FOV OWUTY ENG THE

TRANSIENT EMESSHONS SUMMARY -- 1969 BASELINE ENUINE IS?

MAY 24. 1479

NROE 20 clu: Je ENGI: N318 PH IpAR RATED BHP: N/7A RATEL RPMS N/A

COMM TGs 14n9 LT aN
a HAMS / HHP-He B/BHY-HR | ACTUAL + GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL OISP CUDE
Tar eapine We eo won TASFE wee ae ROR HE OR eee VALID
T4S147 HLT 0905 7270 68.56 623 00597 16.758 -4.8 10.23 90.13 10-63) 12,99 315,62 13.89 8
T9S1G9 WL 0902 7270 100.91 7669 061? 18.35) -06l UL.DL 145.5% 121-09 12,58 164.89 12.56 8
T9S1SU SL 890) Hebb 9bL4S o.nT 0-599 17.524 4.6 11.63 125,60 9044 14,27 154.22 11.99 a

MEANS T.9h 86.97 7.60 0.599 VT.S44 4S 10.96 120.42 10645 13,28 146,91 12.68 ne 3

S10.DFV. & we 16,63 0.69 0-011 0.797 43 0.76 28.07 0.89 0.88 25.92 dels

-S7-


| -23-
SPEED COMMAND

COMMAND

A/D

SPEED FEEDBACK 1

nN

seo COMMAND

~ dt THROTTLE
| DUA | 0 COMMAND

Lso5
la
[*y
| Bs MS
| ZT
FEED- REFERENGE
BACK {KCOMMANI})
raek. | TAPE
TORQUE COMMAND
| far t T
FB
CASSETTE TI 9608 | CALTB |
KEYBOARD | ee oTs

1 Tenney oreo

ATTENUATED

SPEED
AMPLIFTER

| SPEED COMMAND

THROTTLE posttton

TORQUE ERROR

TORQUE ERROR
| MMPLTETER

VOLTAGE
THROTTLE

i TORQUE FEEDBACK

AMPLTFTER

DYNO

THROTTLE

SERVO
MOTOR

&

SHAFT
TORQUE
METER

roe TRANCT Earn nuacede,

ANALOG CONTROL CIRCUITRY

—DRIVE
SHAFT

ENGINE

HARDWARE


Technical Report

1969 Heavy-Duty Engine Baseline Program

and 1983 Emission Standards Development

by

Timothy P. Cox
Glenn W. Passavant

Larry D. Ragsdale

May, 1979

Standards Development and Support Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Office of Air, Noise and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency


HEAVY ONUTY ENGINE  TRANSTFUT

= 1967 HASEL IME FNGIME CS?

NE Ot an Gtor 3th ENGIN? DITA Fon) RATED BHP: NZA RATED PPM ZA

COMMENTS: $959 WT WER

NUM BE DB

ANS 7 Bip APU AHR ACTUAL GRAMS 7 MILE WETOHICD GRAMNS/LE FURL DISP CONF

- - - VALIO

TRST CaO Tse ore co Ux ASF OHP- H ERROR HC co NOX oe co NOK Me VALID
BoOTAH HL TAND TeAT 164.86 6609 965A 71.920 red 19.96 279,467 11.96 2.26 x
BOOIAT “Lr ING2 4.94 145.90 5 0.60 17.854 ed 12.36 202.34 13.512 221-05 10-68 8
Anoyeu ML TROIS RD 152.95 7.69 9 HAP 1R.ISA uel 12-4) 215.17 10-82 12.9% 22462h 11-20 8
Avorsy st LADe NeTE 1N3.98 TAN 0.640 IA.127 0-164 12.23 187.09 b1.0% 13.61 209.28 12629 fn
WEAN? SNe 164.2 Toe n.641 IAeDLD -1e5 12.33 201.87 80-55 14.35 718.20 Lbe%2 n= 3

STN.DEV. ft ueda 9.61 O.43 9.071 0-251 1.6 9.09 19.55 0-67 0.36 1.89 0.81


-17-

BASELINE ENGINE LOLE
TEST DATA SHEETS

19 ENGINES


-12-

the chassis, supplying the engine to the EPA laboratory in the
proper test configuration, reinstalling the engine into the
chassis, and returning the vehicle to its owner. The scope of
work for Task Order 10, found in Appendix I more fully outlines the
provisions of this contract.

This task order was successfully completed and the final
report accepted by ECTD on November 8, 1978. Included in Appendix
I to this technical report 1s a copy of the final report on this
contract and a copy of the inspection and tune-up sheets for the
engines ultimately included in the baseline.

A third contract with SCI, EPA Contract No. 68-03-2715,
Procurement of Heavy-Duty Venicies and Preparation of Engines
for Baseline Emissions Testing, was awarded on September 14,
1978 for procurement of additional baseline vehicles. The purpose
of this contract, as regards the 1969 baseline, was generally
similar to Task Order 10 outlined above, except that of the re-
quired 15 engines to be procured, prepared, and delivered, 10 would
be delivered to EPA/ MVEL, and 5 to SwRI for testing at these
facilities. The specifics of this contract are in the Scope of
Work for Contract No. 68-03-2715, found in Appendix I. This
contract 18 not yet closea out vecause 1t also includes procurement
of 1973 engines for the HD NOx baseline program. The tune-up and
inspection sheets for the engines procured under this contract and
ultimately included in the baseline are found in Appendix 1.

4. Problems Encountered

In the period beginning October 1977 and ending January
1979, ECTD and its contractor made every effort to procure engines
which met all of the selection criteria outlined on page 7.
However, due to time, budget, engine availability, and sampling
plan constraints, all engines included in the baseline did not
satisfy all of the selection criteria necessary to qualify as class
"A" engines.

Specifically, of the twenty-three engines included in the
baseline, seven had accumulated more than 80,000 miles (see
Table IV-A-3). The carburetors and/or distributors on some
engines either were replaced by new original equipment parts
supplied by the manufacturers or rebuilt to bring their performance
characteristics nearer to manufacturer's specifications.

Also, baseline engine 16, a Ford 360, had received a valve job
at 75,000 miles. This vehicle odometer read 81,464 at the time of
procurement. Although this vaive job made this a class "B" engine,
ECTD felt tnat it was important to include this engine due to its
high sales. As will be shown later, tnis engine's emissions were
not unrepresentative of this engine line.


BASELINE ENGINE TRANSIENT
EMISSION TEST SUMMARY TABLES

4 TABLES


-30-

Table IV B-4

Instrumentation Summary

Instrument

General Electric Direct
Current Dynamometer

Lebow Torquemeter

Lebow Torque Signal
Conditioner and Indicator

CVS Unit (Philco-Ford)

Texas Instrument 960B
Computer with Silent 700
ASR Data Terminal

LABECO Control Console,
Control Equipment

Purpose/Specifications

Absorbing, 380 HP, 400 ft. Lb.
Motoring: 300 HP, 375 fr. Lb.
Base Speed: 5,000 RPM
Frame Size: TLF 3644-F

Model #1228H(5,000 in-lbs,
0 - 5,000 RPM)

hodel #7535

CFV Type, 1,500 SCFM Capacity


-10!1-

Vv. References

These publications will aid the reader in obcaining a greater
understanding of the transient cest procedure and the 1983 HD NPRM
which this report supports.

Report Number Report Title NTIS
and Date and Author Number
HDV 76-03 Engine Horsepower Modeling for Diesel
Oct. 1976 Engines, C. France
HDV 76-04 Engine Horsepower Modeling for Gasoline
Dec. 1976 Engines, L. Higdon
HDV 77-01 Selection of Transient Cycles for Heavy-

Nov. 1977 Duty Engines, T. Wysor & C. France
HDV 78-01 Category Selection for Transient Heavy- PB 294 088
May 1978 Duty Chassis and Engine Cycles, C. France
HDV 78-02 Selection of Transient Cycles for Heavy- PM 294 221
June 1978 Duty Vehicles, T. Wysor & C. France
HDV 78-03 Truck Driving Patterns and Use Survey, PB 293 843
May 1978 Phase II, Final Report, Part IT

Los Angeles, L. Higdon
HDV 78-04 Transient Cycle Arrangement for Heavy- PB 293 764
July 1978 Duty Engine and Chassis Emission Testing,

C. France
HDV 78-05 Analysis of Hot/Cold Cycle Requirements PB 293 842
July 1978 for Heavy-Duty Vehicles, C. France
HDV 78-06 A Preliminary Examination of the Repeat- PB 293-830
June 1978 abilicy of the Heavy-Duty Transient Dyna-

mometer Emission Test, W. Clemmens

EPA 460/3-78-008 Heavy-Ducy Vehicle Cycle Development, PB 288 805
July 1978 Malcolm Smith

Federal Register Proposed Gaseous Emission Regulations

Vol. 44, No. 31 for 1983 and Later Model Year Heavy-Duty

Part IL Engines

February 13, 1979


-37-

7, Emission Sampling System

Emissions were sampled using the CFV-CVS bag technique.
Dilution factors for the transient and 9-mode FTP's were deter-
mined using an average air/fuel ratio of 13.4, dilution factor for
the idle test by using a raw co, analyzer. (The calculations
were performed according to the” appropriate Federal Register).

Sample bags were analyzed at an analyzer site using the
following equipment:

Gas Instrument EPA No.

HC Beckman Model 400 (40% H, /60% He Fuel) 086985
CO(0-1000 ppm) Bendix Model 8501-5MB 109724
CO (0-50,000 ppm) MSA Model 202 109961
co, MSA Model 202 109952
NOX TECO Serial #CT~M-1063-29 109723
cH, Bendix Model 8205 038333

Raw CO, measurements for the idle test were taken on an
MSA Model 702 (EPA #109949) analyzer (0-14%, with ice bath).

Maintenance and calibration checks of the equipment were
performed regularly. Both propane injections and an Easttech
Vortex shedding flowmeter were used on a weekly basis to check
calibration on the CFV-CVS flow.

Emissions collected in the test cells were analyzed at EPA
analyzer train A009, Located 200 feet down che hall. The maximum
delay between sample collection and sample analysis was twenty
minutes.

The sampling timetable used during a transient test 1s pre~
sented in Table IV B-8.

Series 10


HEAVY DUTY PUGINE TRANSIFME EMESSEIN, SUMMAfIY -- 1969 HASFLEINE  FNINE ES)

May ree 1979

MEGS 40 ClDt Ine FNGIDE GHABG ARHNCRLE WATFO RHE: NYA RATED PPE 7a
COMM NI SE 1969 BLE Le
NUMA E B® GRAMS 7 RHP. APP ACTUAL, * GRAMS 7 MILE WEIGHED GPA DESe cour
TEST CON ERNG He co 10x ASF unp. um oRNRMR Ne 0 Nox oe Has vaLD
auOINH BE 14602 ALST TAILS etae 20.507  -ReD 19.79 IN4.3S BLAH NALS ASHL7G ARE w
RONTOS BL 1401 tae 296.UR Oo. 20.936 hed 14.26 120.88 BBA 1N.TS 264.41 7.32 mn
ROOLOs ML 1403 ALGO 180.52 0.716 2n.62t -369 EX.9R ZITAT 09D BNGTD PGS.9$ 7124S 8
MEANT HD LATO? o.Ti? 20-698 AD B6.01 WH.3T HT ANON 2S4.NH 1622 ae 3
STD. t at BAA DD 0006 0.222 1.0 0.74 13.62 0.38 O12 9626 0629

~&2-


-33-

Table IV B-6

1969 Transient Baseline Repeatability

Coefficients of Variationl/ (%)
Engine Valid Tests BSHC BSCO
Sngine

(1) Chrysler 225
(2) THC 392

(3) Ford 391

(4) LHC 304

(5) Ford 330

(6) GM 351C

(7) Ford 330

(8) GM 350-2

(9) Chrysler 318-3
(10) THC 345

(11) GM 350-2
(12) Ford 300
(13) LHC 345

(14) GM 366

(15) Ford 361
(16) Ford 360
(17) GM 292

(18) Chrysler 318-1
(19) Ford 361
(20) Ford 360
(21) GM 350-2
(22) Chrysler 361
(23) GM 366

PORK NOUOROORY

MOURN FE OUNLOEUELUNOSUFOUOF

PPYVAWUE rae RODE RE OOD

NWUADeENYONUNUGOKWO- NFRORYW

WHYNWWNRYNWEWUNHUHLNDUUNUN
ron

rau
ae

Mean Baseline Coefficient
of Variation: (C. of V.) 5.9 5.8

A/C. of V. = 100% x standard deviation of all valid tests/mean of
all valid tests.


HPAVY DUTY FAGINE TRANSIENT EMISSION, SU4MaAKY  - 2909 BASELINE ENUINE CS?

MAY 246 19To

MEGS au Cine eae EnGIus GM202 Vac et RATED BHPS N7a RATE WPMD Na
Comme NTS: Wong HLT #n7
NUMBER GRAMS 7 Hie-nue a/R ACTUAL, 6 ORAMS 7 MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LK FUEL = DISP CUDE
vereeneern ene - Seiten tateietees B= VALID
re co ASFC Nee ee FARO ue co NOX He co NOX wm? VALID
HOOLeY He 170E 209.46 7.60 0.459 15.548 -}ed 12.96 250.95 Gelb 12.59 263.66 B.S K
BuOIeE Wes 1702 285.06 5.61 1 .0nO 13.662 -13.3 23.36 796.45 5.84 20.860 263.946 5.20 x
wOdte? Wes 1703 217.57 4.96 u.66) lo.add oy 12.79 283.56 6.46 11.40 252.70 o-76 x
BOOlss HLT 1704 197.05) S697 0. BOG 1e.67H  -0.9 9.98 227,19 6.65 = 10.02 226.06 6.68 x
HOONSS HL 1705) H621 221.73 8.56 0. 906 14.ASY -d.w 249.06 6625 9.07 245.00 6.14 x
HUO}OY HE 1706 5.24 155.35 3.69 W858 17.945 14.8 212.97 5.54 7,99 234.13 6.10 x
HOOLTO Mee LTO Tele 161,00 14.63 0-578 Ho - Lee? 174,93 15.86 12.39 276.54 25.3} x
AOOIT) HL L706 yay a 4eTd 06774 vs ens 214.89 5.65 V1.4 4 233.33 6.14 8
BOOT BH HL i710 A660 DIDaD 464 0.784 15.020 207.52 5-16 10.97 228.87 2-69 x
BOOLTe ML + 1709 7.99 105.12 554 0.750 Is.ben 193.93 6-50 10.66 220.15 7.38 8
A009 me NTAD 7.0% 192,79 4.64 0.73? 16.2Ns 4.3 8.79 205.44 5.60 9.61 222.31 6.33 x
ME ant A654 172.6 Dee 0.162 15.251 ~4.3 10.10 204.4) 6.07 11,20 226.74 6.16 Ne 2
STD.OPV. 8 uedT 10.95 9-56 0.017 O.bls det 1.00 14.82 0-60 0.76 9.32 0-68

~G5 7


-43-
Each of the 19 engines incluaed in the baseline received ac least
one valid idle test with a maximum of 6.

