1040.0360.0250.047351.4355.9291.3337.20.0080.0010.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0200.0020.0020.005average0.0471.0640.050332.50.0020.0000.005stdev0.0100.1150.0046.60.0000.0000.000I0207009Aged300.2240.0030.0060.0505.3180.0640.0871.1610.1230.0300.0260.048352.5355.5291.4337.20.0150.0010.0010.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0170.0010.0010.004I0207017Aged300.2020.0030.0090.0464.6410.0890.0871.0330.1090.0330.0370.050349.5349.5287.0332.30.0010.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0230.0000.0020.005average0.0481.0970.049334.70.0020.0000.005stdev0.0030.0910.0013.50.0020.0000.001I0207021Aged1500.3970.0040.0110.0875.3610.0370.1231.1650.1930.0360.0260.066351.1355.0287.6335.60.0080.0010.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0210.0000.0010.005I0207024Aged1500.1890.0030.0100.0434.3310.0770.1220.9740.1070.0260.0380.046348.2351.1285.2332.30.0080.0020.0020.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0230.0000.0030.006average0.0651.0700.056334.00.0030.0000.005stdev0.0310.1350.0142.30.0000.0000.001NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles71Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicle Test Cat. Fuel S bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd2001 I0207038 OE 5 0.340 0.011 0.024 0.083 4.585 0.232 0.172 1.118 0.255 0.010 0.126 0.093 539.0 561.4 475.8 533.2 0.059 0.026 0.007 0.028 0.032 0.043 0.009 0.031 0.026 0.000 0.013 0.009Chevy I0207040 OE 5 0.272 0.010 0.023 0.068 4.388 0.225 0.167 1.073 0.309 0.018 0.149 0.115 535.1 560.5 476.1 532.0 0.026 0.029 0.011 0.023 0.005 0.033 0.008 0.020 0.024 0.000 0.010 0.008Silveradoaverage 0.075 1.096 0.104 532.6 0.026 0.026 0.008stdev 0.011 0.032 0.016 0.9 0.003 0.008 0.001I0207043 OE 30 0.296 0.012 0.026 0.075 4.455 0.228 0.189 1.094 0.273 0.010 0.217 0.121 533.8 564.6 472.9 533.0 0.032 0.028 0.018 0.026 0.003 0.029 0.0110.018 0.027 0.000 0.018 0.010I0207044 OE 30 0.265 0.012 0.023 0.068 4.217 0.282 0.177 1.069 0.372 0.010 0.181 0.132 542.8 565.7 474.5 535.9 0.036 0.038 0.013 0.031 0.020 0.065 0.0150.042 0.034 0.000 0.013 0.011average 0.072 1.082 0.127 534.5 0.028 0.030 0.011stdev 0.005 0.018 0.008 2.0 0.003 0.016 0.000I0207046 OE 150 0.392 0.013 0.028 0.096 4.594 0.256 0.141 1.124 0.294 0.012 0.111 0.098 540.4 570.0 476.6 538.2 0.048 0.035 0.012 0.031 0.037 0.054 0.010 0.038 0.033 0.001 0.012 0.010I0207047 OE 150 0.554 0.013 0.030 0.130 7.482 0.106 0.140 1.645 0.245 0.107 0.193 0.159 578.5 645.6 492.4 589.6 0.103 0.014 0.018 0.033 0.056 0.028 0.011 0.029 0.054 0.002 0.017 0.017I0207050 OE 150 0.263 0.015 0.032 0.071 3.867 0.169 0.151 0.931 0.416 0.017 0.150 0.136 540.8 572.2 480.7 540.6 0.043 0.015 0.025 0.024 0.006 0.028 0.014 0.020 0.032 0.000 0.014 0.011average 0.099 1.233 0.131 556.1 0.029 0.029 0.013stdev 0.030 0.369 0.031 29.0 0.005 0.009 0.004I0208001 Aged 5 0.550 0.011 0.036 0.130 5.449 0.353 0.276 1.389 0.223 0.008 0.065 0.068 531.5 559.7 469.4 529.0 0.131 0.111 0.061 0.101 0.105 0.161 0.065 0.123 0.033 0.000 0.008 0.009I0208003 Aged 5 0.370 0.010 0.033 0.091 5.490 0.282 0.292 1.365 0.354 0.008 0.077 0.099 530.5 556.9 471.0 527.8 0.092 0.099 0.073 0.091 0.065 0.116 0.067 0.092 0.035 0.000 0.011 0.010I0208007 Aged 5 0.306 0.010 0.032 0.077 4.837 0.241 0.269 1.202 0.387 0.019 0.123 0.124 534.6 558.6 467.7 528.7 0.081 0.073 0.054 0.069 0.056 0.089 0.044 0.070 0.032 0.001 0.017 0.012average 0.099 1.319 0.097 528.5 0.087 0.095 0.010stdev 0.027 0.102 0.028 0.6 0.016 0.027 0.001I0208008 Aged 30 0.331 0.007 0.030 0.081 5.071 0.305 0.236 1.274 0.364 0.016 0.123 0.118 530.4 554.5 466.3 525.3 0.097 0.111 0.068 0.096 0.086 0.137 0.057 0.104 0.037 0.001 0.018 0.013I0208009 Aged 30 0.492 0.011 0.032 0.117 7.246 0.232 0.244 1.743 0.397 0.030 0.122 0.135 570.3 675.4 479.5 597.1 0.127 0.095 0.081 0.098 0.089 0.110 0.064 0.092 0.057 0.001 0.020 0.019I0208012 Aged 30 0.329 0.010 0.032 0.082 5.135 0.233 0.228 1.248 0.369 0.021 0.119 0.120 531.0 557.1 469.4 527.6 0.073 0.061 0.054 0.061 0.040 0.071 0.035 0.055 0.027 0.000 0.015 0.010average 0.093 1.422 0.124 550.0 0.085 0.084 0.014stdev 0.020 0.279 0.009 40.8 0.021 0.026 0.004I0208013 Aged 150 0.397 0.015 0.051 0.104 5.921 0.271 0.439 1.489 0.327 0.039 0.216 0.147 529.5 557.0 467.6 526.7 0.119 0.055 0.077 0.074 0.071 0.099 0.058 0.082 0.043 0.004 0.043 0.023I0208014 Aged 150 0.385 0.013 0.039 0.097 6.373 0.202 0.316 1.513 0.385 0.032 0.152 0.138 533.5 554.2 466.3 525.7 0.092 0.040 0.059 0.056 0.055 0.076 0.042 0.062 0.040 0.001 0.022 0.015average 0.101 1.501 0.143 526.2 0.065 0.072 0.019stdev 0.005 0.017 0.006 0.7 0.013 0.014 0.006TDL-NH3(g/mi) FTIR - NH3(g/mi) FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi) CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi) CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles72Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicle Test Cat. Fuel S bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd2000 I0206005 OE 5 0.346 0.003 0.013 0.077 6.040 0.033 0.069 1.289 0.145 0.009 0.008 0.037 566.2 611.7 507.6 573.7 0.133 0.010 0.011 0.036 0.140 0.046 0.015 0.057 0.023 0.000 0.008 0.007Jeep I0206014 OE 5 0.397 0.004 0.011 0.087 8.039 0.000 0.038 1.679 0.112 0.038 0.007 0.045 565.1 613.4 505.7 573.8 0.185 0.008 0.015 0.047 0.200 0.034 0.009 0.062 0.026 0.022 0.008 0.019Grandaverage 0.082 1.484 0.041 573.8 0.041 0.059 0.013Cherokee stdev 0.007 0.276 0.006 0.1 0.008 0.003 0.009I0206022 OE 30 0.352 0.005 0.013 0.079 4.776 0.022 0.019 1.005 0.194 0.050 0.160 0.110 572.4 617.9 511.2 579.1 0.051 0.004 0.046 0.025 0.008 0.000 0.0000.002 0.035 0.017 0.057 0.032I0206025 OE 30 0.359 0.004 0.010 0.079 6.234 0.027 0.019 1.310 0.164 0.044 0.138 0.095 573.2 616.7 508.3 577.9 0.091 0.008 0.032 0.032 0.093 0.033 0.0000.036 0.032 0.022 0.053 0.033average 0.079 1.158 0.103 578.5 0.029 0.019 0.032stdev 0.000 0.216 0.011 0.9 0.004 0.024 0.001I0206031 OE 150 0.427 0.015 0.013 0.100 9.940 0.395 0.034 2.269 0.239 0.194 0.442 0.271 587.0 622.8 522.2 587.9 0.121 0.033 0.014 0.046 0.084 0.072 0.000 0.055 0.131 0.165 0.200 0.167I0206048 OE 150 0.363 0.012 0.021 0.087 7.873 0.033 0.495 1.785 0.185 0.086 0.012 0.086 555.5 594.8 503.4 561.6 0.176 0.018 0.116 0.078 0.152 0.055 0.070 0.079 0.059 0.104 0.024 0.072I0206056 OE 150 0.381 0.010 0.022 0.090 8.983 0.160 0.582 2.105 0.136 0.022 0.009 0.042 566.3 608.0 520.5 575.3 0.197 0.032 0.226 0.120 0.233 0.099 0.123 0.133 0.074 0.057 0.031 0.053average 0.092 2.053 0.133 574.9 0.081 0.089 0.098stdev 0.007 0.246 0.122 13.1 0.037 0.040 0.061I0207002 Aged 5 0.244 0.006 0.015 0.058 4.961 0.014 0.112 1.065 0.169 0.188 0.182 0.182 541.4 587.5 487.0 550.3 0.035 0.002 0.005 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.021 0.029 0.025I0207006 Aged 5 0.311 0.005 0.013 0.071 7.116 0.018 0.101 1.512 0.093 0.120 0.155 0.124 545.0 585.6 483.2 549.1 0.113 0.006 0.008 0.029 0.063 0.016 0.006 0.023 0.019 0.015 0.024 0.018I0207014 Aged 5 0.288 0.005 0.015 0.066 6.331 0.014 0.047 1.332 0.124 0.175 0.265 0.189 541.0 575.3 479.5 541.9 0.082 0.004 0.000 0.019 0.031 0.003 0.000 0.008 0.020 0.018 0.034 0.023average 0.065 1.303 0.165 547.1 0.019 0.010 0.022stdev 0.007 0.225 0.036 4.6 0.010 0.011 0.004I0207022 Aged 30 0.363 0.005 0.012 0.081 8.285 0.036 0.055 1.751 0.155 0.165 0.177 0.166 546.2 584.9 482.6 548.8 0.096 0.031 0.002 0.036 0.057 0.041 0.000 0.033 0.024 0.022 0.051 0.030I0207025 Aged 30 0.275 0.007 0.014 0.065 6.206 0.015 0.057 1.311 0.113 0.253 0.203 0.210 524.5 561.5 463.0 526.7 0.077 0.003 0.003 0.018 0.026 0.005 0.000 0.008 0.024 0.022 0.039 0.027average 0.073 1.531 0.188 537.8 0.027 0.020 0.029stdev 0.012 0.311 0.031 15.6 0.013 0.017 0.003I0207035 Aged 150 0.283 0.005 0.012 0.065 5.516 0.018 0.040 1.163 0.304 0.318 0.427 0.345 554.2 595.6 490.1 558.1 0.037 0.003 0.003 0.010 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.085 0.091 0.176 0.113I0207037 Aged 150 0.306 0.006 0.014 0.070 6.489 0.016 0.081 1.375 0.181 0.340 0.352 0.310 553.4 594.2 490.3 557.2 0.077 0.003 0.004 0.019 0.038 0.007 0.000 0.012 0.063 0.078 0.139 0.092average 0.067 1.269 0.328 557.6 0.014 0.006 0.102stdev 0.004 0.150 0.025 0.6 0.006 0.008 0.015TDL-NH3(g/mi) FTIR - NH3(g/mi) FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi) CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi) CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles73Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0203016OE50.1190.0030.0040.0272.4280.0460.0270.5350.1600.0080.0800.059452.8453.5365.5429.20.0020.001-0.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0040.002BuickI0203020OE50.1150.0030.0030.0262.6420.0300.0100.5660.1350.0050.0680.050443.8452.4367.9427.40.0070.0020.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0020.0000.0060.002LeSabreaverage0.0270.5510.055428.30.0020.0000.002stdev0.0010.0220.0061.2530.0010.0000.000I0203031OE300.1020.0020.0030.0232.6170.0400.0300.5720.1890.0080.0950.069449.7444.5358.7422.00.0020.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0060.002I0203040OE300.1200.0030.0040.0282.5160.0560.0080.5530.1470.0070.0850.057446.7443.9356.6420.50.0060.0000.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0060.002average0.0260.5630.063421.30.0010.0000.002stdev0.0040.0130.0081.0680.0000.0000.000I0203048OE1500.1070.0040.0060.0262.3060.0240.0230.4980.1770.0050.1020.067446.5447.3367.0425.10.0030.0020.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0060.0000.0120.004I0203051OE1500.1110.0020.0050.0253.3490.0510.0100.7250.1650.0040.0870.060445.7443.7360.9421.30.0030.0010.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0080.003average0.0260.6120.064423.20.0020.0000.004stdev0.0000.1610.0052.6550.0010.0000.001I0202051Aged50.1160.0040.0080.0282.3500.0220.0820.5210.1700.0030.0840.060442.3443.2363.2421.00.0100.0010.0040.