Based on the fact that:

1) Only 1969 model year heavy-duty gasoline-fueled engines
were tested;

2) Over 79 percent of the 1969 fleet 1s represented; and
3) 55 valid idle emission tests were accomplished on these
engines;

ECTD concludes that the 1969 baseline data for the idle emission
standard 1s representative of the HC and CO emissions levels of
1969 gasoline-fueled HD engines. Tne following values are con-
sidered as a 90 percent reduction from actually measured emissions
of 1969 HD gasoline-fueled engines and are the proposed 1983
heavy-duty idle emission standards:

HC 970 ppmCc

co 47%


740040 Lats
79004 Pw
190062 1

aya

Hood

14109,
13566.
1304f,
1ssna.

scowl?

ENGIO:

ava,
lov,

10.0

OM ASN 2 U Ihe

WATE AUPE

Hone

HC

V164,
bya,
410s.
1203,

122.8

~-@35-

2704.7 789,T

ENUINE tS)

RATED RPM

N/A

MODE NO. &

He

L464,
1443,
14496,

1444,

20.9

a

20498.
2167).
20011.
2o7et.

653.3

NOK

BoB.

90d.
Coe

66.9



-5-

Table IV-A-1

1969 Sales Data

Manufacturer Engine Sales % of Market
Chrysler 318-3 10,850 3.1
9.3% 318-1 10,150 2.9
361 7,000 2.0
383 2,000 0.6
413 1,500 0.4
225 1,000 0.3
Ford 330 50,200 14,4
33.5% 360 21,300 6.1
361 17,300 5.0
300 14,200 4.1
391 6,700 1.9
477 2,600 0.7
390 2,300 0.7
534 2,000 0.6
GM 350-2 47,000 13.5
39.3% 366 22,000 6.3
292 18,000 5.2
351¢ 12,000 3.6
250 10,000 2.9
307 9,000 2.6
305C 6,600 1.9
477 6,300 1.8
350-4 3,000 0.9
396 2,000 0.6
THC 345 20,500 5.9
14.7% v304 17,300 5.0
v392 7,600 2.2
RD450 3,350 1.0
VS478 2,000 0.6
Others* 11,334 3.2
3.2%
Total 347,584 100%
* Others as shown here represents sales of small volume engines

whose individual percentages in tne 1969 market were insignificant.


-1i-

Contributors

The development of this baseline program and the ultimate
determination of the baseline emission levels would not have
been possible without the dedicated work of the personnel listed
below:

Special recognition is due William B. Clemmens who was di-
rectly responsible for the success of the baseline program and the
development of the transient test procedure. dis technical skills
and expertise greatly enhanced EPA's acquisition of transient
testing capability and the ultimate success of this baseline
program was in large part due to his efforts.

Testing Technicians

Engineering Computer Specialists

John Anderson
Chester France
Robert Maxwell
Jack McFadden
Timothy Mott
Richard Nash
Larry Ragsdale
Kevin Stulp

Tad Wysor

Eugene Chaires
Jensen Cheng
John Kargul

Robert Kopacz

Secretarial Support

Lois Gardner
Nancy Henderson
Jennifer Stanley

Joan Wirth

Thaddeus Cieslak
Vincent Crowell
Timothy Davis
John Drake
Stephen Halfyard
Leon Jones.
Lawrence Navarre -
J. Michael Spates
David Watson

Ronald Westlake


-40-

M = Marginally valid cest
X = Invalid tese

The test data on pages 49-70, summarize the test results for
each of the 23 baseline engines tested. Using the descriptions
above and basic engineering knowledge, the data should be self-
explanatory.

The four tables following the test data sheets, (Computer
Tables 1-4) summarize the results shown for each of the twenty-
three baseline engines. Although che data in these tables shoula
be easily understood using the short descriptions below, one
important factor should be discussed.

The Clean Air Act Amendments prescribed that tne 1983 HC and
CO emission standards should be determined from the average of the
actually measured emissions from heavy-duty gasoline-fueled ve-
hicles or engines. ECTD interpreted average to mean the average of
the entire 1969 fleet of HD gasoline-fueled vehicles and not just a
simple average of the engine lines sold which would give equal
weighting to each engine line sold. Thus, ECTD has sales-weighted
the emission results according to the market share each engine line
actually held correctea to 100 percent. This correction to 100
percent was necessary vecause not all engine lines are repre-
sented in the baseline. These market shares and their correction
to 100 percent are shown in Computer Table 2. In the final analy-
$is, using a simple average of the engine lines tested yielded only
slightly more stringent emission standards.

For the reader's use, a short description of each cable 1s
provided below:

(1) Computer Table 1: Sales-Weighted Brake Specific Emis-
sions. This table gives the average brake specific emissions
g/BHP-hr) of HC, CO, and NOx for each baseline engine, sales-
weighting fractions and sales-weighted emissions plus the number of
valid tests on each engine ("Sample Size"). Figures representing a
90 percent reduction are aiso shown. The NOx data 1s not needed
for any of the proposed standards and 1s included solely for
informational purposes.

(2) Computer Table 2. Sales-Weighted Percentages Data. This
table lists che percent of totai 1969 sales represented by each
baseline engine ("percent cocal"), as well as the percentage
corresponding co the fraction of total sales representea by each
engine using the combined sales of only the baseline engines as a
base ("Corrected percent”). The latter figure yields the weighting
factors.

(3) Table 3: Brake Specific Emissions. This table lists the


1969) BASLUEINE ENGINE (9)

HEAVY OOULY FNGINE TRONSTFNT @,5S10N» SUMMARY

MAY 240 1979

Nhs 40 cin 366 ENGINE GMt6b SFT RATEO BHPI NvA RATED RPME N/A
COMM: NESS 1969 HLT #27
NUMBER GRAMS 7 BUP-HR B/HMPHAHR ACTUAL GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL DISP CODE
a eee wenne VALID
ASFC NUP. HF RROR He co NOK HC co NOK val 10
BO0A3In HELI 2301 4.4% 229.10 4.23 0-644 20.5¢0 -500 13.60 205.13 672 13,01 200647 0.57 a
HOO2T/ ML 2302 4.71 138,80 4.04 0.6068 19.790 6.4 0.0 0.0 0-0 13.04 207,78 6.05 x
800234 AL 7303 4245 161,00 4,96 0.679 20-260 bel 13.24 220,53 Told 12.44 207,66 bee a
H00239 ALI 2304 8.7L 134.50 S.19 0.673 2.100 72.3 13.51 206.66 8.05 12.94 199.85 77k 8
MEANT 865) 1AG.H7T 4.660 0.665 20-633 -4.5 13.45 211.44 7.30 12,83 202.66 7.00 N= 3
SID.DFV. & O15 5.96 0449 0.019 0.420 2.0 0.19 8.07 0-68 0,34 4.34 0.62


HEAVY DUTY ENGINE Tntp TEST FNESSTONS samaly 1969 BASELINE  ENUENE OS)

MAY P44. 1979

MEG? iu) cipt ve FNGID: F330 AAtISASS BATED AUP: ONZA RATED REMY ONZA
COMM. TSE fone RET ans
MODF NU. 1 HONE NO. 2 HOHE NO. Y MODE NO. 4 O1SP COVE
ones eens --- B= vaLTN
4 co Hux M= VALID
377. ISWA, LIT, 17TII. 6HS44, 1517. 3398. 1719, 2272. 794K, TOIT. 8
304, 16h? 6. 2999S. ALAS. 2132. 3900- 2255. 27ia. HOT3. LAST. 8
Worn, 1618, WALO2. Ty, 2055. 3793. 2621. 2590. 8364. 1929. 8
MEANT vwoo, TAINT+ §=220. 21943, T4ISS. She. 1901. 3667. 219A, asia. B262. 1ADI. N= 3
STO.DEV. & th. 659.5 27.6 6975.3 6641.5 46.8 33509 315.5 453.9 223.6 277.2 149.3

~GO-


1969 Heavy-Duty Engine Baseline Program

and 1983 Emission Standards Development



-1-

I. Foreword

Under the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1977, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency was tasked to develop revised
hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emission standards for heavy-duty
engines for the 1983 model year. The Emission Control Technology
Division (ECTD) of EPA's Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution
Control was directed to determine these revised emission standards
based on the criteria outlined in the Clean Air Act Amendments.
Specifically, the Emission Control Technology Division was to
measure the HC and CO emission levels of uncontrolled heavy-duty
gasoline-fueled engines (model year 1969) and determine the
emission standards based on at least a 90 percent reduction from
the average of these actually measured emissions.

Consequently, ECTD began a baseline program to procure the
engines prescribed by the CAAA (1969 MY) and test the emission
levels of these engines to determine the baseline emission levels.

The primary purpose of the 1969 baseline program was to
develop the baseline emission levels used to determine the 90
percent reduction. The 90 percent reduction directly represents
the HC and CO emission standards which should then be proposed for
heavy-duty engines beginning in MY 1983.

The purpose of this technical report is to present the results
of the 1969 baseline program and explain the methodology by which
the 1983 heavy-duty HC and CO emission standards were calculated.

It includes:

1. Engine procurement and preparation information.

2. Revised cycle statistical validation criteria.

3. Transient and idle test summaries for each engine tested.

4. Derivation of the 1983 standards.

While most of che information in this report has previously
been placed in the public docket in various forms, this report
provides a complete information base which should facilitate

evaluation and comment on the baseline program by HD vehicle/engine
manufacturers and other interested parties.


-28-

voltage curves. A small torque error compensatory voltage would
then be sufficient to account for variation in engine performance
(e.g., a cold engine vs. a hot engine). EPA plans to implement one
of these alternatives in the near future. Furthermore, based upon
testing experience to date, additional capabilities of a transient
dynamometer controller are desirable. These include:

1) The engine should be capable of being "uncoupled" from the
dynamometer, either electrically or mechanically, during idle
portions of the transient test. This allows for a free idle,
especially important during a cold start if the engine tis
equipped with an automatic choke.

2) The controller's data reduction capability should be
sufficient to allow rapid calculation of a test's cycle
performance statistics. This allows much prompter trouble-
shooting of controller calibration settings, resulting in
higher system reliability and lower void rates.

4. Engine Preparation and Instrumentation
Engines tested at MVEL arrived from two sources: private
contractors and in-house procurements. Engines obtained through

in-house procurements were removed from the vehicles and assembled
upon test stands; those engines originating from contractors
arrived in test-ready configuration. In both cases, the engines
were set up for testing according to MSAPC Advisory Circular 22A
(April 3, 1973).1/

The standard engine test configuration consisted of the
engine's flywheel bolted cto a torquemeter-equipped rubber-softened
2/ driveshaft (Dana-Spicer) coupled to the dynamometer. The engine
was isolated from its mountings by shock-absorbing rubber mounts

(usually OEM vehicle mounts). The throttle actuator stands were
bolted to the dynamomecer bea viate and to the engine itself by
means of a rigid cross bar. (Accurate transient control of the

chrottle was difficult unless the actuator motor and the engine
were rigidly fixed to one another.) The throttle servo motors were
clutch driven with internal position feedback potentiometers. The
actuator arms were connected to the throttle linkages by either
ball chain or wire cable such that full travel of the actuator arm
(approximately 60°) resulted in wide-open throttle.

V The only exception to A/C 22A procedure was that engines were

mot equipped with clutcn assemplies, driveshafts were bolted
directly to the flywheel by means of an adapter plate. A/C 22a is
included in Appendix II.

2/  Driveshafts used at EPA were ruvber-softened to alleviate the
possibility of resonant torsionai vidrations. SwRI used solid
steel shafts with no apparent difficulties.


MROr 270
COMM TS:

NUMMER

M059 Ten L30L
196540 Lo 1300
19H9NG Tote 2303
MEANT

Stb.0bV. F

HEAVY

bury

cle
band Wet

MODE

Hoo.
Bus.
ove
Hou,

3.7

FG TN

3s

wy

no.

nse,
UG Ibe
947%.
ons.

624.6

toe

ENOLOE

Test

EMESS Lots

May 24

V3eS T19L4h

MODF ND

5627.
Pe.
4586,
4972.

en23.2

2092.
24202.
24580.
2eu2e.

1703-2

63.
15.
61.

66.

T.e

RATED BHPS

MONE

HC

2933.
2418,
2306.
2352.

$8.5

~€7-

1969

N/A

NO

co

14204.
14950.
144607.
14542.

381.7

HOSEL Int

ENGINE (5)

RATED Rent N/A

NOX

1783,
1096,
1se7.
1689,

94.3

He

2073,
2456.
2079,
2109,

1ol.g

NO. &

10392.
14693
lotsa.
11423.