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0080.004I0202054Aged50.1260.0020.0080.0293.3250.0320.1320.7430.1660.0030.0800.058446.6449.9365.5426.00.0080.0030.0080.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0080.0000.0070.004average0.0290.6320.059423.50.0050.0000.004stdev0.0010.1570.0013.5360.0010.0000.000I0202063Aged300.1350.0040.0090.0333.3820.0090.1260.7410.1220.0030.0880.051442.1442.8360.3420.00.0010.000-0.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0070.003I0203002Aged300.1190.0030.0080.0283.0610.0140.1110.6730.1870.0040.0850.064443.9441.6359.9419.60.0100.0020.0060.0040.0030.0000.0000.0010.0070.0000.0070.003average0.0300.7070.058419.80.0020.0000.003stdev0.0030.0480.0090.2570.0030.0000.000I0203006Aged1500.1240.0050.0160.0333.5840.2360.9291.1210.1970.0090.1110.076445.2449.7368.2426.40.0130.0100.0300.0160.0080.0100.0180.0120.0240.0010.0390.016I0203009Aged1500.1550.0040.0090.0374.5400.0870.2951.0670.1080.0030.1290.059483.3507.3396.3471.80.0200.0050.0120.0100.0020.0020.0040.003N/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.0351.0940.068449.10.0130.0070.016stdev0.0030.0380.01232.1490.0040.006N/ATDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles74Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0203021OE50.3650.0030.0030.0784.9070.0630.0011.0510.0350.0000.0180.012329.2335.9285.2320.60.0940.0160.0010.0280.0620.0140.0000.0200.0020.0000.0000.000DodgeI0203024OE50.2960.0030.0020.0633.6550.0240.0000.7710.0290.0010.0200.012328.1335.1285.2319.90.0770.0120.0000.0230.0430.0110.0000.0150.0040.0000.0000.001Neonaverage0.0710.9110.012320.20.0250.0180.001stdev0.0100.1980.0000.5010.0040.0040.000I0203046OE300.3330.0020.0020.0714.1360.0230.0000.8700.0410.0030.0180.015329.0337.8286.8322.00.0970.011-0.0010.025N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0203050OE300.3700.0020.0020.0784.5280.0120.0000.9470.0390.0060.0130.015330.8338.1285.1322.00.0770.006-0.0020.0180.0580.0080.0000.0160.0030.0000.0010.001average0.0750.9090.015322.00.0220.0160.001stdev0.0050.0540.0000.0110.005N/AN/AI0203030OE1500.3490.0020.0030.0744.0140.0650.0630.8830.0470.0040.0140.016326.7331.6280.8316.60.1000.0260.0070.0360.0770.0240.0050.0300.0100.0010.0060.004I0203034OE1500.2320.0030.0030.0502.4920.0280.0530.5460.0980.0090.0230.031323.4334.2281.3317.40.0130.0120.0030.0100.0020.0040.0000.0020.0130.0010.0080.005I0203039OE1500.2780.0020.0040.0602.9640.0880.0900.6850.0670.0150.0340.031326.9335.5285.8320.10.0370.0200.0030.0190.0230.0150.0020.0130.0140.0040.0100.008average0.0610.7050.026318.00.0220.0150.006stdev0.0120.1690.0091.7920.0130.0140.002I0202043Aged50.3410.0040.0060.0744.3270.0300.0020.9150.0200.0040.0090.009335.5341.1289.2325.60.0680.0160.0030.0230.0390.0120.0000.0140.0020.0000.0000.000I0202046Aged50.3140.0030.0030.0673.7220.0450.0290.8050.0330.0030.0020.009333.1337.3285.0322.10.0660.0160.0080.0240.0430.0150.0030.0180.0090.0000.0000.002average0.0710.8600.009323.90.0240.0160.001stdev0.0050.0780.0002.5340.0010.0020.001I0202050Aged300.2880.0040.0040.0632.9900.0510.0010.6480.0300.0020.0390.018327.3335.2283.0319.20.0550.0180.0010.0210.0520.0110.0000.0160.0200.0210.0140.019I0202053Aged300.2350.0030.0030.0512.8780.0260.0010.6100.0230.0240.0440.029324.9331.8283.7317.10.0570.0100.0010.0170.0440.0060.0000.0120.0060.0000.0000.001average0.0570.6290.024318.20.0190.0140.010stdev0.0080.0270.0081.4740.0030.0030.013I0202062Aged1500.3590.0010.0050.0764.6960.0350.0451.0060.0440.0070.0180.018330.7337.5285.0321.70.0800.0160.0070.0270.0540.0180.0020.0210.0090.0010.0060.004I0203001Aged1500.2850.0040.0040.0623.0400.0290.0250.6540.0800.0030.0330.027329.1334.8284.4319.70.0400.0200.0060.0200.0190.0110.0040.0110.0110.0010.0050.004I0203008Aged1500.2740.0020.0040.0593.4070.0620.0690.7590.0750.0160.0300.032328.8335.9282.8319.80.0620.0290.0100.0310.0500.0290.0080.0270.0170.0030.0050.006average0.0660.8060.026320.40.0260.0200.005NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles75Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0203007OE50.1840.0020.0080.0412.3730.0140.0500.5130.1640.0100.0930.065392.5369.3313.4358.70.0180.0090.0060.0100.0060.0030.0000.0030.0240.0010.0230.012ToyotaI0203010OE50.1710.0030.0090.0392.1790.0180.0330.4700.1620.0090.0700.058393.3369.2310.7358.10.0100.0090.0080.0090.0040.0020.0000.0020.0370.0010.0200.014Camryaverage0.0400.4920.062358.40.0100.0020.013stdev0.0010.0300.0050.40.0010.0010.001I0203017OE300.1520.0030.0090.0361.9240.0130.0740.4260.1430.0090.0680.053373.4340.8299.5336.20.0190.0100.0010.0090.0010.0010.0000.0010.0290.0010.0200.012I0203022OE300.1390.0030.0080.0331.6850.0210.0480.3730.1550.0080.0830.059386.3369.2312.7357.20.0110.0070.0050.0070.0000.0000.0000.0000.0320.0000.0200.012I0203026OE300.1570.0020.0110.0371.9540.0180.0970.4410.1550.0100.0770.058385.4364.3311.4354.10.0110.0060.0110.0080.0000.0000.0000.0000.0350.0010.0180.013average0.0350.4130.057349.20.0080.0000.012stdev0.0020.0360.00311.30.0010.0010.000I0203041OE1500.1550.0030.0110.0372.0390.0370.1180.4740.2060.0260.1140.088388.6367.1310.4356.00.0150.0030.0010.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0560.0080.0370.026I0203045OE1500.1540.0020.0110.0362.0890.0090.0990.4650.2000.0100.0820.069385.1366.3309.7354.60.0170.0020.0010.005N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.0370.4700.079355.30.0050.0000.026stdev0.0010.0060.0131.00.000N/AN/AI0201046Aged50.2000.0040.0100.0462.7620.0160.0340.5910.1350.0130.1090.065395.6376.1314.5363.20.0350.0040.0270.0170.0280.0050.0000.0080.0230.0010.0190.010I0202001Aged50.1230.0030.0110.0301.7190.0150.0730.3840.1740.0060.0790.061385.6375.0316.0361.00.0130.0080.0180.0120.0040.0010.0050.0030.0260.0000.0190.011I0202008Aged50.1330.0020.0080.0312.0750.0140.0430.4500.1010.0090.0800.048389.3372.1313.8359.60.0230.0050.0150.0110.0060.0000.0010.0020.0260.0000.0180.010average0.0360.4750.058361.30.0130.0040.010stdev0.0090.1060.0091.80.0030.0040.000I0202016Aged300.1640.0040.0110.0392.5650.0160.0450.5530.1410.0100.0840.058386.8372.3314.7359.50.0330.0080.0110.0140.0070.0040.0000.0040.0270.0040.0220.014I0202018Aged300.1610.0020.0080.0371.9740.0200.0210.4250.1480.0120.0790.059405.8383.6318.5370.30.0270.0080.0050.0110.0060.0040.0000.0030.0310.0020.0190.012average0.0380.4890.059364.90.0120.0030.013stdev0.0020.0910.0017.70.0020.0000.001I0202036Aged1500.1720.0030.0140.0413.3660.0250.1100.7410.1660.0170.0990.070399.9374.5315.0363.40.0190.0010.0080.0070.0000.0000.0000.0000.0450.0070.0380.023I0202037Aged1500.1280.0020.0100.0301.7120.0110.0560.3770.1890.0080.0870.068385.7370.4313.9358.00.0170.0050.0080.0080.0000.0000.0000.0000.0630.0010.0290.021I0202057Aged1500.1160.0030.0130.0291.3810.0110.0880.3160.1810.0190.0910.073377.3365.8311.1353.10.0200.0020.0050.0070.0010.0000.0000.0000.0720.0080.0370.029average0.0330.4780.070358.20.0070.0000.025stdev0.0070.2300.0035.10.0010.0000.004NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles76Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0205020OE50.1340.0030.0040.0301.2430.0130.0000.2650.1070.0030.0150.028417.3436.4362.8412.20.0050.0010.0080.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0050.0000.0000.001ChryslerI0205023OE50.1450.0030.0030.0331.2480.0050.0000.2620.1540.0020.0080.035413.1431.4359.4407.80.0040.0020.0170.0070.0000.0000.0000.0000.0060.0000.0000.001Sebringaverage0.0320.2640.032410.00.0050.0000.001stdev0.0020.0020.0053.0940.0020.0000.000I0205027OE300.1430.0030.0030.0321.7370.3280.0000.5300.0740.0000.0270.023408.3428.0359.0404.90.0270.0440.0040.0300.0050.0480.0000.0260.0090.0000.0000.002I0205031OE300.1290.0030.0030.0291.4670.1560.0000.3850.0960.0010.0270.028407.6431.8360.2407.10.0100.0160.0200.0160.0000.0040.0000.0020.0110.0000.0000.002average0.0310.4580.026406.00.0230.0140.002stdev0.0020.1030.0041.5400.0100.0170.000I0205039OE1500.1550.0070.0030.0361.8890.5100.0000.6560.1010.0440.0860.067408.0425.6359.5403.80.0140.030-0.0020.018N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0205040OE1500.1480.0030.0020.0331.3240.1230.0000.3380.1640.0010.0830.057412.4437.8361.9411.70.0060.014-0.0010.0080.0000.0000.0000.0000.0190.0000.0040.005I0205044OE1500.1490.0060.0020.0351.4160.2960.0000.4470.1060.0100.0320.036417.6440.2362.2414.10.0060.0250.0010.0150.0000.0000.0000.0000.0140.0060.0050.008average0.0350.4800.053409.80.0140.0000.006stdev0.0020.1620.0165.4000.0050.0000.002I0205051Aged50.1300.0040.0040.0301.8270.1430.0000.4530.0590.0000.0300.021413.4432.4358.6408.20.0380.0330.0240.0310.0180.0280.0000.0180.0070.0000.0000.001I0205054Aged50.1360.0020.0030.0301.7530.2530.0000.4950.0570.0000.0080.014410.9429.3357.1405.60.0230.0330.0070.0240.0010.0240.0000.0130.0060.0000.0000.001I0205060Aged50.1220.0030.0040.0281.1840.1220.0000.3090.0650.0000.0340.023416.2444.5365.0416.80.0110.010-0.0030.0060.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0000.001average0.0290.4190.019410.20.0210.0100.001stdev0.0010.0980.0055.8560.0130.0090.000I0205065Aged300.1220.0040.0040.0281.9960.1820.0000.5080.0650.0010.0390.024404.5424.0354.9400.90.0180.023-0.0030.0150.0000.0140.0000.0070.0080.0000.0000.002I0205066Aged300.1230.0030.0020.0281.4440.1010.0000.3520.0880.0000.0170.023414.6438.8360.1412.20.0100.0100.0070.0090.0000.0000.0000.0000.0100.0000.0000.002average0.0280.4300.024406.50.0120.0040.002stdev0.0010.1100.0017.9310.0040.0050.000I0206004Aged1500.1200.0030.0020.0271.2020.0800.0000.2900.1010.0130.1150.059415.4438.5363.0413.00.0120.0050.0000.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0170.0060.0130.010I0206011Aged1500.1380.0030.0030.0311.3990.0610.0000.3220.0880.0020.0950.045405.7425.9356.1402.50.0070.006-0.0030.