2699.2

NUX

1320.
Vous.
1009.
1360.

313.9

OISP COLL
VALID
= VALIU
B
a
Cy)
N= 3


HEAVY DUTY OFNGTHE TOLER TEST EMTSSION, SUMMARY - 1969 BASELINE ENGINE (9)

Moy Pee FRED

mEGt 40 cine 336 ENGIDE F330 ABNGONS RATEO fips NZA | RATEO RPME ONZA
COMMENTS: 1969 HLT HOT

NUM CFR MovE HO. t MODE NO. 2 Mong NO. 4 MODE NU. & OTSP CODE
wenn ene eene-- ee A= VALID
Test cune HC co NOx HC co Nox Me VALID
ranges TH OTOL 1646, 19575. 100, THUG. Gn ylee 32. W537. 2375S. 466, 1866, 23619, Sud. B
T0925 TH A702 1901. POR. 1d, 1126, Wee. She Vara, 2t77s, 512. 12. 24132. Soh, 8
190026 PVH 0703 md. 1 69026 42045, 36. LOTS, VIILT. Ibe 1840. W923ye THee 8
19N02T Tak A708 Py. AB20. Jan. 2. 1562. 23078. 1008. wn. 144609. THO. 8
790029 Toh 0705 1514. 199716 ASG. GOHOT. = 2-169. 24H50. 526, LRAT, = 24365, SIH 8
190059 Ten 0706 210A, = 296556 SIIB. 14NSH. 70. 2599, BIS. 965. 29ND. THIS. SOT. 8

ME Att 1.36. TAVIS 75216 40257. 27. 1816, P6l2h. 745, 1936. 22243. 6096 N= Of

SID.ORV, F “ATT THOR. 2005 141960 SA? 6.A 402.7 OAD S 24965 192.3 4692.7 124d


-9-

the distributors. If a carburetor or distributor was found to be
out of specifications, then the required overhaul or rebuild was
done by the manufacturer when possible. This distributor and
carburetor checking process was very time consuming due to tight
scheduling at manufacturer's facilities. As a result of these
delays, the carburetors and distributors of all baseline engines
were not checked at the manufacturer facilities. Ite should be
emphasized that the operation of all carburetors and distributors
was inspected by EPA/MVEL and corrected if necessary. The carbur-
etor flow curves and distributor curves for several baseline
engines are shown in Appendix I.

3. Procurement Actions

Several procurement actions were instituted to obtain the
initial 25 baseline engines. These consisted of actions by
ECTD and ECTD's authorized contractors, SCI, and EG & G.

To expedite the procurement of baseline vehicles and get
the 1969 baseline program underway, procurement actions were
started by ECTD personnel in October 1977. ECTD contacted State
and Federal agencies and the Armed Forces to determine the avail-
ability of 1969 model year venicles. The first successful procure~
ment action was completed on December 19, 1977, when baseline
engine number one was procured (see Table IV-A-3).

In February 1978, SCI (formerly Olson Labs) was awarded
EPA Contract No. 68-03-2412, Task Order 7, Location and Source
Search for 1969 Model Year Heavy-Duty Vehicles. The purpose
of this contract was to assess the availability of 1969 HD gas-~
oline-fueled vehicles having a GVWR between 16,000 and 33,000
Pounds. Availability was defined to mean that an arrangement
(i.e., lease, borrow, etc.) could be made to remove the engine for
performance testing on an engine dynamometer. The goal of Task
Order 7 was to identify 100 HD engines which met the selection
criteria outlined above. The scope of work for Contract No.
68-03-2412, Task Order 7, found in Appendix I, more fully outlines
the provisions of this contract. This task order was successfully
completed and the final report was accepted by ECTD on June 15,
1978. Included 1n Appendix [ to this technical report is a
copy of the Final report for this contract and a copy of the
contact and inspection sheets for the engines ultimately included
in the baseline.

Also in February 1978, EPA Contract No. 68-03-2411, Task
Order 10, Heavy-Duty Vehicle Engine Emissions Baseline Testing
Program, was awarded to SCI. The purpose of this task order
was to provide 15 qualified original equipment 1969 HD test
engines, identifred by ECTD, in the proper test configuration
to the EPA/MVEL in Ana Arbor. The contractor was responsible
for transporting the vehicle to SCI, removing the engine from



MF Oy:
COMM fy

NUMBE

west cop

793002 HLT
793003 tL
TIINNG Ht
TIVZ9 HL
796296 HLT
TINAKA HL
7967395 HE
TYP HLT

MEANT

S1O-08V

HEAVY

em

fet

n

Lie

neal
vane
"603s
1406
408
«10
499
ont

1yao HLT #04

nury

coe

FING ENE,

jue

GRANS 7 BHP-HR

10.95,
11.96
10.70
Ddedd
Tred
10.37
Teds
1.26

11.7?

76.91

98.09
136.24
Ve7.B?
127.65
125.65
173.40
128,99

127,716

18.42

TRANSIFNT

ENC Tus:

4 7RHP-HR

ASEC

0-677
0-649
0.664
1.640
O79
0-119
9.7ar
9.720

9.6A7

0.040

MISS Tot

MAY PG,

SUMMARY

19790

VANG KOHOGR

ACTUAL

HHP. HR

19.488
19.527)
19.606
1y.ab6
19.837
20-051
19.066
19.892

19.6482

0.14

rRRoR

a hea
162
-0.8
-1-5
=420
odel
- 4-6
~3eA

“203

165

RATED BNP:

GRAMS,

nC

16.646
16.A2
16.40
1927S
V7enl
16.47
16.33
16-01

17.26

1.46

1969

co

116.85
149.18
208,79
222.25
199.85,
198.78
194,56
202.40

196.49

27.84

-—5S 2-

BASELINE

NvA

MILE

NOX

10-67
10-19

O41

8.09
12-85
12014
12.05
12-13

10.33

1.69

FNGINE (SD

RATED

WEIGHTED

HC

16.18
17.06
16. be
20.e7
14,95
14,66
16.37
14,25

16,53

7.

RPM

313-61
WS.3
P0D.49
Panel
176.63
174.48
IM.AS
179.95

187.70

7o.71

N/A

GRAMS/LB Furl

OISP CcOvE
valu
VALTO

oueuagzerm

z
’


HRAVY DUTY ENGINE
+

SUMMARY =~ 1969 BASELINE FNUINE IS)

MAY Pay PTD

MEE Ww rip: wo ENGIN: FIA FEE RATE BHP NZA RATED RPMS RA
COMMENT SE 1ae9 HLT eo
Num or # Noor Ho. 1 MOMF OND. ? HONE NO. MODE NO, 4 DISP CONE
“ wae
RONZUS IM 2001 oo, The LHR, 4027. «wd Tet. ate ha, 979. S012. aoe 1494, 665. 8
Ronee TR 2002 177. OW. 153, 432. INIZ4. De 166. 934. 1054. eur, 1Sa8. 678, cy
MF ANI 113. A. 159. 4199. 0N26. tae 165. 957. 1033. 209. W521. 6The Ne 2

STD.DEW, 91.0 Ce i, Le eC 1.9 32.8 29,9 25.7 38,2 847


tamer one

bb Det

Fw 22un 2996 052 0

VIG? ASHOLT
dans

W504 O4n0G8
#430 9ans055
G39) 2403434
#130 4845055
OM ISO VIST2KE
Oils m4 WAR
VAGS FPYHOC
OM 350 2 LJPN
#wod

V345 71 1456
GH366 BRHUCKLE
F361 Hor

Feu 5 6G)
GN292 WACKET
OSTS 1602
Faebett 19
Find t 6nd

GNASO THANIS
Ds61-3 SLUG
GHI66 Sued

Seoosos0550000ecC BEe5C590

SALE S-WETONTEG Hitant

a)

WE TOHT ENG
FACTORS

0.0036n
0.02699
0.02331
0.06135
0,0RH IS
0.046617
0.08614
0.05521
0.01804
0.03620
0.05521
0.05031
0.0320
0.03865
0.03067
0.03742
0.06380
0.0355h
0.0067
0.93142
0.0550)
0.02454
9.01845

SALtS-Wr fonTEO GAS AAG TOTALS:

90% VEWUCTION FROM HASEL INF?

BASELINE ENGINES)
MAY 244 19919
size HO we Tontre

ne
? 7.20, 0.070
y 6.35 ott
2 13.56 0,16
5 11.22 0,068
5 2A.13
2 9.72 0.420
V 34.16 3.018
2 9.40 0.519
7 7.9 0.303
2 7.12 0,258
4 6.2) 0.343
3 7.81 0.395
y 6.41
3 8.59
2 14a.te
3 7.96
? a.S4
3 A.B2
q 9.57
2 §.92
3 AAG
2 12.643
3 4.53

SPECIFIC EMISSIONS (O/BHP HRD

ov co

s2.zo
178,47
W799
127,76
157,15
VIb.ob
224,37
170,77

80,97

To.53
120.15
233.38

94.02
187,92
228,39
132.19
172,86
144.26
197,55

15.32
150,36
168,68
134,87

- 73 ~

Pao

WEIGHTED
co

0.192
4.618
4.178
71.818
13.883
4.926
19.622
9.429
3.308
2.770
6.964
Wn.748
3.403
T.203
7.006
4.947
41.029
5.133
6.060
2.819
8.302
4.139
5.213

155.18
, 15.52

No.

10x

8.40
4624
$84
6.70
7.89
8.80
6.25
4.82
7.60
6.46
5.36
4.91
S.59
$5.32
5.43
6.63
5.14
7.54
5.09
6.88
4.58
6.01
4.66

WEIGHTED
NOX

0.031
O.1LS



-34-

Following preparation and calibration of an engine, a mapping
reference tape was created by tne MAKECAS function. The mapping
reference tape served as tne commana tape during the automatic
mapping procedure. [It consisted of wide open throttle commanas at
100 RPM speed increments over the entire speed range of engine
operation (1.e., approximately 200 RPM below idle to 300 RPM above
rated or governed RPM). Each increment lasted fifteen seconds,
torque feedback measured over the last five seconds of each incre-
ment were averaged to arrive at a maximum torque value. This
feedback data was stored on a separate cassette tape.

The mapping feedback tape was then loaded into MTS data files
by means of INPMFB, at wnich point GENCYC created a normalized
cycle reference file, wnich was then recorded on a blank cassette
by means of MAKECAS. This cassette became the command tape for
controlling the engine during the entire transient cycle.

The feedback data from a transient test was recorded on a
blank cassette during the test. The data from the feedback cas-
sette was stored into MTS by INPEFC, at which time the regression
analysis was performed by CYCPERF. Following the regression
analysis, 1t¢ was then possible to input the emission data into the
master file (STOREDS), process the tests (PROCTEST), and generate a
complete transient test report (see Appendix II).

During the baseline program, the actual process of loading
data from the cassettes to the MTS files was time consuming;
primarily because a time sharing system (MTS) was being used which
was not under direct ECTD control. This delayed cycle performance
results and tied up the keyboard terminal. EPA plans to substitute
disc memory for the cassettes in a future transient test cell, in
an effort to substantially reduce turnaround time.

"
6. Void Rates/Test Repeatability

A summary of the baseline program's void rates and the emis-
sion repeatability of valid transient tests is presented below in
Tables IV B-5 and LV B-6. Statistical validation was accom-
plished using the revised statistics within this report.

Void rates during the baseline program were somewhat high.
The voiding of tests due to experimental error (e.g., equipment
malfunction, operator error) was initially high; as more experience
with the test procedure and the equipment was gained, however,
tests voided for this reason were virtually eliminated. Statisti-
cally-void tests were present throughout the program. In most
cases, these high statistical void rates were a result of one
of three causes:

a) the statistical criteria were not available (1.e., had not
been developed) for calibration or validation when the engine was
tested. A later application of the statistical criteria indicated
that additional tests (as in engine No. 1) would not have been
needed. .


HC (PPM~C) x10-h
1300.00 1700.00 2100.00 2500.00 2300.00 3300.00 3700.00 4100.00

(300.00

SALES-WETGHTED BASELINE IDLE Ftgmte 1vet

EMISSIONS

HC (PPM-C)

eee

3.00

5.00

7.00 9.00 11.00 13,00 15.00 17,00 19,00
NO. OF ENGINES

~46-

21,00


BAG th TRANSIENT EMISSTUNS SUMMARY -~ 1969 BASELINE ENGINE (S)
may e4y 1979
NFot 30 cle 34h ENGEDS Wieww HATED BHP: N/A RATED RPMI N/A
COMM NTs 1999 HLT #08
Nua BEF ORANS 7 HAH #/QHP-HR ACTUAL . GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LH FUutL = DISP CODE

nanan eee we tee eee n een en nnn eee wen eee nnn ae nee we rene ee m enn nee ===) Ae VALID
HEST | CODING HOF MHP- HP ERROR He co NOX Hc co NOX = VALID
192404 BLE OIL 19-13 278,99 4.6 0-039 24.681 166 36.18 338.63) 9620 29,93 PAO~N) 7.61 x
T2671 WE y03 19.50 178,88 S214 0.441 24.608 163 26.12 346,18 bhekd 21.06 279.07 8.95 8
TH26T Ht 304 Le. 98 177,55 Sony 0.633 24.K0H 23 24.05 339,94 11.08 20.5) 280.49 9.14 x
142674 ML 4305 15.59 379,50 5.92 0.645 24.A95 202 25.96 342,92 31-32 22.07 278.30 2.18 6
TY2NH37T MLE 9302 12.98 $93.04 5.55 0.058 24.685 Leb 24.73 367.75 = 10657 19,73 295.38 Beas x

Mr ANd 179.19 5.87 240721 2.7 26.04 344,55 Ileed 21,06 278,68 9.08 Ne 2

SID.0FV. F 1.07 0.44 O13 0.004 0.162 U7 O.ul 2.33 0-16 0.0 0.66 O.17

—S{-


6.40

7.80

CENT)
S20

CO (PER:

4a

260

Fiyore 1V-0-4

SALES-WEIGHTED BASELINE IDLE
EMISSIONS CO (PERCENT)

NN

3.00 5.00 7.00 9.00 1.00 43,00 15.00
NO. OF ENGINES = _ay7_

17,00 19.00 .