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0120.0010.0050.004I0206015Aged1500.1380.0020.0030.0301.3590.0700.0000.3180.1020.0010.0290.030405.3426.3354.1402.00.0050.0120.0060.0090.0000.0000.0000.0000.0120.0000.0020.003average0.0290.3100.045405.90.0060.0000.006stdev0.0020.0170.0156.1770.0030.0000.004NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles77Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicle Test Cat. Fuel S bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd bag 1 bag 2 bag 3 Wgtd2001 I0205061 OE 5 0.172 0.003 0.006 0.039 2.373 0.057 0.000 0.521 0.059 0.030 0.105 0.057 431.4 429.1 352.6 408.6 0.078 0.003 -0.001 0.017 0.053 0.007 0.000 0.015 0.007 0.000 0.008 0.004Acura I0206010 OE 5 0.141 0.004 0.007 0.033 1.746 0.049 0.000 0.387 0.053 0.011 0.058 0.032 417.6 421.5 346.0 399.9 0.047 0.005 0.005 0.013 0.020 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.008 0.000 0.005 0.0033.2 CL I0206013 OE 5 0.161 0.003 0.006 0.037 1.984 0.024 0.000 0.423 0.063 0.036 0.107 0.061 427.9 427.8 347.2 405.7 0.069 0.002 -0.002 0.015 0.047 0.007 0.000 0.013 0.004 0.000 0.010 0.003average 0.036 0.444 0.050 404.7 0.015 0.011 0.003stdev 0.003 0.069 0.016 4.4 0.002 0.006 0.000I0206023 OE 30 0.134 0.003 0.006 0.031 1.296 0.042 0.008 0.292 0.070 0.037 0.149 0.075 420.7 420.8 343.1 399.4 0.041 0.004 0.000 0.011 0.020 0.004 0.0000.006 0.005 0.000 0.010 0.004I0206027 OE 30 0.140 0.002 0.005 0.031 1.279 0.058 0.012 0.298 0.106 0.031 0.059 0.054 426.9 426.6 347.3 404.9 0.026 0.003 0.002 0.008 0.011 0.000 0.0000.002 0.008 0.000 0.008 0.004average 0.031 0.295 0.065 402.1 0.009 0.004 0.004stdev 0.000 0.004 0.015 3.9 0.002 0.003 0.000I0206049 OE 150 0.146 0.004 0.006 0.034 1.695 0.078 0.011 0.394 0.065 0.010 0.131 0.055 418.4 416.4 338.2 395.3 0.029 0.004 0.000 0.008 0.010 0.003 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.000 0.015 0.006I0206055 OE 150 0.146 0.004 0.007 0.034 1.619 0.131 0.014 0.407 0.061 0.023 0.113 0.055 419.9 422.6 343.9 400.5 0.054 0.017 0.000 0.020 0.027 0.012 0.000 0.012 0.008 0.000 0.024 0.008average 0.034 0.401 0.055 397.9 0.014 0.008 0.007stdev 0.000 0.009 0.000 3.6 0.009 0.006 0.002I0206064 Aged 5 0.180 0.002 0.011 0.041 3.149 0.113 0.054 0.726 0.097 0.031 0.112 0.067 429.7 430.0 357.5 410.0 0.039 0.011 0.002 0.014 0.027 0.019 0.001 0.016 0.014 0.000 0.018 0.008I0206069 Aged 5 0.173 0.002 0.012 0.040 3.025 0.185 0.040 0.733 0.061 0.035 0.096 0.057 428.3 428.2 350.9 407.0 0.032 0.014 0.000 0.014 0.022 0.027 0.000 0.018 0.006 0.000 0.018 0.006average 0.041 0.730 0.062 408.5 0.014 0.017 0.008stdev 0.001 0.005 0.007 2.1 0.000 0.002 0.001I0207005 Aged 30 0.222 0.002 0.011 0.050 3.748 0.212 0.017 0.889 0.054 0.011 0.201 0.072 415.4 416.0 341.3 395.4 0.103 0.031 0.000 0.037 0.077 0.056 0.002 0.046 0.007 0.000 0.021 0.007I0207007 Aged 30 0.179 0.003 0.009 0.041 2.638 0.050 0.011 0.575 0.070 0.018 0.162 0.068 414.2 417.2 339.4 395.2 0.059 0.006 0.000 0.015 0.043 0.015 0.000 0.017 0.007 0.000 0.017 0.006average 0.046 0.732 0.070 395.3 0.026 0.031 0.007stdev 0.006 0.222 0.003 0.1 0.015 0.020 0.001I0207015 Aged 150 0.190 0.003 0.009 0.043 3.196 0.062 0.013 0.697 0.065 0.014 0.215 0.080 411.1 410.9 340.7 391.7 0.098 0.005 0.000 0.023 0.077 0.017 0.000 0.025 0.011 0.000 0.019 0.007I0207016 Aged 150 0.186 0.003 0.009 0.043 3.005 0.056 0.013 0.655 0.074 0.033 0.078 0.054 405.4 416.0 339.4 392.8 0.068 0.005 0.001 0.017 0.031 0.006 0.000 0.010 0.015 0.001 0.016 0.008I0207020 Aged 150 0.177 0.005 0.012 0.043 2.492 0.139 0.011 0.592 0.061 0.023 0.271 0.099 408.5 414.0 339.6 392.4 0.052 0.016 0.001 0.019 0.035 0.025 0.000 0.021 0.011 0.000 0.029 0.010average 0.043 0.648 0.078 392.3 0.020 0.018 0.009stdev 0.000 0.053 0.023 0.6 0.003 0.008 0.002NMHC (g/mi) CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi) CO2(g/mi) TDL-NH3(g/mi) FTIR - NH3(g/mi) FTIR - N2O (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles78Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0202024OE50.1400.0040.0060.0332.1340.0410.0380.4740.1070.0000.0730.042484.1489.0414.4467.50.0450.0040.0060.0130.0420.0050.0000.0110.0150.0000.0060.005FordI0202029OE50.1310.0050.0060.0311.9680.0300.0320.4330.1240.0000.0180.031479.2485.2407.7462.60.0350.0110.0100.0160.0190.0100.0010.0090.0210.0000.0020.005Windstaraverage0.0320.4540.037465.10.0140.0100.005stdev0.0010.0290.0083.40.0020.0010.000I0202047OE300.1400.0080.0100.0361.8430.0400.0220.4090.1140.0000.0440.036498.5505.4414.9479.10.0250.0150.0070.0150.0050.0120.0000.0070.0220.0000.0040.006I0202049OE300.1190.0090.0080.0321.6200.0280.0460.3630.1740.0010.0130.040469.4485.5409.3461.20.0310.0140.0360.0230.0080.0120.0220.0140.0270.0000.0010.006average0.0340.3860.038470.10.0190.0110.006stdev0.0030.0330.00312.70.0060.0050.000I0202056OE1500.1320.0110.0210.0391.8630.0830.1700.4750.1580.0130.1090.070481.9488.7412.7466.40.0700.0480.0200.0450.0640.0600.0150.0480.0430.0090.0280.021I0202058OE1500.1210.0080.0090.0321.7900.0660.0510.4200.1500.0030.0820.055470.5481.9407.6459.10.0400.0350.0130.0300.0530.0520.0130.0410.0300.0010.0090.009average0.0350.4480.063462.80.0370.0450.015stdev0.0050.0390.0115.1740.0100.0050.008I0201036Aged50.1360.0030.0080.0322.0550.0650.1800.5090.1720.0010.0230.042470.4485.4412.2462.10.0880.0280.0570.0490.0840.0380.0600.0540.0290.0000.0040.007I0201041Aged50.1360.0060.0110.0341.8520.0650.3170.5050.1810.0010.0470.051485.3494.0416.8470.90.0960.0380.0740.0600.0850.0530.0750.0660.0230.0000.0040.006average0.0330.5070.047466.50.0540.0600.006stdev0.0020.0030.0066.20.0080.0090.001I0201045Aged300.1700.0040.0080.0402.6140.0500.1280.6040.1760.0020.0280.045490.4493.3414.0470.90.1050.0270.0570.0510.1010.0420.0600.0590.0310.0000.0030.007I0202002Aged300.1470.0040.0090.0352.4320.0630.1870.5890.2050.0010.0190.048481.8486.7412.3465.20.1220.0390.0790.0670.1540.0580.0910.0870.0260.0000.0030.006average0.0370.5970.047468.00.0590.0730.007stdev0.0030.0110.0024.00.0110.0200.001I0202009Aged1500.1580.0080.0200.0422.3610.1580.4530.6970.2180.0250.1370.096483.4492.4412.5468.50.1130.0610.0570.0710.1260.0740.0550.0790.0500.0100.0370.026I0202011Aged1500.1550.0050.0130.0382.3810.0730.2870.6110.2020.0020.0390.054479.1485.5412.1464.00.1240.0500.1010.0790.1120.0630.0990.0830.0260.0000.0080.008I0202014Aged1500.1410.0100.0140.0382.4540.1310.2550.6480.2240.0160.0640.072472.7481.7411.3460.40.1230.0700.0560.0770.0910.0790.0520.074N/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.0400.6520.074464.30.0760.0790.017stdev0.0020.0430.0214.00.0050.0050.013NMHC (g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO (g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles79Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2000I0204042OE50.0820.0010.0020.0180.3330.1640.0890.1780.0650.0000.0200.019368.6353.2302.5342.50.0080.003-0.0020.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0060.0000.0030.002HondaI0204045OE50.1010.0090.0070.0280.2710.1530.0900.1600.0690.0000.0130.018368.5354.9305.2344.10.0040.0020.0000.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0020.001AccordI0204051OE50.0970.0030.0040.0230.3020.1270.1230.1620.0750.0000.0300.024372.7356.8307.5346.50.0010.0020.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0060.0000.0060.003average0.0230.1670.020344.40.0020.0000.002stdev0.0050.0100.0032.00.0000.0000.001I0204056OE300.0770.0010.0010.0170.2840.1520.0380.1480.0640.0000.0200.019365.5356.2303.5343.60.0080.004-0.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0010.001I0204060OE300.0770.0060.0060.0210.3050.1260.0490.1420.0660.0000.0090.016369.3358.0307.3346.40.0010.000-0.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0050.0000.0010.001average0.0190.1450.018345.00.0020.0000.001stdev0.0030.0040.0021.9740.0030.0000.000I0204069OE1500.0740.0020.0030.0170.2400.1130.0130.1120.0630.0000.0130.017368.4356.5306.1345.20.0020.004-0.0010.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0050.0000.0010.001I0204075OE1500.0890.0030.0040.0210.2010.0760.0010.0810.0730.0000.0320.024373.3358.9305.9347.30.0060.0030.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0040.002I0205007OE1500.0850.0040.0040.0210.2590.1080.0030.1110.0700.0010.0150.019365.2357.2305.4344.70.0060.0040.0010.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0030.002average0.0200.1010.020345.70.0030.0000.002stdev0.0020.0180.0041.4160.0010.0000.000I0204011Aged50.0660.0030.0040.0160.2930.1990.0830.1870.0610.0010.0200.019373.0356.0306.2345.80.0090.0050.0000.004N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0204015Aged50.0730.0010.0040.0170.3110.1980.0870.1910.0770.0000.0270.023372.3352.9305.3343.80.0010.004-0.0010.0020.0000.0010.0000.0010.0030.0000.0030.001average0.0160.1890.021344.80.0030.0010.001stdev0.0010.0030.0031.4200.002N/AN/AI0204019Aged300.0610.0030.0060.0160.2910.1980.0600.1800.0730.0000.0290.023376.6358.4308.1348.30.0100.0140.0040.0090.0000.0100.0000.0050.0040.0000.0040.002I0204023Aged300.0690.0020.0040.0160.3460.1650.0880.1810.0750.0000.0190.021368.7354.1305.8343.90.0040.0040.0010.0030.0000.0010.0000.0000.0020.0000.0030.001average0.0160.1810.022346.10.0060.0030.002stdev0.0000.0010.0013.1610.0040.0030.001I0204028Aged1500.0700.0020.0050.0170.3560.1340.0590.1590.0690.0000.0250.021367.6355.7304.8344.20.0150.0180.0090.0150.0050.0180.0010.0110.0050.0000.0050.002I0204029Aged1500.0680.0010.0050.0160.2740.0990.0200.1130.0700.0000.0280.022366.1356.8305.8344.70.0060.0140.0060.0100.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0060.003average0.0160.1360.022344.50.0130.0050.002stdev0.0010.0330.0010.4020.0030.0080.000TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles80Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0205062OE50.1020.0020.0020.0230.9510.0000.0000.1970.0250.0000.0070.007360.1331.9298.8328.60.0060.0020.0000.