21.00

23,00

28.00


TARL) G2 SAL ES-WEIGHTFD TRANSIENT ENGINE FMISSTONS (RAMS /MED PAGE

ENGINE

Fe 225P 2994 02 9

VI92 ASNAIT
Bnd

VI0% Kanne
F430 YA 1595S
GIST 26036
F930 onnsOss
CMISO VOSTAKE
ODS om TAR
VIGS UEAANC
GM 350 2 Len
Fian

VIVES 711056
GAG AS RUCKLE
Fle tor
Fi6u 66or
UM292 PACKET
DIB FG?
FI6L tt 19
FIN 6 GHF
GHISO TRMNIS
IGt-1 SE UG
GIES Set

2P2rees 9999003093 09002435

pase

WEIGHTING
FACTORS

9.00368
9.92099
0.07351
0.08115
0.0RK 1G
0.0407
O.0AKIG
0.95821
0.05n04
0.03620
0.05521
0.05031
0.01620
0.01N6S
O.91007
0.01742
0.06 3N0
0.9955"
0.01067
O.03%42
0.05971
0.07454
0.07845

SALE S-WEITOHTED G45 NAG TOTALS

90% VEDUCTION FROM BASELINE?

BASELINE

SI7t

WNUN SEVEN seN NUN AY

MAY Pay

ites

4.16
a0
2h.04%
17.26
35.91
12.43
47.65
15.98
19.96
10.01
9.25
19.57
10.70
e.ot
20.7)
1a .n2
10.10
12.34
Wott
9.92
13.63
15,90
19.45

1979

Sai

WEIGHTED

or

o,
o.
o,

0.
un
0.
o.
ov.
oO

e,

1A,

ENGINE CS)

HES

c

apr

aol
Aor

thu
aya
ans
a7
152
300
seo

ta

ay

SALES
WEIGHTED
ca

9.164
1.057
R012
12.055
17.723
66319
27.640
16.091
4.5Al
J.AOM
10.040
15.944
5.490
T1.Aat
lo.2ny
8.965,
19.042
T.IAY
9.569
4.725
13.071
Se2ll
8.172

227.63

22.76

NO}

NOX

1.23
62d
Meet
+33
10.07
1.26
BT)
ALNd
10.45
09
WZ
6.67
9.44
8.67
1.97
1.99
6.07
10.55
8.04
11.56
1.16
1.57
1.30

4

SALES
WEIGHTED
Nox

O.027
9-168
0.261
0.436
0.890
0.497
OTL
0.452
0.3948
0.929
064n3
0.335
0.738



HFAVY PUTTY FHGINE TULE TEST EMIPSSTOMs SUMMARY = 1969 HASELINE ENGINE OS)

HAY 2%. PUTO

UFoL w cio: 400 FNGIDG F300 1 RATED AUP? Nea RATED RPH: NsA
COMMENTS! lorg BLT HW)
NUM CER NODE OND. Tt MOnF OND. 2 Mone NO. 7 MODE NO. & OLSP COLE
eee--- | RE VALID
4c co nox He 1o NOX valto
TQ00G) EH y201 SV. STINT, 127, 5529. T2660. 20. 519, SH6LS.  B2B.  2HOY, = S9419, ANT. B
Tagnes JH 1202 S46, 64707. 107, 95TT. TI IH4. Ae 2HGS. = 63333. 7206 IRV. «= O39T2-  -3HD- 8
Teapes Th 1204 GARG, — H2GTE. TIE. 4042. 6122-6 3% 2726. = H0B59. B21. = 292A. = HUAI. INS co)
2
MEAN STAT, 6IKI2. 121, 6983, THT4d. «= 79, PHT, «= -60AHI- «790. © 29K9. 1409. IYI, N= 9

STO.DEV. = GINS VWOHIeL 1269 2964.4 Blla.s 9.9 164.8 3397.64 860.2 156.9 2532.7 2667


-41-

average brake specific HC, CO, and NOx emissions for each baseline
engine, along with the sample size.

(4) Table 4: Sales-Weighted Transient Engine Emissions.
This table is the same as Table 1, with the exception that ail
emission results are expressed in terms of grams per mile.

2. Idle Test: Emission Summaries and Results

EPA has also proposed idle emission standards for HC and CO.
Idle test data to determine the 90 percent reduction 1s shown for
19 baseline engines which were tested. These 19 engines represent
79 percent of the 1969 sales of gasoline-fueled HD engines.

The results of the idle tests for these 19 engines are shown
on pages 78 to 96. The four test modes listed on these individual
summary sheets are:

Mode 1: 2500 rpm - no load.

Mode 2: Idle - no load (this mode used for standard setting).

Mode 3: 2200 rpm - 55 percent of maximum torque.

Mode 4. 1700 rpm - 43 percent of maximum torque.

Computer Tables 5, 6, and 7 summarize the idle emissions data
for the 19 baseline engines. These tables are similar to Tables
1-3 shown earlier and are described briefly as:

(1) Computer Table 5. Sales-Weighted Idle Emissions. This
table is the same as the Computer Tadle 1 listed above, except that
it lists idle test data. :

(2) Computer Table 6: Saies-weighted Percentages Data. This
table is the same as Computer Taple 2 listed above, except that it
is for engines having idle test data (19 engines instead of 23).

(3) Computer Table 7. Iale Emissions. This table is the
same as Computer Table 3 listed above, except that it is for

engines having idle test data.

Grams per mle data for the idle test is not incluaea for
obvious reasons. These tables are found on pages 98-100.

3. Standards Computation and Discussion

The 1969 heavy-duty vaseline program began in tne fall of 1977
with the first procurement actions and 1s concluded with this
report.


Il.

Ill.

Iv.

Table of Contents

Page
Foreword L
Summary 1
Introduction and Background 2
Discussion 4
A. Vehicle/Engine Selection and Procurement 4
1. 1969 Sales Data and Sampling Plan
2. Selection Criteria
3. Procurement Actions
4. Problems Encountered
5. Results of Selection and Procurement Accions
B. Engine Testing 18
1. Test Sites
Test Procedures (Revised Statistical Validation
Criteria)
3. Control System
4, Engine Preparation/Instrumentation
5. Software Support/Data Reduction
6. Void Rates/Test Reveatability
7. Emission Sampling System
C. Baseline Compilation and Standards Computation 39
1. Transient Cycle: Emission Test Summaries
and Results
2. Idle Test: Emission Test Summaries and Results
3. Standards Computation and Discussion
Vv. References 101

Appendices (Available Under Separate Cover)
I. Selection and Procurement

Scopes of Worx

Contract Final Reports

Individual Engine Sheets
Carburetor and Distributor Curves

PUN

II. Engine Testing

1, MSAPC Advisory Circular #22A
2. Engine Testing Data


MEAVY ODUTY OFNGINL TRANSIENT FETSSEONS SUMMAHY -- 1969 HASELINE ENGINE OS)

NAY fa. pUTa

Mbt 30 cto wo Beal: FeO FGOL RATED BMP: Nya RATEN RPMS FA
COMM NESS Tn
ee KHAMS 7 RHE-HE R7RHO-HR ACTUAL » GRAMS 7 MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL DISP COUF
seteeee B= VALID
Test CopTHG ae co sox ASE MHP. HR ERROR ie co Nox HC co NOX Me VALID
AOOTTT (Lt TROL 10.16 149,05 6.00 92690 PYeTND 18.67 269.06 10683 216.01 8.70 x
KOOTIO ML LAO? Te6H LVOLND Bele 066546 27.50H 13473 748.29 11-30 206-626 9.99 a
AOOTAT 4 bHOe 1.79 420,07 7.01 9.62A 22.344 19.72 202.29 12.36 T9T.ED  TEe16 "
AOOT3IK HL 1605 4.65 1I7T.3 Sead 9.67 P1696 14.34 233.10 9.18 38 201.33 1.93 x
ROOIGO HLT 1606 ALA 141.66 KATY 0.6A4 736338 IS.AL 259.12 12632 12.64 207.08 9.85 ”
MEANS 7eOm VAP fed 06655 23-09 14.42 239.57 11.99 12.15 201-48 10-183 N= 3
SIP.DEV. t eer 11.07 0.078 0.65n 209 1.21 25.08 0659 0.65 9.00 0.92



HRAVY OOUTY FHGINE TRANSTENT EMISSIONS SUMMAPY -= = 1969 HASELINE ENGINE CS)

may 244 1919

MFO 270 chor 392 ENGI? vI92 HSnay? RATED BHet N/A RATLU RPHE NVA
COMMENTS? tase WLI fo?

GRAMS 7 HNP =HIt F/RUP-HR ACTUAL ‘ GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LH FUEL = OISP CODF
aeoe-e - B= VALID
nse HHP- HR FRROR uC co NOX HC co NOx M2 VALID

TIPSIO EL* 9201 16603 202.60 1.63 21.15) 3.0 25-21 118.29) S27) 20.14 754.28 4.56 x
TIDAL NL 9702 9.98 172.5949 19.695) - 4.5 13.78 262.42 6-11 19.96 227.69 5.32 x
TOI? HL 02033699 7876195, 19.193 -8.5 5eMI 116.73 2-89 TLV 223.05 95651 x
T9163 AL 9706 ReST 265.64 ae 19.489 -Sel 12693 400.29 = 6662 9.66 298.92 4.94 x
TOTGI4 NL 205 12.15 192.02 4.70 18.96) 0-767 17.87 282.33 6.18 14,71 232.47 5.09 x
TYI6IS NL 9206 A244 194.06 4.29 19.098 -7.0 12.66 286.43 6-33 10.32 237.22 5.24 K
791636 NLT 0207 9.00 204.13 4.904 19.954) - 7.7 13.23 300.10 5-94 = 19,97 748.94 4.93 x
T9IHIT ML. 70H 19.31 228.88 3.90 18.505 -949 14.70 326.2) 5-56 11. BT 763-38 4.49 Xx
TIAL WE 9710 6.69 186646 TE 18.992 0-709 9-82 273.61 5645 34 232.47 4.63 8
T92I0¢ BLE 02D) 09 TTILGT 678 18.998 = -7.5 8.98 252.81 7.05 A.04 226.21 6-31 8
T9210) RL» 9212  -6.PN 177.50 eet 1A.AND AAG 9.12 257,89 6-12 8.12 229.62 5.45 A
MEANS 6635 17AL47 46 eG 1B,9N4 = 709 9.31 261.4% 6621 ALIT 229.64 = 5.46 Nz 3
SID-DFV. ¢ Ue3t 7.654 0.84 9.022 0.099 oS 0.45 10,85 0.80 0.16 3.16 0,84

-—50-


ay
04
as
On
ar
an
ov
mn
Ve
n
6
s
de
uw
1"
y
20
al
ee

faut at
Loe

ENGINE

svies

VI06 Hennat
#430 +n 15058,
GIST P4A IG I6
$330 KOSS
Gr VO VO Lert
OSS a 4bBbe
G4 156 7 LEN
# you

VIG 11650
GH ING BRPUCRLE
Fob tor
Fso0 8 Gd
OMENS RECRET
DITH EG
Fiob ut 19
F460 1603
ONI5O TONNES,
Wiel-a Stu

Sum 1OnatS:

Sabb s-wtIGHIED

PERCE TAGES

BASFE TUL RNOENE (9)

PERCE GT
Torn

evo
5.000
7.200
4.600
7.200
4.500
3.100
4.500
41M
S.900
6.400
2.500
4.050
$6200
?.900
2.500
3.0450
4.500
2.000

1900

MEY

Data

1979

CORRECTED
PERCENT

2.405
eae
Crary
4.550
vetbe
9-696
3.924
5.696
S.140
7.464
Ts
3.165

4.861
6.58?
3.67)
3.16%
V.AGd
5.696
2.532

1oo.00

Pat

WEIGHTING
Factor

0.02405
0.06329
0.09114
0.04557
0.09114
0.05696
0.03924
0.05696
0.05190
0.07468
0.07975
0.03165
0.03A6)
0.065A2
0.02671
0.03165
0.03861
0.05696
0.02532

1.000

—- 4 9 -

NO,


-24-

WIDE OPEN
THROTTLE
oor -
.
.
2sof ett
200
ACTUAL
SHAFT
TORQUE
(Fr-LBs) 150F
100}
00 @)~ conTRoLLeR .
CALIBRATION POINTS «
.
sof .
LsO °
.
.
0 : °
A A 4
0 Y 1.00 2.00 3.00 74700 2 00

; THROTTLE POSITION VOLTAGE (VOLTS)
FIGURE IV B-2: TYPICAL THROTTLE VOLTAGE/LOAD CHARACTERISTICS OF AN SI ENGINE


-20-

Table IV Bel

NPRM Regression Line Tolerances

Speed Torque Brake Horsepower
Standard Error 100 rpm 10% of max. 5% of max. brake
of Estimate engine torque horsepower
(SE) of yon x (in fe-lbs)
Slope of the 0.970-1.020 0.850-1.020 0.900-1.020
Regression Line, m
Coefficient of 0.9700 1/ 0.8800 1/ 0.9200 1/
Determination, r°
y Incercept of + 50 rpa + 10.0 ft-lbs + 5.0 BHP
the Regression
Line, b

Revised Cycle Performance Regression Line Tolerances

Speed Torque 2 Brake Horsepower
Standard Error 100 rpm 13% of max. 7% of max. brake
of Estimate engine torque horsepower
(SE) of y on x (in Fe-1bs.)
Slope of the 0.970-1.030 0.83-1.03 (hor) 0.89-1.03 (hot)
Regression Line, o 0.77-1.03 (cold) 0.87-1.03 (cold)
Coefficient of 0.9700 1/ 0.8800 (hot) 1/
Determination, r2 0.8500 (cold) L/ 0.9100 1/
y Intercept of * 50 rpm + 15.0 ft-lbs * 5.0 BHP
the Regression
Line, b

L/ Minimum

2/ In addition to the torque points not included in the regression
per the February 13, 1979 NPRM, 1.e., 1) all torque points measured
during the initial 24 +1 second idle period of the cold and hot
start cycle, and 2) all torque points where the throttle 1s wide
open and a negative torque error occurs, an additional exclusion
of torque points 1s permittea. These additional points are. 3)
all torque points measurea wnen negative torque (motoring) is
commanded and tne throttle is completeiv closed.


-32-

Table LV B-5

1969 Baseline Void Rates

Total

Void Tests Void

Engine Total Testsl/ Statistical2/ éxperimental3/ kate
(1) Chrysler 225 8 6 75%
(2) THC 392 9 3 3 67%
(3) Ford 391 5 2 1 60%
(4) THC 304 8 3 37%
(5) Ford 330 5 0%
(6) GM 351¢ 8 2 75%
(7) Ford 330 8 1 4 63%
(8) GM 350-2 3 1 33%
(9) Chrysler 318-3 4 1 25%
(10) LHC 345 4 2 50%
(11) GM 350-2 9 4 2 67%
(12) Ford 300 6 3 50%
(13) IHC 345 7 4 57%
(14) GM 366 3 0%
(15) Ford 361 8 6 75%
(16) Ford 360 6 3* 50%
(17) GM 292 ll 82%
(18) Chrysler318-1 4 1 25%
(19) Ford 361 4 1 25%
(20) Ford 360 4 2* 50%
(21) GM 350-2 5 2 40%
(22) Chrysler 361 3 1 33%
(23) GM 366 4 1 25%
Total 136 (100%) 54 (40%) 18 (13%) 53%

*See Appendix II, Baseline Engines 16 and 20.

i/ Cold start transient tests intended for baseline data (excluding
all correlation and parameter sensitivity tests).

2/ Statistically Void. exceeding the revised cycle performance
regression tolerances given in this report.

3/ Experimentally Void engine or equipment malfunction, operator
error, etc.


Hravy DUTY ENGINE TRANSTFNT EMTSSENN> SUMMARY ~ 1969 WASELINE ENGINE (S?

MAY Pa, 1979

MP Ot aa cin: 80 LUGIDE OyS0 VOST. xT RATED BHP! N/A RATE PPME N/A
COMM NES? 1989 HLT HOR
NUMBER GOAMS 7 AHP #7HHP-HR ACTUAL GRaMS 7 MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LH FUEL = DSP CODE
nSFC HUP— 1 RRO HC co NOX He ne vaLtD
T9IGHOV HLT 903 9.99 167.42 5.06 9.640 77.40% es4 17.26 291.68 8.82 15.48 761.59 7.91 x
194604 HL OROZ 9299 170.61 4693 A 2VeTSI 50? 16.02 291-10 8-41 13,64 247.98 7.16 f
T4605 HL WROL 4.61 170092 4671 9648 2V.7M -569 15.94 269,58 7698 14,52 263.77 7,27 8
MEANT Y.60 170,77 4.2 0.668 216742 0-529 15.98 290.34 8.19 14,08 255.67 7.21 N= 2
SID.OFV. v.07? 0.35 0.078 0.0 ot 0.06 1.03 0-30 0.62 11617 0.07

—~S6-


on
n2
Oo”
06
05
06
or
on
a”
10

TARLF  ?F SALES -WEIGHTED

Lene

TANG EE

Fw 225P 2944 O30
vioe «Snot
Jade

V1ING HGKNGA
#30 BA ISO5S
GMIST Zane
FAjU YR ISOSS
C350 VOSE2KE
Nia om TBR
vets TEVaAOr
om agu 2 LPN
Fyoo 4

VIG T1456
GHIRR AURUICELE
Fahl Mor
FIG HOD

GM2 1? RICKET
DVN BG?
Riel ae 19
F3RO POOF
GHISO TeHNES
DIGI-V SLUG
GM IHG SPL

sum TOTALS!

0

aotoszts32909S95909999

VEWLENT AGES

HASFLINE | ENGINES?

pERCeny
Tort

0.200
2.200
1.on0
S.n00
7.200
3.800
7.700
4.500
y.100
2.050
4.500
4.100
2.9%
FN
?.sna
1.050
5.700
2.900
2.500
a.050
4.500
7.000
w1S0

Al.san

May

Poe

DATA

1979

COpPECTEU
PRUCE NT

Oo. 3Aa
Poh
2-991
KAS
ALAM
Gl?
B.A
5.521
yeANG
yeHe0
5.521
5.081
ye62n
3.865,
3.067
3.702
4.380
peso
3.007
30742
5.57t
2.454
3-865

100.00

Pact

WOIGHEENG
FACTION

0.001458
0.02699
9.02m
0.06115
ORANG
0.04017
0,08N 34
0.05921
0.01106
0.03820
0.05521
0.05051
0.03670
O.03N65
0.03067
0.03142
0.06100
0.09558
9.07067
0.03742
0.05821
0.02454
0.03945

1,000

nO.

2



Table ff 5-3

Transient Controller Calibration Procedure

Task A

Step Calibration Potentiometer 1/ (Figure 4 B-1) Purpose (Figure 4 B-2)

A. Torque and Speed Feedback Calibrates load and speed
Feedback (TFB and SFB) feedback signals so that the
engine's performance may be
accurately recorded.

B. Midspeed/Zero Torque Sets zero point for speed
(MSZT) compensating voltage (Throttle
Input 2)
C.  Midspeed/Mid Torque Sets mid-span point for
(MSMT ) throttle command voltage

(Throttle Input 1)

D.  Midspeed/Max Torque Sets maximum span point
(MSMXT )2/ for additional Throttle voltage
(Throttle Input 1)

E.  Low-Speed Offset (LSO) Spans speed compensation
voltage (Throttle Input 2).

I/ Named for speed/load at which calibration occurs. In general, midspeed

Rated (or governed) RPM-Idle RPM + Idle RPM, midtorque as

1s defined as z

Maximum torque @ Midspeed RPM. These were not rigid parameters, however,

and the calibrations occured wherever necessary to achieve satisfactory

results.

2/ In reality, the Midspeed/Max Torque (MSMXT) 1s not only a potentiometer,

but also additional circuitry located a in Figure IV Bl. This

Circuitry was designed to provide on additional linear voltage boost at
higher loads, so that the analog system could more closely approximate the
load/throttle characteristics 1a the operating range between half and full

throttle (See Figure IV B-2).


nury

URavy

1969 RASELINF  ENGENF (S)

MAY PG. L0n0

MEGS 20 cipr 4A Fein: DIA EUG2 WATED HNP? N/A RATED RPE N/A
Comm ans: 1ono ALT ete
a HOOF NO. 1 MONE ONO. 2 MODE NO OIse CONE

as-- -- = - B= VALID
TEST co tox HC co Nox HC co NOK HC Lo NOX Mz VALID
Koobeh pet PROL WI. PETS. FALL 1SGK6. 205066 45s 2330. 11540. 2198, 2646. 13528. 2166. 8
Raaiv2 ten paoe 1049, 252472 Pan, u2e2- TW 2)s 2404, 12459. 19460, 2Tha. $4299. 1977, 8
HE ANE WO9I. — AHAIAL PIO B44. 1GENEs «= J, 2824 20006 202%. = P74. BTPDe 2OTZ. «=—ONE 2
SIDE VL APALT HAS 6.1 1965.5 9055.9 1S.6 59.5 649.7 1187 Sain $65.2 133.5

~FY7~


~6-

Table IV-A-2

Initial Sampling Plan

Sampling
Manufacturer Engine Sales % of Market Target Range

Chrysler 318-3 10,850 3.1 0-1
(9.3%) 318-1 10,150 2.9 O-1
361 7,000 2.0 O-1
383 2,000 0.6 O-1
413 1,500 0.4 O-1
225 1,000 0.3 O-1

Total (2-3)
Ford 330 50,200 14.4 3-4
(33.5%) 360 21,300 6.1 1-2
361 17,300 5.0 1-2
300 14,200 4.1 1-2
391 6,700 1.9 o-1
477 2,600 0.7 O-1
390 2,300 0.7 O-1
534 2,000 0.6 0-1

Total (8-9)

GM 350-2 47,000 13.5 3-4,
(39.3%) 366 22,000 6.3 1-2
292 18,000 5.2 1-2
351C 12,000 3.6 O-1
250 10,000 2.9 O-1
307 9,000 2.6 0-1
305C 6,600 1.9 0-1
477 6,300 1.8 O-1
350-4 3,000 0.9 O-1
396 2,000 0.6 0-1

Total (9-10)
THC V345 20,300 5.9 1-2
(14.7%) V304 17,300 5.0 1-2
V392 7,800 2.2 0-1
RD450 3,350 1.0 O-1
VS478 2,000 0.6 O-1

Total (3-4)


te ‘ om Ce ow od AOE
19e4 HASEL INE ENGINE (OS)

MAY 26. 1974

ENGINE nsuc nsco WSNOXx side
Fa 225k 7994 032 0 eu $2.20 B46 e
VIY2 noWQ dT 0 6.29 17.47 4.24 4
Vins a eer) Vr98.ha 5.83 e
VI05  6hnee 0 Vieed 127.76 6.70 5
F320 AnS0545 0 ens 157,19 7.89 >
GAIL 24R34I6 o Vaiyod 8.80 2
Fas0 98 8055 0 224.37 6.25 4
OMI VOSTeKE a 170.77 4.82 2
Oss 4 VBR 0 BAL9T 7.60 3
Vie 1yHOL 0 14.53 6.46 é
OM 390 2 LPN o beeedd 5.36 4
Foo 4 o 233,38 4.91 4
VIGS 71 1456 o 94,02 5.59 3
Gasho alHUCREE on 187.92 S230 3
Ca) o 220.39 S643 2
F i001 60) a 132.19 6.63 3
Omed2 WICKET 0 Ll2.he SolG 2
Oslb F6ne 0 144.26 7.54 3
bie (rae rn 191.55 S.09 3
F160 +609 a 75.32° 6.88 2
Gr300 TENNIS o 150, 36 4.58 3
Ni6l-a sro 0 168,68 6.00 2
GAG SORE 0 134.87 4.66 3

-75-


MEGS

40

COMM RTS:

790040 Ten
F900 FL Lette
790052 fh
90033 1H
Ty00 16 bn

AF AND

STpb.bey,

1

060)
060?
0603
0604
0608

Mbavy

pouty

clo:

ono HLT

en.
1090.
2u7h.
ss?.
7569,

Pos,

4A7.7

19seH,
aaa,
2n0r0.
20nr9,
2007,

P1gde,

2075.0

four Test

ENDIDE

ENtsstane

MhY eos

GUIS) 2663436

MODE

4596.
4201.
4920.
Sens.
S632.

SOli.

635.9

NO. 2
co

317St.
WT1O.
24504,
4hS0d,
o04D5.
3B22n.

y16td.0

lvls

RATED BHP?

HONE

NOX HC
35.1053.
34. 1055.
62. 1249,
0. 1376,
SS. 1480.
37. 124d.
24.1 190.7

~S|(-—

1969

N/A

NO. 3

WASEL INE

HATED RPHD

ENGINE (S)

N/A

DISP COLE



III. Introduction and Background

The 1977 Amendments to the Clean Air Act, Section 202(a)
(3)(ii) require that beginning in model year 1983, both gasoline-
fueled and diesel heavy-duty engines meet emission standards for
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide which represent at least a 90%
reduction "from the average of the actually measured emissions from
heavy-duty gasoline-fueled vehicles or engines, [emphasis added] or
any class or category thereof, manufactured during the baseline
model year." Part (v) of the same subsection goes on to define
baseline model year as '". . . the model year immediately preceding
the model in which Federal standards applicable to such vehicle or
engine, or class or category thereof, first applied with respect to
such pollucanc." Using this criterion, EPA determined that 1969
was the baseline model year prescribed by law and established a
1969 baseline testing program.

The goal of this program was to measure the actual HC and
CO emission levels for a predetermined sample of 1969 heavy-
duty gasoline-fueled engines and then sales-weight the results
of these tests to determine the average emissions for model
year 1969. This technical report summarizes ECTD's efforts in
procuring and testing the 1969 engines used to establish the
proposed 1983 heavy-duty engine HC and CO emission standards.

Also included in this report is a summary of the method-
ology used to derive the HC and CO emission standards which
are proposed for 1983 and Later-model year heavy-duty engines.
On February 13, 1979, EPA published an NPRM (Federal Register
Vol. 44, No. 31, Part I1) which included preliminary HC and CO
emission standards of 1.4 g/BHP-hr (lower limit of .76 g/BHP-hr for
HC) and 14.7 g/BHP-hr (lower limit of 11.4 g/BHP-hr for CO).
In addition, preliminary idle standards of 1400 ppmC HC (lower
limit of 530 ppmC) and 0.55% CO (lower limit of 0.30%) were also
published. Preliminary levels and lower limits were proposed
because the baseline testing program used to derive the final
proposed standards was not yet completed. At the time the NPRM was
published, only 12 baseline engines had been tested. The baseline
testing program is now complete and the proposed final emission
standards have been derived. These final emission and idle stan-
dards are not below the lower limits initially proposed and hence
are acceptable in that respect.

Although these finalized standards were made public prior
to the Heavy Duty Hearings of May 14 and 15, 1979, this report
gives the engine manufacturers and all other interested parties the
information necessary to allow them to comment on ECTD's selection,
Procurement, and testing tecnniques as well as the method by which
the final proposed standards were derived.

This report is divided into two main parts: the text and the
appendices. The text of the report discusses the vehicle/engine


pave

MEGS #70
COMM: HES:
Num

F90001 Ten 0401
T900Ue Th 0402
Mo3o7 teh 0404
Me aur

SID.ObYS ft

cps

1oH9 HLT

2209,
1446,
1843,
1966,

210.3

huty

PNG tue

alike.
2326,
24HS5.
?S?HA.

179.6

ToLp Test

MAY eae

LNISSTOUS

LNOIDS VI04 AaROGH

146,
143,
las,

158,

2963 14195.6

MODE

399455.
46825,
1A160.

34307.

NOY

93432.
110554,
H1O>,
aT1 he.

12028.2

24,7

RATED Burt

MODE

2045,
1382.
1936,
1787,

355.8

-749-

SUMMARY == 1969 HOSEL IME

1919

ENOINF OS)

N/A RATED RPM:

1826. L767,
B00, B14,
6654. 2100,

TS07. 1500.