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0000.002NissanI0205064OE50.0340.0010.0020.0080.6700.0000.0000.1390.0160.0000.0090.006358.1332.2299.5328.60.0080.0050.0030.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0020.0000.0000.000SentraI0205069OE50.0390.0020.0020.0100.8840.0000.0000.1830.0240.0000.0060.007353.0328.9296.4325.00.0100.0010.0000.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0000.001average0.0140.1730.007327.40.0030.0000.001stdev0.0080.0300.0012.10.0010.0000.001I0206032OE300.0300.0010.0020.0070.5190.0150.0140.1190.0130.0010.0060.005352.9327.5298.7324.90.0080.0010.0000.0020.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0000.001I0206062OE300.0490.0020.0020.0121.1810.0280.0150.2630.0130.0000.0040.004354.1332.7303.3329.10.0090.0030.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0000.001I0206067OE300.0250.0020.0020.0070.6240.0200.0270.1470.0550.0000.0050.013357.6330.5304.6329.00.0110.0040.0010.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0110.0000.0000.002average0.0090.1760.007327.60.0030.0000.001stdev0.0030.0760.0052.40.0010.0000.001I0207004OE1500.0730.0010.0010.0160.4910.0140.0270.1160.0160.0000.0050.005351.3321.9292.2319.80.0110.0020.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0070.0000.0000.002I0207039OE1500.0390.0010.0010.0090.8040.0170.0260.1830.0180.0000.0070.006353.6328.2300.8325.90.0110.0020.0000.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0060.0010.0000.002I0207041OE1500.0320.0020.0020.0080.6490.0140.0160.1460.0270.0000.0060.007354.4330.0297.8326.20.0070.0020.0000.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0080.0000.0000.002average0.0110.1480.006324.00.0030.0000.002stdev0.0040.0340.0013.60.0000.0000.000I0205021Aged50.0540.0020.0030.0131.0190.0310.0240.2340.0050.0000.0040.002358.5334.0301.2330.00.0090.0000.0010.002N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0205022Aged50.0320.0020.0010.0080.6500.0290.0100.1520.0600.0000.0070.014355.0330.3298.7326.70.0100.0020.0000.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0010.0000.0000.000I0205026Aged50.0420.0020.0020.0110.6710.0340.0390.1670.0240.0000.0080.007356.0330.7298.2327.00.0050.001-0.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0000.0000.001average0.0110.1840.008327.90.0020.0000.000stdev0.0030.0440.0061.80.001N/AN/AI0205029Aged300.0750.0010.0020.0170.5960.0370.0130.1460.0170.0000.0110.007363.3336.3301.0332.20.0130.0010.0010.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0020.0000.0000.000I0205035Aged300.0410.0020.0030.0100.7780.0310.0170.1820.0250.0000.0050.006355.3330.0300.7327.10.0060.000-0.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0050.0000.0000.001I0205045Aged300.0410.0020.0030.0100.6340.0340.0270.1560.0470.0000.0110.013357.6330.2293.3325.70.0010.0010.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0010.0000.0000.000average0.0120.1610.009328.30.0020.0000.001stdev0.0040.0190.0043.40.0020.0000.000I0205049Aged1500.0870.0020.0020.0201.4210.0870.0700.3590.0110.0000.0050.004356.0330.5296.0326.30.0310.0040.0040.0100.0070.0020.0000.0030.0040.0000.0000.001I0205050Aged1500.0510.0020.0020.0121.2680.0390.0140.2870.0270.0000.0070.007353.1329.4295.1324.90.0210.0030.0030.006N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0205055Aged1500.0470.0020.0020.0111.0970.0500.0450.2660.0260.0000.0050.007354.9327.9296.1324.80.0130.0080.0020.0070.0020.0020.0000.0020.0030.0000.0000.001average0.0140.3040.006325.30.0080.0020.001stdev0.0050.0490.0020.90.0020.0010.000TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles81Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2000I0204046OE50.4490.0040.0030.0962.7230.1940.0760.6850.4900.0070.0160.110297.4319.0274.0302.40.0160.0010.0010.0040.0010.0000.0000.0000.0230.0000.0000.005VWI0204053OE50.4920.0020.0020.1033.8150.2250.0690.9430.2840.0200.0200.075299.4319.5275.6303.30.0310.0020.0010.0080.0200.0050.0000.0070.0340.0000.0010.007BoraI0204055OE50.3980.0030.0020.0842.9350.1630.0980.7190.4020.0070.0480.100301.2324.9277.4306.90.0100.0020.0010.0030.0000.0000.0000.0000.0470.0000.0020.010average0.0940.7820.095304.20.0050.0020.007stdev0.0100.1400.0182.40.0020.0040.003I0204070OE300.5720.0040.0030.1213.9200.2450.1240.9730.2830.0090.0450.076301.7330.3280.1310.60.0480.0080.0020.0140.0150.0120.0000.0090.0330.0000.0020.007I0204076OE300.5040.0040.0030.1072.9360.1950.0670.7270.3170.0040.0310.076304.7340.2278.1315.90.0240.0050.0010.0080.0000.0000.0000.0000.0370.0000.0010.008average0.1140.8500.076313.20.0110.0050.008stdev0.0100.1740.0003.70.0050.010.000I0205025OE1500.5590.0030.0020.1183.2600.2050.0670.7990.2860.0020.0340.069295.7323.3273.5303.90.0260.006-0.0010.0080.0020.0010.0000.0010.0360.0000.0020.008I0205030OE1500.4460.0030.0030.0952.8390.2860.0700.7560.4000.0060.0530.101306.1337.0280.8315.20.0090.0050.0010.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0360.0000.0030.008I0205034OE1500.5870.0040.0030.1253.1810.2210.0660.7910.2440.0080.0150.059318.5344.6293.9325.20.0150.0040.0010.0060.0000.0000.0000.0000.0270.0000.0000.006average0.1120.7820.076314.80.0060.0000.007stdev0.0160.0230.02210.70.0020.0010.001I0202059Aged50.5450.0030.0050.1163.5870.3180.1450.9350.3650.0280.1450.130301.2325.6281.8308.50.0430.0090.0020.0140.0340.0130.0010.0140.0290.0000.0090.009I0202061Aged50.5580.0020.0150.1213.2530.2040.0830.8030.3740.0300.1390.131301.6324.9280.5307.90.0330.0050.0030.0100.0200.0050.0000.0070.0240.0000.0090.007average0.1190.8690.131308.20.0120.0100.008stdev0.0040.0930.0010.50.0030.0050.001I0203029Aged300.4890.0040.0040.1053.5830.1610.0880.8490.4680.0430.1180.152301.2328.5280.1309.50.0200.0060.0020.0080.0030.0040.0000.0030.0330.0000.0080.009I0203043Aged300.5060.0030.0040.1083.9940.2200.0400.9530.4470.0450.1050.145300.4322.1277.3305.30.0370.003-0.0020.009N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.1070.9010.149307.40.0080.0030.009stdev0.0020.0740.0053.00.001N/A N/AI0203068Aged1500.5180.0030.0050.1104.3420.0970.0610.9660.5220.0520.1020.163294.4318.4276.9302.00.0310.0030.0010.0080.0080.0050.0000.0040.0350.0010.0070.010I0204002Aged1500.5240.0030.0040.1113.7210.1150.0620.8480.4600.0130.0980.129297.5324.8278.0306.30.0270.0030.0020.0080.0000.0000.0000.0000.0360.0000.0070.009average0.1110.9070.146304.20.0080.0020.010stdev0.0010.0830.0243.00.0000.0030.000TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles82Appendix E. Detailed FTP Emission ResultsVehicleTestCat.Fuel Sbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtdbag 1bag 2bag 3Wgtd2001I0204039OE50.2280.0020.0030.0491.1460.0200.0300.2560.0230.0350.0400.034303.3292.6263.1286.70.0220.003-0.0010.0060.0030.0020.0000.0020.0020.0010.0040.002RenaultI0204040OE50.2080.0030.0030.0450.8240.0150.0380.1890.0250.0300.0290.029297.7298.1260.1287.60.0250.0040.0020.0070.0000.0000.0000.0000.0030.0010.0050.003MeganeI0205041OE50.2200.0030.0030.0480.9300.0350.0470.2230.0280.0380.0540.040313.6318.0276.2305.80.0160.0030.0000.0050.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0030.002I0205046OE50.2310.0030.0050.0511.0500.0020.0230.2250.0290.0420.0560.043305.2289.8261.7285.30.0150.0010.0000.0040.0000.0000.0000.0000.0050.0010.0070.004average0.0480.2230.037291.30.0050.0000.002stdev0.0020.0270.0069.670.0020.0010.001I0204064OE300.2150.0030.0040.0470.8580.0060.0280.1890.0310.0360.0880.049298.9300.6263.3290.00.0190.0010.0000.0040.0010.0000.0000.0000.0040.0020.0080.004I0204067OE300.2270.0040.0040.0501.1240.0110.0310.2470.0250.0280.0680.039299.0299.0264.4289.50.0210.0020.0020.0060.0020.0000.0000.0000.0020.0000.0080.003I0205052OE300.2500.0030.0040.0540.9140.0080.0230.2000.0310.0290.1490.062298.1290.5256.7282.80.0340.0040.0000.0090.0050.0000.0000.0010.0040.0000.0100.003I0205056OE300.2260.0030.0040.0500.9800.0140.0340.2200.0500.0300.0550.041298.0293.9261.0285.70.0370.0030.0010.0090.0040.0010.0000.0010.0020.0010.0070.003average0.0500.2140.048287.00.0070.0010.003stdev0.0030.0250.0103.3890.0030.0000.001I0205002OE1500.3240.0050.0040.0711.1720.0140.0230.2570.0480.0310.0670.044327.9315.6278.7308.00.0220.0050.0010.0070.0000.0000.0000.0000.0080.0000.0060.003I0205008OE1500.2670.0030.0050.0580.8770.0080.0260.1930.0310.0340.1200.057301.6291.1263.6285.70.0240.0020.0010.0060.0000.0000.0000.0000.0040.0000.0150.005average0.0650.2250.051296.90.0070.0000.004stdev0.0090.0450.00915.7820.0010.0000.001I0203023Aged50.2470.0030.0080.0551.3690.0380.1390.3410.0280.0280.0500.034301.4309.8263.9295.50.0520.0080.0260.0220.0370.0210.0210.0250.0070.0020.0040.004I0203025Aged50.2770.0040.0070.0611.3420.0510.0800.3270.0240.0320.0420.033304.9302.5268.9293.80.0540.0110.0120.0210.0330.0190.0090.0190.0040.0010.0040.002average0.0580.3340.034294.60.0210.0220.003stdev0.0040.0100.0011.2060.0010.0040.001I0203044Aged300.2550.0020.0070.0561.1940.0400.0910.2940.0470.0310.0560.041306.4297.8266.2290.90.0510.0080.0130.018N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AI0203049Aged300.2560.0030.0100.0571.2110.0280.2030.3210.0420.0490.0430.046305.3293.2263.3287.50.0390.0060.0180.016N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/Aaverage0.0570.3080.044289.20.017N/AN/Astdev0.0010.0190.0042.4140.002N/A N/AI0203067Aged1500.2930.0030.0170.0671.4350.0270.1670.3580.0480.0340.0730.048311.1301.9264.6293.60.0250.0030.0050.0080.0080.0020.0000.0030.0110.0010.0110.006I0204003Aged1500.2600.0020.0290.0631.4860.0540.2590.4070.0230.0220.0440.028295.5290.6262.3283.90.0370.0050.0070.0120.0090.0080.0000.0060.0120.0000.0070.005I0204008Aged1500.3560.0040.0350.0851.7000.0250.3540.4620.0490.0310.0360.036301.4292.7262.6286.20.0350.0070.0090.0130.0040.0060.0000.0040.0170.0000.0080.006average0.0720.4090.037287.90.0110.0040.005stdev0.0120.0520.0105.10.0030.0020.001NMHC (g/mi)CO (g/mi)NOx(g/mi)CO2(g/mi)TDL-NH3(g/mi)FTIR - NH3(g/mi)FTIR - N2O (g/mi)