742.5 667.2

MODE NO. &

2sla,
e22o9,
2377,
2540,

61.6

co NOK

17865. 698,
17349. 98S.
16796. 1380.
16070. 10%.

1643.3 260.2

OISP COVE
VALID
VALID

wv ten


MMARY = 1969 HASELINE ENGINE (5)

HRAVY DUTY FNGEME ft TEST EMESSEONS 5

MPY PMs 1979

MFGE w CID: tan ENGIN! FOO FUEL RATED QP? NZA  RATFD RPM! NZA

COMMENTS? 1969 ALT bn

NUMER woODF HO. TE ? Mone NO. MODE NU. & VISP CODE

weer eee e nee VALIU

mM = VALIU
Aon? Te 160) TSSA. 20707, A962, BdHbae 656 MSIT. 2191, 2595S. N39. TATA, a
RONLIO Tet 1AOG 442. 2159, 505. Soot, l. WS. 244, wo. 1489, 157, A
Hoonld Eo 1602 6504. 24206. PHO, Siel. aSHI2. St. TIH2+ 2062. 2681. 14°08. 1353+ A
ROOTS Ten 1603 295T. 162006 195, 4950. hehe. 45. 7995. 2164,  P4B2. 1 3TOT. 13H06 8
MEANT “OS. Vrvrs, qi. Way, ao. 1yA9. 6in2. 1640, 2005. 1Ones. Tots. N= 4G

STD.OLV,. ft VPTV.Y PIAIS.Y P1TS.B  20610.1 27.6 1165.9 3465.3 93864 1139.4 6240,2 ST9.T

~ 1 o-


MF avY

FOE 279

comm tats:

NUMA EB

795286 WLe 1oOOL

795286 HL 10nz

795207 HL 1003

795332 HLT 1004
MEAN:

SIO.DEV. ¢

t249 HLT who

uty

clot

Eneinr

345

GRAMS 7 AIHP-HE

co

78.49
W457
9IL1e
79.77

76.53

2.17

“ox

6.357
6655
4.10
6.97

6.46

ned

TANS IFAT

ft fut

ARP HR

RSF

0-717
0.705
0.659
9.656

o-7tl

0.008

~S 8 -

Ev tsstart SUMMARY - 1969 HASELINE
MAY 2a, YTD

VIG IEYVANG RATED BPS NZA
ACTUAL GRAMS / MILE
We ne PRROR HC co NOX
17.927) -41-3 10-00 109.27 8-87
17.966 -Vtel 10.02 105.91 9031
71.836 al T1616 156.10 10.46
21.768 be3 9.68 132.29 10.90
W7.944 1162 10.01 107.59 9.09
0.035 962 0.02 2.38 0.31

ENOL
RATED

WEIGHT

HC

to.02
1o.oL
9.87
A.90

10,01

0.01

NE ts)

RPMt

Eb GRAMS/LB FUEL

109647
105.78
138.31
121.59

107.62

2661

usa

8.89
9.30
9.26
10.02

9209

v.29

OISP CouE
VALIO
vauiD

ux OD

N


ME AVY DULY BMC Te

NSTONT NESSTON, SUMMARY

1969 HASEL INE ENGINE (S)

MAY eH 1979

MF ut 40 crn: 38a ENGINE GMIST e4BI436 RAIFO BPI Nya RATED HPT NA
COMME HESS bong HLT 498
NiMH P GHAMS / ANP -10R + /7RHP-MR ACTUAL 6 GHAMS / MILE 1 OGRAMS/LA FURL | MISP Cour

een e ween nee eee ence eee nner eee ceo ee -- wee ene n ce enn e enn ree nena man Sak TET)
VEST CODING ne co rUK asre HHP. WR ERROR HC co NOK co Oa Be ovat lp
TY IS0H HL UAO2 44.90 FOL ,0F beet 0.031 18.336 Pray 20.69 146.29 9.65 22,66 1H0,e) 10.57 ,
THADOL HL nbOS BeAL DL2,79 7.92 0-653 16.519 -467 11.68 149.47 10.50 13.49 172.66 12.453 “
TWO HM NHO4 149.270 106,28 70-30 06450 FA.092 400 16.16 242.51 2767S 29,55 231673 adele x
TVA MANS weed DDI 7T 9665 0.650 16-72) -39 10.66 148.42 32.00 175.03) 34-55 .
T3404 Mh 9606 9.00 TAL5S6 9-88 9.609 16.65 -461 11.80 103.01 14,78 129,00 Lo.e2 .
THOS NL H6OT 1.75 82.78 Keo 0.649 16.655 -4.2 13.55 108.36 16.09 128.74 ) 3.50 x
T96S WE 60H 1.6% W1O.2R 96K 06651 15.812 -869 13.18 136.64 16.34 169.6b 14.87 "

MEANT 4.72 D115) B.RO 9.652 16.225 9-68 17.63 443.05 W4.92 171.02 13.50 ue?

SUD.DEV. E Lezu 1. TY deed 9001 0.500 3.0 1.06 9.07 2.0b 2.30394

-S4Y-


/ Hi

AY ARACEAE | H

JO, 00B 4 iN
30, 49, 000 Seoeo 40,066 76,006 90,000 90,000 160,000 16,600

7
MILEAGE RANGE



HR)
1306

CO (G/BY

C06

SALES-WEIGHTED BASELINE TRANSIENT
EMISSIONS CO (G/BHP-HR)

3.00 S.00 7.00 9.00 1.

00 12,00 15.00 v7.00 19,00 21.00 23.00
NO, OF ENGINES “U6.


HFAVY DUTY ENGINE ThANSEENT EMISSIONS  SUMMGKY 1969 BASELINE ENGINE (S)

MAY 24s 1479

KEGT 20 Clip: 2a ENGIUS Fe 225K 2044 O42 RATED BPE N/A RATED RPME ZA
COMM NESS 1969 HLT #or
ACTUAL * GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL = DISP CODE
- = VALID
HuP- HR ERROR HC co NOX HC NOK M= VALID
TaOAte ML HPOL  o-1t 95.69 4.9y 9.819 10.767 -y 560 6.35 7.4 67.99 12.20 x
T3OKKO HL 6102 96% 4910 TS 0666 10.84 -14.0 8.24 9.52 73.73 14.04 x
Peleeb wt upo3 o.en 4AGLD 4.19 0.640 1L.10H  -12.3 5.35) 41.47 7692 9,69 75.17 14.36 x
Mye2t HLA 4106 DOL 624 — Qe051 10-967 -4 464 5-81 43.42 7686 10.48 78.35 14.19 u
791652e Hh 410d 33.40 7.68 0.027 DLS 2169 6.60 12,08 65.16 432.25 a
T4659 ML 0106 S1.7H 9.360.618 V.d10 -1263 8.00 2L.IL 63.79 15.14 x
T1697 HL 0106 460.35 9.00 0.975 14.468 14.4 9.97 6.54 80.61 15.65 x
TYISOF ott 0107 90,07 Ved 0.600 13-55) 1.0 S.41 52.58 9-56 8.56 83.46 15-17 x
W9ISDT te ape 49.718 an) 0.592 14.35) 1leA 4.64 54,39 10-04 7.18) B4.04 15.5) x
PIboeo MEE 0109 4S.49 4S 0.554 14.011 10.6 4.39 48,98 9026 Todt) B2.1b 15648 x
Paboen the OV Sh.2t BAIS 0.577 13.936 0.0 4.42 54.99 8.76 7.13) 68.75) 14613 x
MEANT 7.20) 52.200 8.40 0.639 11.060 -12.7 6.16 44.66 7.23 11.28) 61.76 13.22 N= 2
SIN.NeV. OS 1.69 ded 0.017 0.133 1.0 0.49 1.75 0-89 dels 4.8) 1.37

~49-


HRAVE nUTY

MFG? Ww

COMM Te?

NUM FR

rang? Ten OL
FIQNTA Ee N02
799019 Ten 9303
790020 1° 03046
TIADEL Th 1405

MF Ant

STD.DEV. ft

cips

1os9 HLT

PGR,
PanT.
2104.
2992.
WTA,

aaede

4OI.6

ENGINE

ws

any

co

BJ19She
296036
296996
3350,
SuQAA,

35906,

1076H.0

ime t

FUG Nt

16H,
ran,
1A,
mn,
tao.

167,

2r.T

FST EMISSIONS SUMMARY

MAY 246 OT

Vh- se

MODE ND

HC oo NOK

15008, 15H4, 69,
15594, 1164. 6h
15594. 116A, 66.
Inte. 129956 The
1n966, 71 7e. te

14693, 23°77. Say

2192.3 24651.9 30.2

RATED AUPE

MODE

RAT,
1679,
1679,
1548,
7260.

reo7,

2TA.o

1969 HASELINE

FNGINE €5)

H/A RATED RPMI NSA

NO. Y

co NUx

boeTh. OBA,
12297. 262%.
12297. 2624,
11546. S100.
20656, 11.

W4e13~6 2514,

3737. B1631.9

HO. &

Zale,
2286.
2206.
2156.
300%,

eHade

344

71563,
VITG 1.
17164.
1720n.
36375.

22125.
B155,4

JORG

vis
8

P CODE
vatto
VAULT

ww oroct


Table 1V-A-3

-10-

Final 1969 Baseline Engines

Baseline Selection Date Procurement
Engine No. Engine Mileage Model Body Type Category Source Procured Method
1 Dodge 225 16,271 D500 Stake Truck A MI National Guard 12-19-77 Loan to EPA
Camp Grayling, MI
2 IHC 392 34,611 Loadstar Van A CSA Navy Yard 2-17-78 Loan, Task 10
1800 Motor Pool, Wash. D.C.
3 Ford 391 62,746 F750 Dump Truck A Mr. J.S. Wright 4-14-78 Lease, Task 10
. Livonia, MI
4 THC 304 30,445 Loadstar Van A GSA Navy Yard 4-32-78 Loan, Task 10
1600 Motor Pool, Wash. D.C.
5 Ford 330 68,000 B700 School Bus A Mr. L. Patrias 5-08-78 Lease, Task 10
Westland, MI
6 GM 351 53,627 5500 School Bus A Mr. L. Patrias 5-24-78 Lease, Task 10
Westland, MI
7 Ford 330 78,849 8700 School Bus A Hamilton Com. Schls. 6-27-78 Loan, Task 10
Namilton, MI
8 Chev 350 54,721 c-50 School Bus A W. Central Schls. 7-13-78 Loan, Task 10
Anderson, IN
9 Dodge 318-3 22,224 500 School Bus A Fairlane Com. Church 6-20-78 Lease, Task 10
W. Dearborn, MI
10 IWC 345 45,000 c1800 Tractor A US Army 6-5-78 Loan, Task 10
Ft. Campbell, KY
1 Chev 350 40,705 c-50 Van A GSA, Cleveland, OH 3-21-78 Loan, Task 10
12 Ford 300 16,117 B-600 School Bus A State of MI 8-21-78 Loan, Task 10
Lansing, MI
13 INC 345 88,000 Loadstar School Bus c Martin Schls. 10-6-78 Purchase, SCI
1600 Martin, MI C# 68-03-2715
14 Chev 366 98,000 c-50 School Bus c Plymouth Schls. 10-13-78 Purchase, SCI

Plymouth, MI

C# 68-03-2715


Heavy OULY ENGINE THANSLENT EMESSTiua  SUMMAIY

1969 ASELINE ENGINE (3)

MAY Phe 199

MEOE 30 Cipt Sao ENGIDE FIO IA IS0t> RATED BPE N/A RATED RPMS ONZA
Comm ates be69 OLE 805
#/PMP-HR ACTUAL ‘ GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTE® GRAMS/LB FUEL = O1SP COUE
neeenee wane een nnn ne, a wee e nee e en en ene eeeese= | B= VALIO
TEST CODING ac co ND ASF PHP HK FRROR HC co NOX HC co NOK M= VALIO
T9I2T VE 0501 28.65 163.89 7.08 9.745 10.444  -7.8 36.52 209.03 9.79 38,54 239,99) $0.31 a
TYSAfo MELT A602 24.26 ESO.NF dD TAG 16.198 = -6.0 37.22 198.52 10-36 40.42 215.65 J1-26 4
TYIPEE ML 9503 2fo4n 155.26 7277 OTe Wo.4e2 9-769 34.93 197.91 9.91 37.85 214.66 10.73 u
THAT MH 50% 2AH.29 153.69 H.10 0.715 16.994 tel 32.76 197.34 10-40 36,76 2146.96 42.33 B
TIVWTI HL SOS 24.0% 156.77 767D 0 TRA 16.517 -7.4 37.12 200.29 9.91 39,91 219.34 10.65 8
ME Ars 2oebb LSTLLS THe O.let 16.460 7166 35.92 200.62 10-07 38.68 216.08 10.86 Ne 5

S1O.Miyv, 1 1.250 3.95 O6e2 01 0,065 wes 1.5) 4,84 0628 1,49 2.25 0.43

-S3-


A/C
BS
BSFC
CAAA
crv
co
C02
cvs
EG&G
ECTD
EPA
FTP
GVWR
g/BHP-hr
Hc
HD
HDV

LDT

NOx
NPRM
OEM
OMSAPC

ppac

ciii-

Glossary of Acronyms
Advisory Circular
Brake Specific
Brake Specific Fuel Consumption
Clean Air Act Amendments
Constant Flow Vencurz
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Constant Volume Sample
EG&G Automotive Research, San Antonio, Texas
Emission Control Technology Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Test Procedure
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
Grams per Brake Horsepower per Hour
Hydrocarbons
Heavy-Duty
Heavy-Duty Vehicle
Light-Duty Truck
Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory
Model Year
Oxides of Nitrogen
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Original Equipment Manufacturer
EPA Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control

Parts per million Carbon


MPAVY DUTY FNGINE OTHANSTFNT FISSION, SUMMARY -- 1969 BASELINE ENGINE {S?

way 26. 1079

MFot ca Civt Jol ENGINE 0361-9 Stue RATED BHP? N/A RATED RPME N/A
COUM NEGE 1949 BLT #22
NuMBER GRAMS 7 RHP-HR H/RHP-HR ACTUAL * GRaMsS /¢ MILE WEIGHTED GPAMS/LA FUE! DISP COVE
“rest copie nC DUK FC MPL a rWROR ME GONOK We eo woe WALEP
B8U0220 MLI 2701 19-49 139.72 6.63 9. 61h 16.38% al 17.50 179,41 8651 21243 219-68 10042 x
Bon22) HL 2202 19616 169-02 5-70 9.657 16-192 - 9.2 $6.64 213.68) 7e21 20.0% 257.27 = 4.68 a
00224 Ls 2203 -10 168.36 6.32 9,719 16.05% — -4.69 15.16 211,04 7.93 16.96 236.10 8.87 8
MEANT 17.61 166.68 6.01 9.685 16.125 -965 15.90 212.36 7-57 18.59 266.69 8.78 N= 2
STO.0FVe. ft 0676 0.50 0644 0.040 0-096 OS 1.05 1.87 0-51 2.17 146.96 0613

-70 -


-25-

Calibration of these three throttle input circuits was per-
formed after engine preparation was completed. The calibration
procedure is summarized in Table IV B-3. With the system operating
in Task A mode, 1.e., the engine running at chosen speeds and
torques through typed-in commands at the keyboard, calibration was
performed on the feedback ana then the throttle input circuits.
Specific calibration settings were unique to each engine (reflect-
ung unique throttle/load characteristics and varying impedances
between the test cells.) At any given time during production
testing, one calibrated engine was present in each test cell,
allowing two cold start transient tests per day. (The remaining
space in each cell was reserved for engine buildup and prepara~
tion). Calibration settings for each engine were recorded to
alleviate the need for recalibration when automatic control was
switched from one cell to the other.

Following calibration, the engine was mapped under automatic
control and a transient cycle command tape was generated. (See
Section IV B-5 - Software Support.) This tape controlled the
engine throughout the transient test; feedback data for cycle
performance statistical validation were recorded on a separate tape
and analyzed after the test.

The transient test began by manually cranking the engine with
the starter motor (dynamometer off). Emission sampling began
simultaneously with cranking. Upon ignition, the operator was
permitted to manipulate the throttle as necessary to preclude
stalling. (If stalling did occur, or the engine refused to start,
the contingency procedure of tne NPRM was followed. The few cases
where this did occur are called out in Appendix II as comments on
Individual Test Reports.) S8etween ignition and fifteen seconds
unto the test, the dynamometer, presec to run at engine idle speed,
was engaged. Fifteen seconds into the test (referred to as "lag"
time), the computer took control of the engine. The first non-idle
point in the test occured at the twenty-four second mark and the
transient portion of the cycle began. at the conclusion of
the cold cycle the computer automatically returned control to the
operator console, at which point the engine was shut down for the
soak period. The hot cycle procedure was identical to the cold.
(The emissions were sampled according to the schedule presented in
Table LV B-8.)

During the analysis of the transient feedback tape, 9-mode and
idle testing were performed unaer completely manual control.
Following final validation of all test results, the engine was
removed from the test cell.

Throughout the baseline program the engines were run in
“speed control” mode, as described avove. This was in contrast to
“corque control" mode, in which the aynamometer directly controlled
engine torque, while the throttle control equipment controlled
engine speed. The ECTD system was capable of operating in either


HEAVY DUTY

Distr 30 ctpe:

COMMENTS:

luna BLT 929

NUMBEP

TesT — Contne He co

RV0701 HL: Pant S.7N 739,83

hOoATy ML e009? 6.0 76.110
MEANT S92 75.32
SID.DFV. t ota 2.10

eu

Joo

AR

0-13

PRAISTENT

easton:

W/AID-HR

IMMARY ==

HAY 246

pure

FIeQ Fond

actuar

MHP ie FRROR He

216624 Ail)
aietat 19.03

Pree ued 9.92
0.194 1.7 0.16

1909

RATED ANpt

GRAMS / MILE

125.26
127.28

126.27

1.4)

HASEL ENE

N/A

11-54

0-40

ENGINE (5?

RATED pet

116.27
170.56

DHA.4e

3.03

us

10.82

0.22

UISP COUF
Re VALIO
M= VALIO
TM
4
N=?


HEAVY QUTY RMGTE Pe ANSLENT ERISSTUN, SUMMAY 1969 BASELINE ENGINE IS)

Hay Poe 279

wt bE zt cb: 34 ENGLUE VIG5 Th ISSO RATLO BHPS N/A RATEU RPMI NA
COMMENTS t fond mT wna
NUDE GRANS 7 HHP=H | a 7RUP-HR ACTUAL “ GRAMS / HILL WEIGHTEA GRAMS/LU FUEL DISP CODE
---- po eetee enn nnnn i enn anne en nn anne arene nen eneeene eee B= VALID
FEST CaneeG at co nox ASFC HP Hie ERROR ne co Nox Ht co NOx M= VALID
T9OOTE MLE 1303 AVS 124,17 S672 gen 10.995 -14.4 14650 187.28 8-63 13.12 1H2.06 8.79 x
Teosby ML LAWL 6.09 TEELOL 6.20 06685) 20.325 = 9.78 179.23 9.95 AL HY 162.94 9.09 x
Mr 1402 O31 15.45 S04 96AS 2.1L Ha 10.16 JAS.75 6.94 4,68 173.61 8656 x
Topo? BLE VS 6475 AIUL eed 96670 20.605 =H 11013 133.49 9605 10,84 130.65 8.86 «
796003 ML 1904 6617 102.69 5659 Oe OEE 21-172 = 365 10-97 170672 9439 10,10 166.43 9 9615 8
196404 HL 1106 6.20 99.35 $68 0.809 AALDY dT 10.60 167.43 9657 10534 164.14 4032 8
ANE GG) 94.02 9.54 0.057 70-985 404 10.70 157.2) 9.34 10.44 153.41 Ye ne 3
SID.Dev. 1 oe3t 11637 M04 0.006 06316 166 0.39 20.61 0-26 0.40 19,78 Weed

~lo |


-18-

B. Engine Testing

1. Test Sites

The 1969 Heavy Duty Baseline Testing Program was undertaken
primarily at EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, Twenty-three engines were tested over the course of
fifteen months; twenty-two were tested on one of ECTD's two tran-
sient dynamometers; the remaining engine was tested under contract
by the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) in San Antonio, Texas.

Baseline testing at EPA began in March 1978 upon the attain-
ment of transient dynamometer testing capability in a single test
cell (Cell 3). The secona cese cell (Cell 4) was upgraded for
transient control in August, 1978; following correlation testing
work, Cell 4 was brought on line into the program.

ECTD Test Celis 3 and 4 are adjacent, separated only by a
twelve-foot-wide motor generator room. Each test cell utilized its
own double-ended dynamometer, water coolant system, instrumenta-
tion, and ambient air handling/humidity conaitioning systems. Both
cells were controlled by a single computer, and emissions were
measured using the same CFV-CVS unit.

Under contract by ECTD, SwRI developed both gasoline and
diesel engine dynamometer test cells capable of transient opera-
tion. The purpose of the contract was two-fold: 1) to establish
the fact that an independent laboratory could achieve transient
capability with a minimum of ECTD guidance in a reasonable length
of time, and 2) to provide a site for future transient baseline
testing. Other engines were tested at SwRI upon achievment of
transient capability; these were primarily current technology
engines used for correlation attempts between EPA and SwRI.
(Correlation testing between ZPA and SwRI will be summarized in a
separate technical report. However, correlation for transient and
modal testing for the 1969 gasoline baseline has been satisfactor-
ily establishea.

2. Test Procedure

Testing in the 1969 baseline program involved three separate
test procedures, the transient test procedure (keference Federal
Register Vol. 44, No. 31, February 13, 1979), tne 1979 9-mode FIP.
(Reference Federal Register Vol. 42, No. 174, September 8, 1977),
and an idle test procedure (keference Federal Register Vol. 44, No.
31, February 13, 1979). Time was also Caxen during the program for
various emission sensitivity tests, to assess the impact on transi-
ent emissions of variations in the test cycle. In addition,
several current technology engines were tested for correlation and
technology assessment purposes


“35-

b) communication service with the host computer (MTS) was
umterrupted sucn that statistical validation of the test was noc
possible prior to the running of the next test. (Normally if the
first test was void, the system would be recalibrated before the
next test, however, many times the interruption was so long that
the normal procedure was precluded.);

c) calibration difficulties with the EPA/MVEL system control-
ler, which was highly engine dependent.

Once the statistical criteria were developed, the last two
causes were the most prevalent. ECTD plans to improve both the
communication and controlling capabilities of its sytem in the near
future to reduce the incidence of statistically void tests.

Of those tests determined to be valid, however, the emission
repeatability was good. The average coefficient of emission
variation for the entire baseline program was less than 6%. When
compared to the thirteen baseline engines for which data from more
than a single 9-mode FTP 1s available, model emission variability
over the baseline program was 5.0 percent for BSHC and 4.3 percent
for BSCO. (See Table IV 3B-7.) The prototype ECTD Controller
achieved comparable repeatapility. It 1s anticipated that the
closer future control systems come to achieving the ideal regres-
sion statistics, emission variability as measured over the transi-
ent test will be reduced. .


HEAVY DUTY ENGINE TRANSTENT EMISSIONS  SU4HaRY 1969 WASELIME ENLINE (S)

MAY 24. 1979

NEUE w ctor $30 FNGIDE F410 nHisa5s RATED BHPI N/A RATED RPMs N/A

COMM Ist lono HLT wor
NUMBER GRAMS 7 BHP este HR ACTUAL 6 GRaMS 7 BILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL = DISP CODE
woene een e------ ns peta t enon ren reen---- B= VALIO
TEST CODING NC co NUK aSFC AMP- HWY 1 RROR HC co NOX HC co NOX M= VALIO
T6441 MLE 0708 347.77 260.67 5.50 0.767 18.039 4.3 52.54 334.78 49.24 313.73 ToAT x
P46646 WL 9705S 36.46 299.07 6604 Q.771 17.945 008 $0.50 331.99 47.10 310.06 TB 6
T9646 M0706 33650 201.26 herd a.716 1A.174 ~Seb 46.70 282.27 46.50 281.09 9.40 8
T96666 WL TOT 32.0 2592.17 6.00 0.162 16.060 ated 45.74 324,35 42.96 304.69 7.67 8

mean MG.1A 224,37 62S 0.750 18.006 4.2 47.65 412,87 45.54 298.61 8.30 N’ 3

Sto.bey. 2-01 20.36 0.4) 9.030 onus 66 2.52 26.77 0-61 2.26 15.41 0.90

-—55 -


-21-

The 9-mode test procedure used was identical to that specified
in the Federal Register (Vol. 42, No. 174, September 1977) with the
following exceptions:

a) Only a single 9-mode cycle was run; this was done with a
warm engine (Engine 011 temperature over 200°F).

b) Emission measurements were taken by the CVS-CFV bag
technique, as opposed to raw exhaust analysis. In order to
assure adequate sample volumes in the bags, sample modes of
five minutes length were performed, as opposed to the one
minute modes of the federal certification procedure.1/

Idle test data was taken in accordance with the February 13,
1979 NPRM, employing the CVS-CFV bag sampling technique, with the
ratio of the concentrations of raw COg to dilute sample C02 used
for dilution factor determination. In addition to the idle mode,
however, three other modes were tested for emissions. An overview
of the test procedure is presented in Table IV B-2. These addi-
tional modes were sampled using the same procedure as the idle
mode.

Table IV B-2

Idle Test Procedure

Mode Length

Mode RPM % Max Torque @RPM (minutes)
1 2,500 0 5
2 Idle ) 5
3 2,200 55% @ 2,200 5
4 1,700 43% @ 1,700 5

In addition to the three primary test procedures, various
other tests were performed, primarily on current technology
engines. These tests usually involved consecutive hot starts
(hot start transient cycles with twenty-minute soak time between
runs.) A single test parameter (e.g., total integrated brake
horsepower-hour, engine temperature, throttle aggressiveness,
ambient humidity, calibration settings, etc.) would be varied and
its impact on engine emissions assessed. These tests were useful
in assessing emission sensitivity to variations in the cycle

1/ Test results from current technology engines tested under
this modified test procedure showed negligible variation from
the manufacturers' test results, obtained using the raw exhaust,
certification method.


MFAVY DUTY FNGINE TOLE TEST EMtsst

NS SUMMARY = 1969 ROSELINE ENGINES)
2

NAY 246 4079

MFut 40 a FNGID? GMJ6A APRUCKLE RATFU BMPt N7A RATED RPE OHA
COMM NTS? bono HLT Ae
Nye k Re MODE ND. 1 Mone NO. 2 Mone NO. 3 MONE NO. &
ue co nox HC co NOX He eo oo NOx

Hooll? En 1402 Vann. 2yre. 172, y9L. Jono. Si. 1A40. 16467. 1407, 2069, 9ale 8
NOOL1S Fh p40s 1OAL. TAL?P6. Tn, 706. 2?2nn. 297. 1626. 1034L- 170 1875. 20245. 1020. x
Anolie To ie. 199%, 174, YA06. J2een. 59. 1603. Vil27. S17. 1787. 191fo,. 903. f
MEANT $262. enens. 1a. 3A9B. 335 3K. SS. 72k. V3T97T. 1462, 191A, 207TLL. 9526 2
STM.0KV. f 3606 107t0 ot W310 4877.) 5660 1GT.T | ATTS,9 7.1 1852300 217A5 14.9

—-8F-


-42-

During this program, ECTD procured and tested 23 heavy-duty
gasoline-fueled engines representing 81.5 percent of the 1969
fleet. Of these 23 engines, 16 were class A, | was class B, 6 were
class C (high mileage). One engine included in this baseline had
undergone a major rebuild. No other engine needed one at the time
of procurement.

To determine the emission levels, these engines were tested
using the new transient test procedure. Uf the 137 transient
tests, 64 were considered valid and are included. No engine had
less than two valid tests with the maximum per engine being five.