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 83 Appendix F. FTP Statistical Analysis Results

Statistical Analysis for FTP Emissions Results Excluding the European Vehicles



# NMHC THC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0107 0.0110 0.0110 0.0135 0.0146 0.0140

Catalyst age 0.5630 0.1137 0.0256 0.4406 0.0212 0.2463

Fuel sulfur level 0.0329 <0.0001 0.7118 0.0024 0.4059 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0350 0.0234 0.1185 0.0195 0.0738 0.0732

Vehicle*Fuel - - - 0.0074 0.3845 0.1179 No

outliers

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0806 0.0427 0.8674 0.8163 0.8973 0.8220

Vehicle 0.0106 0.0109 0.0110 0.0134 0.0145 0.0139

Catalyst age 0.5746 0.1154 0.0266 0.4521 0.0211 0.2455

Fuel sulfur level 0.0361 <0.0001 0.6758 0.0021 0.4053 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0382 0.0246 0.1189 0.0190 0.0701 0.0694

Vehicle*Fuel - - - 0.0069 0.3865 0.1097 Logarithmic

All Data

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0847 0.0513 0.8238 0.8306 0.8801 0.7269

Vehicle 0.0118 0.0128 0.0119 0.0465 0.0710 0.0513

Catalyst age 0.6483 0.1906 0.1112 0.3897 0.2680 0.0456

Fuel sulfur level 0.0794 0.0011 0.2698 0.0200 0.3819 0.0649

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0281 0.0208 0.1191 0.0137 0.0175 0.4376

Vehicle*Fuel 0.2930 0.2453 - 0.0060 - 0.0006 No

outliers

Catalyst*Fuel 0.5901 0.4431 0.6693 0.1670 0.4370 0.8133

Vehicle 0.0115 0.0125 0.0118 0.0456 0.0710 0.0513

Catalyst age 0.6711 0.1912 0.1125 0.4009 0.2664 0.0454

Fuel sulfur level 0.0774 0.0010 0.2117 0.0173 0.3960 0.0633

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0384 0.0230 0.1172 0.0135 0.0174 0.3737

Vehicle*Fuel 0.3921 0.2522 - 0.0053 - 0.0006 Arithmetic

All Data

Catalyst*Fuel 0.6289 0.5653 0.4472 0.2277 0.3809 0.9253

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 84 Appendix F. Cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 NH 3 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0126 0.0329

Catalyst age 0.0069 0.3622

Fuel sulfur level 0.5945 0.5747

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0640 0.0225

Vehicle*Fuel - -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.4928 0.2612

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 NH 3 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0136 0.0468

Catalyst age 0.0272 0.1391

Fuel sulfur level 0.0944 0.6818

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.4086 0.0282

Vehicle*Fuel - 0.1106

Catalyst*Fuel 0.4966 0.1696

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 NH 3 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0665 0.2855

Catalyst age 0.4439 0.4746

Fuel sulfur level 0.2115 0.3010

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0368 0.0213

Vehicle*Fuel - 0.4883

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0652 0.5246

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 85 Appendix F. Cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 NMHC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0107 0.0119

Catalyst age 0.6337 0.7521

Fuel sulfur level 0.1054 0.2070

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0398 0.0296

Vehicle*Fuel - -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0418 0.3909

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 NMHC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0160 0.0137

Catalyst age 0.9052 0.5188

Fuel sulfur level 0.0260 0.0063

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0985 -

Vehicle*Fuel 0.2235 -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.5167 0.6605

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 NMHC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0124 0.0137

Catalyst age 0.0085 0.0537

Fuel sulfur level 0.0555 0.0101

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0379 0.0439

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0229 0.0684

Catalyst*Fuel 0.4006 0.4996

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 86 Appendix F. Cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 THC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0107 0.0119

Catalyst age 0.3867 0.5316

Fuel sulfur level 0.0468 0.1290

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0326 0.0273

Vehicle*Fuel - -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0263 0.3606

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 THC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0182 0.0302

Catalyst age 0.2814 0.0905

Fuel sulfur level 0.0220 0.0008

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0257 0.0192

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0628 0.0064

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3977 0.8519

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 THC Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0117 0.0189

Catalyst age 0.0019 0.0231

Fuel sulfur level <0.0001 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0235 0.0185

Vehicle*Fuel 0.1107 0.0927

Catalyst*Fuel 0.5961 0.7134

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 87 Appendix F. Cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 CO Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0103 0.0111

Catalyst age 0.0328 0.1222

Fuel sulfur level 0.7357 0.4895

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0770 0.1192

Vehicle*Fuel - -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3054 0.4137

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 CO Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0142 0.0145

Catalyst age 0.2814 0.3814

Fuel sulfur level 0.0220 0.2912

Vehicle*Catalyst - -

Vehicle*Fuel - -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3977 0.1359

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 CO Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0537 0.1155

Catalyst age 0.0347 0.1442

Fuel sulfur level 0.1152 0.0198

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.2595 0.0772

Vehicle*Fuel 0.2006 -

Catalyst*Fuel 0.4500 0.7390

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 88 Appendix F. Cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 NO

x 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0119 0.0123

Catalyst age 0.6204 0.8133

Fuel sulfur level 0.0388 0.0092

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0486 0.0399

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0362 0.1748

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3813 0.5020

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 NO

x 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0185 0.1175

Catalyst age 0.2879 0.3597

Fuel sulfur level 0.0227 0.1860

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0690 0.0114

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0117 0.0034

Catalyst*Fuel 0.6881 0.3407

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 NO

x 

# Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0174 0.0416

Catalyst age 0.4861 0.3840

Fuel sulfur level 0.0051 0.0037

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.1277 0.0297

Vehicle*Fuel 0.2567 0.1038

Catalyst*Fuel 0.9962 0.3066

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 89 Appendix F. Cont.

FTP Statistical Analysis Results

Statistical Analysis Results for Individual Bags

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 1 N 2 

# O Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0168 0.0242

Catalyst age 0.4536 0.4581

Fuel sulfur level <0.0001 0.0040

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0230 0.0534

Vehicle*Fuel 0.1115 0.0010

Catalyst*Fuel 0.7401 0.4845

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 2 N 2 

# O Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0316 0.0741

Catalyst age 0.3929 0.8716

Fuel sulfur level 0.0571 0.2488

Vehicle*Catalyst - -

Vehicle*Fuel 0.2634 0.0007

Catalyst*Fuel 0.5663 0.1469

ANOVA Analyses for FTP Bag 3 N 2 

# O Emissions



# No Outliers

logarithm arithmetic

p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0205 0.0398

Catalyst age 0.0357 0.0994

Fuel sulfur level 0.0002 0.0219

Vehicle*Catalyst - 0.3254

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0457 0.0050

Catalyst*Fuel 0.8808 0.2035

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 90 Appendix F. cont.

Statistical Analysis Results for FTP Emissions Including the European Vehicles



# NMHC THC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0060 0.0062 0.0065 0.0083 0.0090 0.0087

Catalyst age 0.3715 0.0574 0.0084 0.3217 0.0072 0.1698

Fuel sulfur level 0.0135 <0.0001 0.5905 0.0021 0.6112 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0346 0.0206 0.0740 0.0115 0.0610 0.0607

Vehicle*Fuel - - - 0.0041 0.4070 0.0545 No

outliers

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3309 0.1714 0.8407 0.6832 0.9087 0.8609

Vehicle 0.0060 0.0061 0.0064 0.0083 0.0090 0.0087

Catalyst age 0.3794 0.0581 0.0088 0.3304 0.0072 0.1682

Fuel sulfur level 0.0129 <0.0001 0.5476 0.0018 0.6104 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0376 0.0217 0.0742 0.0112 0.0612 0.0567

Vehicle*Fuel - - - 0.0037 0.4095 0.0496 Logarithmic

All

Data

Catalyst*Fuel 0.3238 0.1998 0.8527 0.6727 0.8962 0.7717

Vehicle 0.0063 0.0069 0.0069 0.0328 0.0529 0.0389

Catalyst age 0.3890 0.0883 0.0514 0.2540 0.2016 0.0259

Fuel sulfur level 0.0281 0.0003 0.2356 0.0182 0.5259 0.0602

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0394 0.0197 0.1026 0.0083 0.0113 -

Vehicle*Fuel 0.4631 0.2727 - 0.0040 - 0.0002 No

outliers

Catalyst*Fuel 0.8967 0.7086 0.7487 0.1674 0.3483 0.7893

Vehicle 0.0062 0.0068 0.0068 0.0323 0.0528 0.0389

Catalyst age 0.4008 0.0874 0.0516 0.2621 0.2010 0.0253

Fuel sulfur level 0.0230 0.0002 0.1811 0.0158 0.5408 0.0587

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0500 0.0226 0.1021 0.0081 0.0112 -

Vehicle*Fuel - 0.2985 - 0.0034 - 0.0002 Arithmetic

All

Data

Catalyst*Fuel 0.9351 0.9720 0.5413 0.2183 0.3101 0.9053

“-” = no interaction

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 91 Appendix G. THC Emissions Results

FTP THC Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages



# European

Excluded European

Included European

Excluded European

Included

5 

# 0.053 0.058 OE 

# 0.052 0.058

30 

# 0.052 0.058 Aged 

# 0.057 0.064

150 

# 0.059 0.066

FTP THC Emissions Results for Individual Bags (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages



# Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3

5 0.219 0.007 0.016 

# OE 0.213 0.007 0.016



# 30 0.210 0.008 0.016 

# Aged 0.221 0.010 0.022



# 150 0.223 0.012 0.024



# US06 THC Emissions Results (g/mi)

Fuel Averages Catalyst Averages



# European

Excluded European

Included European

Excluded European

Included

5 

# 0.024 0.023 OE 

# 0.034 0.033

30 

# 0.037 0.035 Aged 

# 0.046 0.044

150 

# 0.059 0.058University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles92Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Ford Taurus SESI02040104/4/200223,680OE50.0343.6100.003365.10.0220.0250.000I02040144/5/200223,699OE50.0332.8700.004360.20.020N/AN/Aaverage0.0343.2400.004362.70.0210.0250.000stdev0.0010.5230.0013.4990.002N/AN/AI02040204/9/200223,801OE300.0302.7850.004357.10.0290.0220.000I02040244/10/200223,820OE300.0423.4920.008348.50.0330.0260.000average0.0363.1390.006352.80.0310.0240.000stdev0.0080.5000.0036.1090.0030.0030.000I02040334/12/200223,951OE1500.0594.5150.000351.60.0400.0320.003I02040364/16/200223,978OE1500.0554.2090.025355.70.0390.0290.005average0.0574.3620.013353.70.0400.0310.004stdev0.0030.2160.0182.9070.0010.0020.002I02040484/18/200224,154Aged50.0312.6800.000359.20.0350.0250.000I02040504/19/200224,173Aged50.0373.2560.005354.80.0390.0290.000average0.0342.9680.003357.00.0370.0270.000stdev0.0040.4070.0043.0960.0030.0030.000I02040574/23/200224,273Aged300.0503.6000.016351.00.0500.0310.001I02040594/24/200224,322Aged300.0705.5320.010357.80.0440.0320.001I02040634/25/200224,341Aged300.0624.3500.013353.80.0410.0240.001average0.0614.4940.013354.20.0450.0290.001stdev0.0100.9740.0033.4170.0040.0040.000I02040684/26/200224,441Aged1500.0986.9290.058359.00.0570.0420.007I02040744/30/200224,468Aged1500.0814.4000.074351.70.0620.0410.009average0.0905.6650.066355.40.0600.0420.008stdev0.0121.7880.0115.1500.0040.0010.002University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles93Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Chevy CavalierI02060126/5/200222,613OE50.0040.9090.100288.30.0100.0000.000I02060166/6200222,633OE50.0041.5540.058284.80.0250.0160.000I02060176/7/200222,652OE50.0051.0730.067287.10.0080.0020.000average0.0041.1790.075286.70.0140.0060.000stdev0.0010.3350.0221.80.0090.0080.000I02060246/13/200222,760OE300.0091.9580.138281.60.0220.0230.001I02060296/14/200222,779OE300.0103.3050.101281.90.0360.0360.000average0.0102.630.120281.80.0290.0290.001stdev0.0010.950.0260.20.0100.0090.001I02060576/25/200222,954OE1500.0162.6130.130291.70.0370.0350.004I02060586/26/200222,973OE1500.0132.0480.163291.10.031N/AN/Aaverage0.0152.330.147291.40.0340.0350.004stdev0.0020.400.0230.50.004N/AN/AI02060686/28/200223,126Aged50.0072.8630.108296.40.0410.0390.000I02070037/2/200223,153Aged50.0041.9270.058283.10.0260.0180.001average0.0062.400.083289.80.0330.0280.000stdev0.0020.660.0359.40.0100.0150.000I02070097/3/200223,254Aged300.0142.4830.082278.90.0340.0370.001I02070177/10/200223,288Aged300.0081.3110.098277.10.0230.0210.001average0.0111.900.090278.00.0280.0290.001stdev0.0040.830.0111.30.0080.0120.000I02070217/11/200223,419Aged1500.0202.0970.139277.10.0400.0320.004I02070247/12/200223,438Aged1500.0243.0780.131266.80.0390.0330.004average0.0222.5880.135271.90.0400.0330.004stdev0.0030.6940.0067.30.0000.0010.000University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles94Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicle Test Date Mileage Catalyst Fuel NMHC CONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06 US06 US06 US06 US06 US06 US06g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi2001 Chevy Silverado I0207038 7/17/2002 8,507 OE 5 0.039 0.784 0.061 484.8 0.022 0.022 0.000I0207040 7/18/2002 8,526 OE 5 0.043 0.949 0.067 490.5 0.034 0.031 0.000average 0.041 0.867 0.064 487.7 0.028 0.027 0.000stdev 0.003 0.12 0.004 4.1 0.008 0.006 0.000I0207043 7/23/2002 8,634 OE 30 0.059 0.934 0.103 475.5 0.072 0.072 0.002I0207044 7/24/2002 8,653 OE 30 0.049 0.782 0.082 474.9 0.056 0.059 0.001average 0.054 0.858 0.093 475.2 0.064 0.066 0.001stdev 0.007 0.11 0.015 0.5 0.011 0.009 0.001I0207046 7/25/2002 8,784 OE 150 0.073 1.164 0.143 477.3 0.130 0.133 0.006I0207047 7/26/2002 8,803 OE 150 0.071 1.130 0.144 482.6 0.127 0.124 0.006I0207050 7/30/2002 8,830 OE 150 0.072 1.109 0.151 481.8 0.137 0.121 0.006average 0.072 1.134 0.146 480.6 0.131 0.126 0.006stdev 0.001 0.028 0.004 2.9 0.005 0.006 0.000I0208001 8/1/2002 8,972 Aged 5 0.031 1.023 0.088 474.4 0.091 0.120 0.000I0208003 8/2/2002 8,991 Aged 5 0.034 1.190 0.086 474.3 0.116 0.138 0.001I0208007 8/6/2002 9,018 Aged 5 0.034 1.112 0.098 470.8 0.127 0.138 0.002average 0.033 1.108 0.091 473.2 0.111 0.132 0.001stdev 0.002 0.084 0.006 2.1 0.018 0.010 0.001I0208008 8/8/2002 9,134 Aged 30 0.044 1.305 0.206 468.0 0.218 0.233 0.007I0208009 8/9/2002 9,153 Aged 30 0.046 1.227 0.168 472.4 0.196 0.218 0.008I0208012 8/13/2002 9,210 Aged 30 0.045 1.318 0.169 473.8 0.177 0.200 0.004average 0.045 1.283 0.181 471.4 0.197 0.217 0.006stdev 0.001 0.049 0.022 3.0 0.021 0.016 0.002I0208013 8/14/2002 9,301 Aged 150 0.076 1.575 0.418 471.5 0.225 0.217 0.026I0208014 8/15/2002 9,320 Aged 150 0.069 1.643 0.394 478.3 0.208 0.215 0.017average 0.073 1.609 0.406 474.9 0.216 0.216 0.021stdev 0.005 0.05 0.017 4.8 0.012 0.001 0.007University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles95Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2000 JeepI02060056/5/200229,704OE50.0457.3250.034512.20.2210.2240.006Grand CherokeeI02060146/6/200229,723OE50.0454.4990.046509.80.2900.2570.006average0.0455.910.040511.00.2550.2400.006stdev0.0002.000.0081.70.0490.0230.000I02060226/13/200229,830OE300.05311.3280.09525.20.1670.1600.017I02060256/14/200229,849OE300.0474.3370.097523.20.2960.2650.014average0.0507.830.094524.20.2310.2120.015stdev0.0044.940.0051.40.0920.0740.002I02060316/15/200229,979OE1500.0626.8020.329521.50.2140.1300.054I02060486/19/200230,005OE1500.0889.1720.331519.20.3020.2680.044I02060566/25/200230,057OE1500.11716.3670.259512.00.3310.3950.034average0.08910.780.306517.60.2820.2640.044stdev0.0284.980.0414.90.0610.1330.010I02070027/2/200230,226Aged50.0153.7870.026489.70.1870.1640.002I02070067/3/200230,245Aged50.0143.5880.013486.80.1360.1390.003I02070147/10/200230,271Aged50.0186.3670.018486.70.2160.1900.002average0.0164.5810.019487.70.1620.1520.002stdev0.0021.5500.0071.70.0360.0180.000I02070227/11/200230,372Aged300.0561.7510.166483.40.2030.1970.019I02070257/12/200230,391Aged300.0394.3440.116462.80.2120.1970.015average0.0483.0480.141473.10.2070.1970.017stdev0.0121.8340.03514.60.0060.0000.003I02070357/16/200230,528Aged1500.09512.1650.308487.90.1940.1530.055I02070377/17/200230,547Aged1500.09912.1430.300491.40.2100.1850.044average0.09712.150.304489.70.2020.1690.050stdev0.0030.020.0062.40.0110.0230.007University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles96Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Buick LeSabreI02030163/8/200220,565OE50.0040.2100.014344.00.0110.0000.000I02030203/12/200220,593OE50.0050.5610.012349.70.0360.0120.000average0.0050.3860.013346.80.0230.0060.000stdev0.0010.2480.0014.1010.0180.0090.000I02030313/14/200220,695OE300.0060.2580.030340.20.0310.0210.003I02030403/19/200220,721OE300.0070.2450.020340.10.0210.0160.001average0.0070.2520.025340.20.0260.0180.002stdev0.0010.0090.0070.0780.0070.0030.001I02030483/21/200220,824OE1500.0110.7240.066343.70.0400.0330.011I02030513/22/200220,843OE1500.0110.8040.055337.50.0410.0310.007average0.0110.7640.061340.60.0400.0320.009stdev0.0000.0570.0084.3870.0010.0010.003I02020512/22/200220,164Aged50.0090.9120.037349.10.1020.1040.004I02020542/26/200220,190Aged50.0091.7090.099355.00.1000.0990.005average0.0091.3110.068352.00.1010.1020.005stdev0.0000.5640.0444.1720.0010.0030.001I02020632/28/200220,292Aged300.0111.1180.084347.00.0680.0690.011I02030023/1/200220,310Aged300.0090.9940.071343.10.0760.0840.011average0.0101.0560.078345.10.0720.0760.011stdev0.0010.0880.0092.7580.0060.0100.000I02030063/5/200220,411Aged1500.0232.9570.292351.50.0930.1010.037I02030093/6/200220,430Aged1500.0212.9010.284362.90.1000.109N/Aaverage0.0222.9290.288357.20.0970.1050.037stdev0.0010.0400.0068.0250.0050.006N/AUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles97Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicle Test Date Mileage Catalyst Fuel NMHC CO NOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06 US06 US06 US06 US06 US06 US06g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi g/mi2001 Dodge Neon I0203021 3/12/2002 19,067 OE 50.0045.495 0.028 278.9 0.044 0.024 0.000I0203024 3/13/2002 19,086 OE 50.0023.842 0.038 275.6 0.025 0.014 0.000average 0.003 4.669 0.033 277.2 0.034 0.019 0.000stdev 0.001 1.169 0.007 2.317 0.014 0.007 0.000I0203046 3/21/2002 19,378 OE 30 0.006 9.171 0.041 286.1 0.049 N/A N/AI0203050 3/22/2002 19,398 OE 300.0044.879 0.047 281.9 0.030 0.017 0.000average 0.005 7.025 0.044 284.0 0.039 0.017 0.000stdev 0.001 3.035 0.004 2.945 0.013 N/A N/AI0203030 3/14/2002 19,187 OE 150 0.009 4.615 0.072 272.3 0.047 0.036 0.002I0203034 3/15/2002 19,206 OE 1500.0104.144 0.076 268.9 0.046 0.030 0.003I0203039 3/19/2002 19,233 OE 150 0.021 9.241 0.106 285.2 0.064 0.039 0.003average 0.013 6.000 0.085 275.5 0.052 0.035 0.003stdev 0.007 2.817 0.019 8.611 0.010 0.005 0.001I0202043 2/20/2002 18,634 Aged 5 0.009 8.182 0.049 287.8 0.048 0.036 0.000I0202046 2/21/2002 18,654 Aged 50.0067.111 0.028 284.8 0.034 0.019 0.000average 0.008 7.647 0.039 286.3 0.041 0.028 0.000stdev 0.002 0.757 0.015 2.111 0.010 0.011 0.000I0202050 2/22/2002 18,752 Aged 30 0.010 7.266 0.056 279.9 0.030 0.031 0.007I0202053 2/26/2002 18,778 Aged 30 0.009 8.368 0.082 296.1 0.028 0.020 0.000average 0.010 7.817 0.069 288.0 0.029 0.025 0.003stdev 0.001 0.779 0.018 11.45 0.002 0.008 0.005I0202062 2/28/2002 18,875 Aged 1500.0389.373 0.088 286.2 0.045 0.046 0.001I0203001 3/1/2002 18,895 Aged 1500.0195.957 0.050 277.6 0.035 0.022 0.001I0203008 3/5/2002 18,922 Aged 1500.04010.873 0.091 286.8 0.074 0.063 0.000average 0.032 8.734 0.076 283.5 0.051 0.044 0.001stdev 0.012 2.519 0.023 5.172 0.021 0.020 0.001University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles98Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Toyota CamryI02030073/5/200222,946OE50.0084.1330.039319.20.1570.1060.002I02030103/6/200222,515OE50.0095.5480.032317.10.1780.1240.001average0.0094.8410.036318.20.1680.1150.002stdev0.0011.0010.0051.5000.0140.0130.000I02030173/8/200222,614OE300.0217.3050.070316.60.1800.1150.003I02030223/12/200222,642OE300.0278.0810.072319.40.1790.1130.003I02030263/13/200222,660OE300.0206.9960.083309.70.1440.0940.005average0.0237.4610.075315.30.1670.1070.004stdev0.0040.5590.0074.9780.0200.0110.001I02030412/19/200222,779OE1500.0334.6750.143308.20.1150.0720.008I02030452/20/200222,798OE1500.0324.9330.121304.20.114N/AN/Aaverage0.0334.8040.132306.20.1150.0720.008stdev0.0010.1820.0162.8690.001N/AN/AI02010461/31/200222,055Aged50.0209.2590.054331.20.1790.1720.002I02020012/1/200222,074Aged50.0094.8440.027315.90.0770.0740.000I02020082/5/200222,100Aged50.0093.8970.034317.80.0980.0970.001average0.0136.0000.038321.60.1180.1140.001stdev0.0062.8620.0148.3530.0540.0510.001I02020162/7/200222,199Aged300.0358.1900.069321.80.1350.1020.004I02020182/8/200222,217Aged300.0214.5120.064321.80.1520.1240.002average0.0286.3510.067321.80.1440.1130.003stdev0.0102.6010.0040.0140.0120.0150.002I02020362/14/200222,310Aged1500.07912.1890.179323.10.1030.0840.007I02020372/15/200222,329Aged1500.0537.5500.160313.10.1130.0750.006I02020572/27/200222,355Aged1500.0539.0540.152310.20.1070.0810.008average0.0629.5980.164315.50.1070.0800.007stdev0.0152.3670.0146.7780.0050.0040.001University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles99Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Chrysler SebringI02050205/8/200219,808OE50.01221.780.017376.60.1140.1440.000I02050235/9/200219,827OE50.00715.050.022374.20.1250.1020.000average0.01018.410.020375.40.1190.1230.000stdev0.0044.760.0041.7590.0070.0300.000I02050275/10/200219,928OE300.01917.260.064371.90.1410.1400.000I02050315/14/200219,954OE300.01616.740.067373.00.1350.1300.000average0.01817.000.066372.40.1380.1350.000stdev0.0020.370.0020.8010.0040.0070.000I02050395/16/200220,087OE1500.02213.260.177380.20.096N/AN/AI02050405/17/200220,106OE1500.01610.670.098375.40.1050.0840.000I02050445/21/200220,132OE1500.02513.810.086376.50.1340.1080.000average0.02112.580.120377.40.1120.0960.000stdev0.0051.680.0492.5060.0200.0170.000I02050515/23/200220,275Aged50.01822.820.078377.90.1360.1200.000I02050545/24/200220,295Aged50.00712.930.055378.30.0850.0780.000I02050605/29/200220,321Aged50.01014.060.035380.50.0690.0740.000average0.01216.600.056378.90.0970.0900.000stdev0.0065.410.0221.3760.0350.0250.000I02050655/30/200220,421Aged300.02216.620.124367.90.0770.1070.000I02050665/31/200220,440Aged300.01515.210.093375.00.1130.0920.000average0.01915.920.109371.40.0950.1000.000stdev0.0050.9970.0225.0200.0260.0100.000I02060046/4/200220,578Aged1500.06519.9370.154376.30.1020.0890.000I02060116/5/200220,597Aged1500.03512.6680.162368.60.1370.1350.000I02060156/6/200220,616Aged1500.03812.3310.147366.90.1630.1350.000average0.04614.9790.154370.60.1340.1200.000stdev0.0174.2970.0085.0180.0300.0270.000University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles100Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Acura 3.2CLI02050615/29/200220,648OE50.0067.4870.106346.60.0790.0720.000I02060106/5/200220,715OE50.0065.6350.125342.90.0550.0450.000I02060136/6/200220,734OE50.0057.9010.163342.00.0590.0510.000average0.0067.0080.131343.80.0640.0560.000stdev0.0011.2070.0292.50.0130.0140.000I02060236/13/200220,863OE300.0238.0670.039332.80.0670.0580.000I02060276/14/200220,883OE300.0248.0940.096338.00.1110.0880.000average0.0248.080.068335.40.0890.0730.000stdev0.0010.020.0403.70.0310.0210.000I02060496/19/200221,017OE1500.04811.330.279334.40.1440.1110.004I02060556/25/200221,071OE1500.09813.280.143334.80.1830.1400.006average0.07312.310.211334.60.1630.1250.005stdev0.0351.380.0960.30.0280.0200.001I02060646/27/200221,216Aged50.00715.6030.062360.20.1140.1420.000I02060696/28/200221,236Aged50.00511.9830.043348.00.0870.1210.000average0.00613.790.053354.10.1010.1310.000stdev0.0012.560.0138.60.0190.0150.000I02070057/2/200221,339Aged300.0157.5720.149322.90.1220.1180.001I02070077/3/200221,359Aged300.0177.0490.247324.60.0800.0860.002average0.0167.310.198323.70.1010.1020.002stdev0.0010.370.0691.20.0300.0230.001I02070157/9/200221,493Aged1500.0718.1840.085330.10.1130.0960.008I02070167/10/200221,513Aged1500.08414.0510.101324.50.1310.1160.008I02070207/11/200221,533Aged1500.08112.8230.13319.90.1020.0970.009average0.07911.6860.105324.80.1150.1030.008stdev0.0073.0940.0235.10.0150.0110.001University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles101Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Ford WindstarI02020242/12/200221,675OE50.0141.0820.039442.10.0720.0720.000I02020292/13/200221,695OE50.0130.8650.038445.90.0660.0720.000average0.0140.9740.039444.00.0690.0720.000stdev0.0010.1530.0012.6580.0040.0000.000I02020472/21/200221,790OE300.0202.2100.097442.50.0660.0630.002I02020492/22/200221,810OE300.0171.9880.067437.90.0550.0560.001average0.0192.0990.082440.20.0600.0590.002stdev0.0020.1570.0213.3150.0080.0050.001I02020562/26/200221,907OE1500.0241.6090.172439.70.0780.0820.012I02020582/27/200221,927OE1500.0241.8120.129431.50.0770.0880.007average0.0241.7110.151435.60.0770.0850.010stdev0.0000.1440.0305.7610.0010.0040.004I02010361/25/200221,261Aged50.0177.5350.067449.90.1290.1450.001I02010411/29/200221,287Aged50.0248.2950.082458.40.1520.1850.001average0.0217.9150.075454.10.1400.1650.001stdev0.0050.5370.0116.0000.0160.0290.000I02010451/31/200221,383Aged300.0389.5040.188448.70.1620.1890.007I02020022/1/200221,402Aged300.03711.7710.118446.40.1340.1620.004average0.03810.6380.153447.50.1480.1760.006stdev0.0011.6030.0491.6260.0190.0200.002I02020092/5/200221,498Aged1500.0272.6610.340445.50.0970.1010.022I02020112/6/200221,512Aged1500.0201.6900.329445.00.1000.1080.015I02020142/7/200221,536Aged1500.0273.4570.276440.00.1210.117N/Aaverage0.0252.6030.315443.50.1060.1090.019stdev0.0040.8850.0343.0130.0130.0080.005University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles102Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2000 Honda Accord EXI02040424/17/200212,361OE50.0031.0110.005308.60.0030.0000.000I02040454/18/200212,380OE50.0060.5240.006315.30.0000.0000.000I02040514/19/200212,400OE50.0041.4020.006313.50.0090.0000.000average0.0040.9790.006312.50.0040.0000.000stdev0.0020.4400.0013.4540.0040.0000.000I02040564/23/200212,508OE300.0041.1280.005319.90.0100.0020.000I02040604/24/200212,528OE300.0081.2060.005312.40.0040.0040.000average0.0061.1670.005316.10.0070.0030.000stdev0.0030.0550.0005.3010.0040.0020.000I02040694/26/20012,659OE1500.0041.8930.012311.20.0140.0090.001I02040754/30/20012,686OE1500.0040.2480.010310.00.0010.0000.000I02050075/2/200212,712OE1500.0040.2530.008309.40.0050.0000.000average0.0040.7980.010310.20.0070.0030.000stdev0.0000.9480.0020.8850.0060.0050.000I02040114/4/200211,958Aged50.0030.9220.012313.80.005N/AN/AI02040154/5/200211,977Aged50.0030.3400.004307.7-0.0010.0000.000average0.0030.6310.008310.70.0020.0000.000stdev0.0000.4120.0064.2770.004N/AN/AI02040194/9/200212,078Aged300.0040.3440.008311.70.0010.0000.000I02040234/10/200212,098Aged300.0020.5560.007311.40.0020.0000.000average0.0030.4500.008311.60.0020.0000.000stdev0.0010.1500.0010.1870.0010.0000.000I02040284/11/200212,198Aged1500.0041.0410.012310.20.0060.0050.001I02040294/12/200212,217Aged1500.0021.4040.011315.50.0180.0120.000average0.0031.2230.012312.90.0120.0090.000stdev0.0010.2570.0013.7830.0080.0050.001University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles103Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Nissan SentraI02050625/29/20027,112OE50.0023.4920.002326.60.0040.0050.000I02050645/30/20027,113OE50.0031.9960.005329.80.0040.0000.000I02050695/31/20027,132OE50.0021.750.003326.40.0090.0000.000average0.0022.4130.003327.60.0050.0020.000stdev0.0010.9430.0021.90.0030.0030.000I02060326/15/20027,243OE300.0023.7260.004329.60.0280.0230.000I02060626/27/20027,291OE300.0026.8320.004331.40.0300.0350.000I02060676/28/20027,345OE300.0026.1290.005331.50.0300.0440.000average0.0025.5620.004330.80.0300.0340.000stdev0.0001.6290.0011.10.0010.0110.000I02070047/2/20027,446OE1500.0023.8780.005310.90.0240.0130.000I02070397/17/20027,472OE1500.0023.2740.006318.20.0290.0180.000I02070417/19/20027,507OE1500.0024.5130.009317.30.0310.0150.000average0.0023.8880.007315.40.0280.0150.000stdev0.0000.6200.0024.00.0040.0020.000I02050215/8/20026,592Aged50.0033.8460.002329.50.019N/AN/AI02050225/9/20026,611Aged50.0034.5450.003325.50.0150.0030.000I02050265/10/20026,631Aged50.0034.0690.003327.30.0160.0080.000average0.0034.1530.003327.40.0170.0060.000stdev0.0000.3570.0011.9730.0020.0030.000I02050295/14/20026,733Aged300.0022.8680.003325.30.0150.0050.000I02050355/15/20026,733Aged300.0035.8620.002323.10.0340.0370.000I02050455/21/20026,810Aged300.0033.4820.005319.40.0210.0100.000average0.0034.0710.003322.60.0230.0170.000stdev0.0011.5810.0022.9850.0100.0170.000I02050495/22/20026,911Aged1500.0023.7120.019321.70.0310.0220.000I02050505/23/20026,930Aged1500.0024.1010.014321.10.039N/AN/AI02050555/24/20026,950Aged1500.0033.2690.018324.10.0230.0200.000average0.0023.6940.017322.30.0310.0210.000stdev0.0010.4160.0031.5970.0080.0010.000University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles104Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2000 VW BoraI02040214/9/20027,479OE50.0120.8780.026293.20.0250.0290.000I02040264/11/20027,516OE50.0140.7110.131295.60.0160.0050.007average0.0130.7950.079294.40.0200.0170.003stdev0.0010.1180.0741.6790.0070.0170.005I02040714/26/20027,880OE300.0201.0390.082295.40.0560.0550.008I02040764/30/20027,703OE300.0150.6300.008271.80.0310.0270.000average0.0180.8350.045283.60.0440.0410.004stdev0.0040.2890.05216.680.0180.0200.006I02050255/10/20027,918OE1500.0220.8960.013277.50.0490.0510.000I02050305/14/20027,945OE1500.0280.5700.020273.10.0500.0430.000I02050345/15/20027,964OE1500.0270.6610.008275.80.0550.0490.000average0.0260.7090.014275.50.0510.0480.000stdev0.0030.1680.0062.2030.0030.0040.000I02020322/13/20026,863Aged50.0071.3740.041303.70.0100.0070.000I02020552/26/20026,908Aged50.0113.4090.066321.40.0600.0450.000average0.0092.3920.054312.50.0350.0260.000stdev0.0031.4390.01812.4660.0350.0270.000I02030283/13/20027,100Aged300.0180.3640.196292.60.0120.0060.013I02030293/14/20027,108Aged300.0060.6000.052275.00.0200.0200.000I02030473/21/20027,170Aged300.0070.6410.066293.30.018N/AN/AI02030533/22/20027,185Aged300.0060.6420.052290.30.0170.0210.000average0.0090.5620.092287.80.0160.0160.004stdev0.0060.1330.0708.6540.0030.0080.007I02030573/26/20027,288Aged1500.0642.4730.171301.30.0700.0720.018I02030613/27/20027,303Aged1500.0270.4300.151292.30.0210.0180.012I02030653/28/20027,318Aged1500.0260.4630.180292.60.0200.0140.012average0.0391.1220.167295.40.0370.0350.014stdev0.0221.1700.0155.0980.0290.0320.003University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles105Appendix H. Detailed US06 Emission ResultsVehicleTestDateMileageCatalystFuelNMHCCONOXCO2TDL - NH3FTIR -NH3FTIR -N2OUS06US06US06US06US06US06US06g/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mig/mi2001 Renault MeganeI02040274/11/20026,192OE50.0101.8110.020299.10.0320.0370.000I02040314/12/20026,216OE50.0080.7340.017297.90.0180.0140.000I02050415/17/20026,731OE50.0060.8380.055281.40.0240.0180.000I02050465/21/20026,758OE50.0040.8250.024273.20.0180.0080.000average0.0071.0520.029287.90.0230.0190.000stdev0.0030.5080.01812.7080.0070.0130.000I02050525/23/20026,860OE300.0110.6440.015276.90.0200.0090.000I02050565/24/20026,911OE300.0040.6870.026275.10.0210.0100.000average0.0080.6660.021276.00.0210.0100.000stdev0.0050.0300.0081.3250.0010.0010.000I02050025/1/20026,493OE1500.0301.0470.044277.80.0350.0210.000I02050085/2/20026,543OE1500.0140.7920.026275.40.0310.0160.000average0.0220.9200.035276.60.0330.0190.000stdev0.0110.1800.0131.7390.0030.0040.000I02030123/6/20025,638Aged50.0074.0070.027297.50.0620.0670.000I02030153/8/20025,672Aged50.0033.1350.043299.20.0560.0540.000average0.0053.5710.035298.40.0590.0610.000stdev0.0030.6170.0111.1700.0040.0090.000I02030523/22/20025,823Aged300.0231.7330.093291.50.0290.0350.005I02030583/26/20025,861Aged300.0220.8320.051299.30.0230.0290.004I02030633/28/20025,883Aged300.0281.7520.094299.90.0410.0390.008average0.0241.4390.079296.90.0310.0350.006stdev0.0030.5260.0254.6720.0090.0050.002I02040094/4/20026,020Aged1500.0662.5490.123294.20.036N/AN/AI02040164/5/20026,028Aged1500.0282.1550.089292.40.014N/AN/AI02040184/9/20026,051Aged1500.0312.1980.077289.50.0360.0290.003average0.0422.3010.096292.00.0290.0290.003stdev0.0210.2160.0242.3500.012N/AN/A

# University of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH 3 

# Emissions from Late Model Vehicles



# 106 Appendix I. US06 Statistical Analysis Results

Statistical Analysis for US06 Emissions Results Excluding the European Vehicles



# NMHC THC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0155 0.0136 0.0161 0.0130 0.0142 0.0177

Catalyst age 0.0902 0.0069 0.0825 0.0222 0.0873 0.2419

Fuel sulfur level <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0821 <0.0001 0.0043 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0290 0.0229 0.0384 0.1018 0.0446 0.2235

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0021 0.0018 0.2639 0.1713 0.2094 - Logarthmic

Catalyst*Fuel 0.1778 0.2333 0.1568 0.3720 0.0443 0.1108

Vehicle 0.0227 0.0196 0.0136 0.0588 0.0219 0.0940

Catalyst age 0.0482 0.0092 0.0704 0.0498 0.3205 0.0877

Fuel sulfur level 0.0001 <0.0001 0.6676 <0.0001 0.0465 0.0044

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.1550 0.0451 0.2367 0.1515 0.0206 0.0514

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0027 0.0029 0.1412 0.0670 0.0754 0.0013 No

Outliers

Arithmetic

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0070 0.0087 0.3106 0.2015 0.9281 0.0438

Statistical Analysis for US06 Emissions Results Including the European Vehicles



# NMHC THC CO NO

x 

# NH 3 

# N 2 

# O

p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value

Vehicle 0.0099 0.0087 0.0099 0.0085 0.0088 0.0116

Catalyst age 0.0728 0.0103 0.0267 0.0043 0.1401 0.3766

Fuel sulfur level <0.0001 <0.0001 0.2054 <0.0001 0.0012 <0.0001

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.0400 0.0253 0.0274 0.1507 0.0394 0.2589

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0029 0.0033 0.1202 0.1590 0.2250 - Logarthmic

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0954 0.2979 0.0398 0.0968 0.0581 0.0555

Vehicle 0.0148 0.0127 0.0079 0.0461 0.0133 0.0768

Catalyst age 0.0232 0.0058 0.0345 0.0159 0.3041 0.0379

Fuel sulfur level <0.0001 <0.0001 0.7656 <0.0001 0.0425 0.0028

Vehicle*Catalyst 0.1315 0.0339 0.2139 0.1540 0.0142 0.0609

Vehicle*Fuel 0.0015 0.0018 0.1077 0.0495 0.0670 0.0007 No

Outliers

Arithmetic

Catalyst*Fuel 0.0011 0.0013 0.2030 0.0593 0.7954 0.0112

“-” = no interactionUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles107Appendix J. Detailed NEDC Emission ResultsVehicle Test Date Mileage Cat. Fuel S ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDCppm g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km2000 VW Bora I0204021 4/9/2002 7,479 OE 5 0.367 0.002 0.136 2.504 0.098 0.981 0.135 0.001 0.050 269.9 149.2 193.5 0.023 0.004 0.011 0.007 0.000 0.002 0.015 0.000 0.004I0204032 4/12/2002 7,524 OE 5 0.384 0.002 0.142 2.391 0.045 0.907 0.137 0.003 0.052 264.9 148.7 191.4 0.016 0.001 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.005I0204038 4/16/2002 7,538 OE 5 0.387 0.001 0.143 3.030 0.039 1.139 0.127 0.001 0.048 262.2 147.8 189.9 0.017 0.001 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.005average 0.379 0.002 0.140 2.641 0.061 1.009 0.133 0.002 0.050 265.7 148.6 191.6 0.018 0.002 0.008 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.016 0.000 0.005stdev 0.011 0.000 0.004 0.341 0.033 0.118 0.005 0.001 0.002 3.879 0.719 1.822 0.004 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000I0205006 5/2/2002 7,760 OE 30 0.510 0.003 0.189 3.141 0.045 1.180 0.210 0.026 0.094 248.2 151.7 187.1 0.014 0.001 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.119 0.000 0.018I0205014 5/7/2002 7,793 OE 30 0.440 0.002 0.163 3.248 0.059 1.230 0.132 0.001 0.049 274.4 146.2 193.2 0.017 0.001 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.048 0.000 0.007I0205019 5/8/2002 7,800 OE 30 0.360 0.001 0.133 2.383 0.049 0.909 0.134 0.006 0.053 266.4 148.3 191.8 0.013 0.001 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.061 0.000 0.009average 0.437 0.002 0.162 2.924 0.051 1.106 0.159 0.011 0.065 263.0 148.7 190.7 0.015 0.001 0.006 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.076 0.000 0.011stdev 0.075 0.001 0.028 0.471 0.007 0.173 0.044 0.013 0.024 13.420 2.768 3.235 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.038 0.000 0.006I0205037 5/16/2002 7,983 OE 150 0.405 0.002 0.150 2.782 0.088 1.078 0.150 0.003 0.057 268.5 155.0 196.7 0.011 0.009 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.043 0.0000.006I0205042 5/17/2002 7,990 OE 150 0.493 0.004 0.183 3.036 0.047 1.141 0.233 0.011 0.093 266.8 155.1 196.0 0.010 0.004 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.070 0.0000.010I0205047 5/21/2002 8,004 OE 150 0.393 0.003 0.147 2.691 0.059 1.027 0.171 0.003 0.065 268.6 148.5 192.7 0.010 0.005 0.007 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/Aaverage 0.431 0.003 0.160 2.836 0.065 1.082 0.185 0.006 0.072 268.0 152.9 195.1 0.010 0.006 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.057 0.000 0.008stdev 0.055 0.001 0.020 0.179 0.021 0.057 0.043 0.005 0.019 0.987 3.758 2.132 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.000 0.003I0202032 2/13/2002 6,863 aged 5 0.449 0.002 0.166 2.933 0.025 1.094 0.172 0.025 0.079 240.4 153.0 185.2 0.015 0.000 0.006 0.005 0.000 0.002 0.020 0.0000.006I0202055 2/26/2002 6,908 aged 5 0.429 0.002 0.160 2.904 0.019 1.081 0.206 0.007 0.080 266.0 150.4 193.0 0.017 0.000 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.002 0.026 0.0000.008average, km 0.439 0.002 0.163 2.918 0.022 1.088 0.189 0.016 0.080 253.2 151.7 189.1 0.016 0.000 0.006 0.005 0.000 0.002 0.023 0.000 0.007stdev, km 0.014 0.000 0.005 0.020 0.004 0.009 0.024 0.012 0.001 18.10 1.833 5.543 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.001I0203047 3/21/2002 7,170 aged 30 0.454 0.002 0.168 2.925 0.025 1.089 0.177 0.017 0.076 261.7 148.3 189.9 0.016 0.001 0.006 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AI0203053 3/22/2002 7,185 aged 30 0.458 0.002 0.169 3.270 0.017 1.211 0.205 0.048 0.105 262.5 148.5 190.3 0.018 0.000 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.027 0.000 0.008average, km 0.456 0.002 0.168 3.097 0.021 1.150 0.191 0.033 0.091 262.1 148.4 190.121 0.017 0.000 0.006 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.027 0.000 0.008stdev, km 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.244 0.005 0.086 0.019 0.021 0.021 0.537 0.129 0.258 0.001 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AI0203056 3/26/2002 7,281 aged 150 0.419 0.005 0.157 3.070 0.054 1.163 0.182 0.006 0.071 265.8 148.9 191.9 0.019 0.002 0.008 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.032 0.000 0.009I0203064 3/28/2002 7,311 aged 150 0.480 0.003 0.178 3.031 0.020 1.125 0.180 0.014 0.075 260.8 149.1 190.1 0.013 0.001 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.008average, km 0.449 0.004 0.167 3.050 0.037 1.144 0.181 0.010 0.073 263.3 149.0 191.0 0.016 0.001 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.029 0.000 0.008stdev, km 0.043 0.001 0.015 0.027 0.024 0.027 0.002 0.006 0.003 3.530 0.113 1.285 0.004 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.000 0.001FTIR - N2OFTIR - NH3TDL-NH3CO2NOxCONMHCUniversity of California, Riverside, CE-CERT CRC E-60: NH3Emissions from Late Model Vehicles108Appendix J. Detailed NEDC Emission ResultsVehicle Test Date Mileage Cat. Fuel S ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDC ECE EUDC NEDCppm g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km g/km2001 Renault Megane I0204027 4/11/2002 6,192 OE 5 0.167 0.003 0.063 0.544 0.022 0.213 0.012 0.020 0.017 258.8 153.5 192.1 0.012 0.003 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.001I0205033 5/15/2002 6,717 OE 5 0.156 0.003 0.059 0.475 0.035 0.196 0.012 0.009 0.010 237.2 161.3 189.1 0.013 0.010 0.011 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.012 0.002 0.002I0205038 5/16/2002 6,724 OE 5 0.194 0.003 0.073 0.654 0.070 0.284 0.010 0.013 0.012 249.1 163.3 194.6 0.017 0.006 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.001average, km 0.172 0.003 0.065 0.558 0.042 0.231 0.011 0.014 0.013 248.4 159.3 191.9 0.014 0.006 0.009 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.008 0.001 0.002stdev, km 0.020 0.000 0.007 0.090 0.025 0.046 0.002 0.006 0.004 10.838 5.194 2.778 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.001I0204047 4/18/2002 6,336 OE 30 0.264 0.005 0.100 0.633 0.020 0.245 0.017 0.007 0.011 256.1 153.3 191.0 0.016 0.002 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.001I0204052 4/19/2002 6,343 OE 30 0.166 0.002 0.062 0.592 0.026 0.234 0.012 0.025 0.020 254.7 152.9 190.3 0.010 0.004 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.001average 0.215 0.004 0.081 0.613 0.023 0.240 0.015 0.016 0.016 255.4 153.1 190.7 0.013 0.003 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.001stdev 0.069 0.002 0.026 0.029 0.004 0.008 0.004 0.012 0.006 0.96 0.318 0.511 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000I0205009 5/3/2002 6,563 OE 150 0.171 0.004 0.065 0.607 0.020 0.236 0.015 0.010 0.012 240.4 151.8 184.3 0.008 0.002 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.000 0.004I0205015 5/7/2002 6,570 OE 150 0.162 0.004 0.062 0.561 0.010 0.212 0.010 0.013 0.012 259.1 150.5 190.4 0.011 0.001 0.005 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/Aaverage, km 0.166 0.004 0.064 0.584 0.015 0.224 0.012 0.012 0.012 249.8 151.2 187.4 0.009 0.002 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.000 0.004stdev, km 0.006 0.000 0.003 0.033 0.007 0.017 0.004 0.002 0.000 13.24 0.854 4.332 0.002 0.001 0.001 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AI0203012 3/6/2002 5,638 aged 5 0.193 0.003 0.073 0.797 0.020 0.305 0.018 0.026 0.023 255.8 154.7 191.8 0.052 0.006 0.023 0.027 0.006 0.009 0.005 0.004 0.002I0203015 3/8/2002 5,672 aged 5 0.199 0.003 0.075 0.839 0.035 0.330 0.025 0.025 0.025 252.9 155.9 191.4 0.052 0.006 0.023 0.021 0.005 0.007 0.005 0.001 0.002average, km 0.196 0.003 0.074 0.818 0.028 0.317 0.021 0.025 0.024 254.4 155.3 191.6 0.052 0.006 0.023 0.024 0.005 0.008 0.005 0.003 0.002stdev, km 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.030 0.010 0.018 0.005 0.001 0.001 2.05 0.793 0.233 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.000I0203052 3/22/2002 5,823 aged 30 0.191 0.003 0.072 0.766 0.020 0.295 0.027 0.014 0.019 250.1 154.3 189.5 0.041 0.005 0.019 0.024 0.007 0.008 0.010 0.003 0.003I0203059 3/27/2002 5,869 aged 30 0.171 0.003 0.065 0.730 0.013 0.276 0.018 0.009 0.012 252.9 153.7 190.0 0.031 0.003 0.014 0.0120.0040.0040.007 0.001 0.002I0203062 3/28/2002 5,876 aged 30 0.189 0.003 0.071 0.759 0.022 0.292 0.028 0.025 0.026 255.3 153.7 191.0 0.032 0.004 0.014 0.014 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.000 0.001average, km 0.184 0.003 0.070 0.752 0.018 0.288 0.024 0.016 0.019 252.8 153.9 190.2 0.035 0.004 0.015 0.017 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.002 0.002stdev, km 0.011 0.000 0.004 0.019 0.005 0.010 0.006 0.008 0.007 2.620 0.330 0.729 0.006 0.001 0.003 0.007 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001I0204016 4/5/2002 6,028 aged 150 0.244 0.006 0.093 0.928 0.030 0.361 0.017 0.017 0.017 255.1 152.7 190.4 0.010 0.008 0.009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AI0204018 4/9/2002 6,051 aged 150 0.157 0.004 0.060 0.717 0.020 0.276 0.012 0.013 0.013 253.8 153.5 190.3 0.020 0.002 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.001average, km 0.200 0.005 0.077 0.822 0.025 0.318 0.015 0.015 0.015 254.5 153.1 190.4 0.015 0.005 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.001stdev, km 0.062 0.001 0.024 0.150 0.007 0.060 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.91 0.547 0.100 0.007 0.004 0.000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ANMHC CONOxCO2TDL-NH3FTIR - NH3FTIR - N2O