The fact that ECTD ceased baseline testing at 23 engines was
based primarily on the fact that baseline emission levels were
insensitive to further testing. This 18 shown in Figures IV-C-1
and IV-C-2 wnich demonstrate that as the number of engines tested
approached 25, the effect of incluaing more engines in the baseline
was insignificant. This 1s true for both HC and CO.

Based on the fact that:

1) Only 1969 model year heavy-duty gasoline-fueled engines
were tested;

2) Over 81 percent of the 1969 fleet is represented; and

3) 64 valid emission tests were accomplished on. these
engines;

ECTD concludes that the 1969 baseline shown here is representative
of the HC and CO emission leveis of 1969 HD gasoline-fueled en-
gines. The following values are considered as a 90 percent reduc-
tion from the average of actuaily measured emissions based on the
results of the test program:

HO 1.3 g/BHP~hr
CO 15.5 g/BHP-hr

The above values are the emissions standard which are proposed
for heavy-duty engines beginning in 1983.

In addition, EPA has proposed idle emission standards based
on Mode 2 of the four modes described above,

Mode 2: Idle - no load.

The 19 engines incluaed in the idle test baseline give a
representative depiction of che fleet-wide 1969 idle emissions.
Figures IV-C-3 and IV-C-4 snow tne decreasing sensitivity of the nC
and CO idle emissions as che number of baseline engines increased.


HEAVY DUTY ENOTME TDLE TEST LMESSEONS SUMMARY -- 1969 BASELINE  ENOINE (S)

MAY Pay 1919

MhGr 40 clos 3480 ENGIDE GM5S0 VOSI2K1 RATED WPT N7ZA | RATED RPMS NZ
COMM NTS: 1989 HLT saw
wus ER MOOF NOL F MODE NO. & monk NO, 4 MODE NO. 4 DISP COLE

Saeed ele atallaetteeeetee  e e  ain woteoe => B= VALIU
THST Cone HC co Ox HC He ca NUX Me VALID
TOGOLG IK OHOD 929, VosAn. 49. 346 1026. 9886. 458. 1319, 1B<O0. 442. 8
190015 Tat 0802 Oe 10472. 39271. 27. 1053, 9940. 685. lelo, 17230. 4706 8
190016 1 i OOS 148. ans. 4914) 25. 1019, 9780. 9b, 1299, 16746. S20, 8
Mi ant node 9OKX, = BS, 644T, 43379. 2H. 10336 9409., BBS, 1298, 17412. 494. NE 3
sip.pey, t 99.6 A43.4 1066 1078.5 Sigl.0 4.7 17.6 81.6 26.4 21.5 173.10 25.0


HEAVY ORUTY ENGINE TRANSIENT EME Ssfotis  uanatey.

1969 HASKLIME ENGINE OS?

AY fue F279

MPU: 3n ip: ane bnsiv: F3oo 1 RATED HPL MZA | RATED PEM NZA
comme MTGE tena mn at?
NUMA EB BANS 7 AMPA F/BUP AH ACTUAL 6 GRAMS 7 MILE WEIGHTEQ GRAMS/LH FUFL DSP CODE
+ Be VALID
TEST Conte ASF HHP. He PRON ile co NOX nC co NOK Mz VALIO
Taso ME PPOb ees PILAR 5299 AY V?.UTA  =6.8 11-A3 12,16 12,99 947.93 7.89 4
rissse 0 Lage FAST 204.91 5.50 Uren LB 10.47 Whole 10.64 Jon. 37 7.62 x
MESSE nl en) 225.55 S+e6 Thane 1.8 8.76 IP6.19 R69 J23-tI ASD x
TYSSS4 ME PNG 262.397 and fo.n2n  -964 W1.27 316.10 12.09 397.49 6.70 8
TYSsss Ml 1205 774,40 Crd 18, .Ku -1.3 A.S2 32.61 B,9% B3P,a frites K
TOSSSF HL} 1206 6.06 227.02 4.52 TA, 264 " B.6L 327.53 A690 12637 O64 A
MEANE TePR 233,38 4.90 AM V7. any 50? 10.57 316.93 6-67 VWh.26 JIAR.2H 7.08 Ned

STU.DtY, ft 1652) 7697 0 yam aaa Oak? 52 1.72 5.24 0055 2.07 2-5) 79


HEAVY

MEGE 20

comm Nit

NUM eR

M906 TH 0901

MP Att

HuTY FHGINE LOC TEST EM SUMMARY

STONS

uty
cipt ova FNGID? NLR Pe yh RATED Huet
1on9 HLT #9
MODF ONO. L MODE Nt. 2 MONE
ne co UK Ne
M2. aan, ASE, TBG4, Ties. 46. 190.
9. 46004 ISI. TAGS. wes. 46. 190,

1969 BASELINE

ENGINE (S)

N7A RATED RPE ONZA

NU. 3 MONE NO. 4 VISP COLE
---- VALID

co NOX VALID
2

3175. 26R4, 1927. S201- 257A. A

JLTS. 26864, - 1927. S201. 2578. 1



=29-

The engine coolant water was circulated through a heat-
exchanging water cooling system; the system temperature control was
set such that coolant water to the engine was a minimum of 20°F
below engine thermostat temperature. Portable fans were directed
at each side of the engine during the test, but were shut off
during the hot soak.

Exact duplication of the in-vehicle exhaust system involved
practical difficulties arising from the location of the dynamome-
ter. Where necessary, the standard exhaust systems were bent to
clear the dyno and other obstructions (e.g., the control instru-
mentation boom). Bends were kept to a minimum to eliminate back-
pressure variations, Marmon flanges were welded to the end of the
exhaust system for attacnment of flexible convoluted piping for
transport of the raw exhaust to the CVS inlet, to which the piping
was rigidly attached. Inlet depression at the CVS was kept within
NPRM specifications.

In addition to the tune-ups performed by the procurement
contractor, all engines were tuned and adjusted by ECTD personnel
to manufacturer's recommended specifications prior to mapping and
testing. The tune-up specifications used were those published in
the manufacturer's applicavle service manuals, obtained directly
from the manufacturers. In the interest of accuracy, a number of
carburetors and distributors were checked and adjusted by the
manufacturers at their own faciiities. Every attempt was made to
meet the recommended specifications, and this was accomplished in
che vast majority of cases. In a few cases (called out in Appendix
II) both engineering judgment and manufacturer's advice, were used
when specifications were unacnievable.

The tuneup procedure involved verification of engine perform-
ance. Distributor advance curves and dwell variation were checked
on a Sun Model 500 distributor tester (distributor removed from the
engine). With the engine running on the dynamometer, a Sun Model
947 engine performance tester was used to cneck mechanical and
vacuum advance curves and dwell variations. The same instrument
was used in the adjustment of idle HC and CO, along with the
carburetor/cylinder balancing aajustment and the carburetor power
valve check.

After all mechanical specifications were checked, calibration
of the engine/control system was performed, and the engine mapping
procedure began.

A summary of the equipment used 1s presented in Table IV B-4.


-4-

IV. Discussion
aA. Vehicle/Engine Selection and Procurement

Le 1969 Sales Data and Sampling Plan

To establish the HC and CO emission standards for 1983
heavy-duty engines, it was necessary to test the emission levels of
1969 heavy-duty engines.

To determine the average of actually measured emissions,
ECTD first gathered the sales data by engine CID for each manu-
facturer's 1969 model year sales. This sales data, shown in Table
IV-A-1, was supplied by the vehicle/engine manufacturers and MVMA
at the request of ECTD, beginning in October 1977. The market
shares for each of the manufacturer's engine lines were determined
from this data.

Using this sales information, a sampling plan was constructed
to determine which engines, and how many of each engine Line, would
be statistically desirable if between twenty and fifty engines were
tested. A preliminary sample size of 25 engines was chosen to
construct this sampling plan. However, the number of engines
ultimately used in the baseline would be based primarily on the
trend of the emission results with cost, time, and engine avail-
ability as other limiting factors. The sampling plan shown in Table
IV-A-2 was constructed by multiplying the market percentage of each
engine by twenty-five and chen using the integer range around that
number. For example, (0.059) x (25) = 1.475, or a (1-2) range
for the sample. The desired sample was further constrained by
not permitting more engines from any manufacturer than the number
shown for each manufacturer in column 5 of Table IV-A-2.

Once the sampling plan was finalized, the next step was to
determine the means by which the desired engines could be procured
for testing.

In the fall of 1977, ECTD first considered testing manufac-
turer supplied 1969 heavy-duty gasoline-fueled engines. These
engines would not have deen production engines but would have
been new engines built as near to 1969 specifications as possible.
However, there was no guarantee that these engines would have been
close enough to 1969 specifications to make them acceptable. Due
to the non-availability of some original eauipment carburetors and
distributors it was very unlikely the 1969 specifications could
have been met, especially by all four manufacturers on ail engine
lines. This alternative was rejected by OMSAPC for the reasons
cited above and for another very importance reason. £©PA interpreted
the provisions of the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments to mean actual
1969 production engines and not new engines built to 1969 specifi-
cations.


HC (G/BHP-HR)
14.00 16.00 18.00

12.00

SALES-WEIGHTED BASELINE TRANSIENT
EMISSIONS HC (G/BHP-HR)

NA
Ne

3.00 5.00 7.00 9.00 i) 17.00

00 13,00 15.00
NO. OF ENGINES

-HY-

19.00 21.00 23.00


-3-

selection and procurement efforts of ECTD and its contractors,
Systems Control Inc. and EG & G Automotive Research, as well as the
engine preparation and testing programs at EPA/MVEL, and Southwest
Research Institute. The lasc section of the cext includes a
presentation and discussion of the 1969 emissions data used in
determining the 90% reduction wnich is used to determine the
proposed emission standards for 1983.

The appendices to this report, available upon request,
contain more detailed information on the procurement contracts
and specific procurement, inspection, and preparation data for
the baseline engines, as well as test by test data on the baseline
engines.


-38-

Table IV B=8

Transient Emission Sampling Schedule (Cold Cycle) i/

Time After
Ignicion
(seconds) 2/

1- 14
15
25

272
579
895
1167

1169 +2

Event
Cranking of engine/Begin Bag | Sampling
Ignition (Times Started)
Dynamometer Engaged

Automatic Control Engaged

Just Non-Idle Cycle Command

Bag 1 Ends/Bag 2 Begins
Bag 2 Ends/Bag 3 Begins
Bag 3 Ends/Bag 4 Begins
Bag 4 Ends

Twenty-Minute Soak Begins

L/ Hot cycle is identical, following twenty-minute soak.
2/ As denoted in the NPRM speed/Torque schedule.


-17-

Table IV-A-5

Sampling Plan vs. Baseline Engines Procured

Sampling Actual
Manufacturer Engine Target Range Procurement

Chrysler 318-3 0-1 1
318-1 0-1 1
361 0-1 1
383 0-1 0
413 0-1 0

225 0-1 os
Total 2-3 4
Ford 330 3-4 2
360 1-2 2
361 1-2 2
300 1-2 1
391 o-1 1
477 0-1 0
390 0-1 0

534 0-1 oO
Total 8-9) 8
General Motors 350-2 3-4 3
366 1-2 2
292 1-2 1
351¢c 0-1 1
250 O-1 0
307 0-1 0
305¢ o-1 0
477 O-1 te)
350-4 0-1 )

396 0-1 O°
Total (9-10) 7
THC V345 1-2 2
V304 1-2 1
V392 O-1 1
RD450 0-1 0

VS478 0-1 0.
Total (3-4) 4


-11-

Table IV-A-3 (Cont'd)

Final 1969 Baseline Engines

Baseline Selection Date Procurement
Engine No. Engine Mileage Model Body Type Category Source Procured Method

15 Ford 361 65,537 B700 School Bus A Taylor Cen. Baptist 10-27-78 Lease, SCI
Church, Taylor, MI C# 68-03-2715

16 Ford 360 81,464 F250 Pick-up B Mr. D. Woolett 10-03-78 Lease, EG&C
San Antonio, TX C# 68-03-2683
17 Chev 292 46,200 c-30 Pick-up A E & M Motor Sales 12-06-78 Purchase, SCI
Detroit, MI C# 68-03-2683

18 Dodge 318-1 37,526 D200 Pick-up A Mr. J. Stanley 8-24-78 Lease, EG&G
San Antonio, TX C# 68-03-2683
19 Ford 361 93,430 B750 School Bus Cc Southfield Pub Schls 12-14-78 Purchase, SCI
Southfield, MI C# 68-03-2715

20 Ford 360 87,750 F250 Pick-up Cc Mr. R. Pfluger 11-16-78 Lease, EG&G
San Antonio, TX C# 68-03-2683
2 Chev 350 57,000 c-50 School Bus A W. Central Schls. 11-13-78 Purchase, SCI
Anderson, IN C# 68-03-2715
22 Dodge 361 85,000 C-700 Dump Truck c City of Huntington 1-05-79 Purchase, SCI
Woods, MI C# 68-03-2715
23 Chev 366 109,000 c-50 School Bus c Plymouth Schls. 10-13-78 Purchase, SCI

Plymouth, MI C# 68-03-2715


-iv-

scl - Systems Control, Incorporated, Livonia, Michigan
st - Spark Ignition

SwRI - Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas


MWRavy OOUTY ENGT TRARSTRST EMISSTOND == $969 BASELINE  ENDINE OS)

Mos so ci: awl EMOTE Ese) HEE be RATED Bp N7A RATLU PME NSA
COMMENTS: Weg HET ene
HUMBE & GHANS 7 fete w/AHP-HEE ACTUAL ‘ GRAMS 7 MILE WEIGHTED GRaMS/LB FULL = OISP CODF
-- - - - VALID
ASEC WHE He ROW uc cu NOK HC co Noa vatID
KOOjTe mM LOO) Yee 204,90 4.40 0.6H0 7b.ors -e.8 16,20 335.60 7.35 14,44 299.26 6.56 x
BOOT2H 1402 4654 204.97 Geol 0.684 20.547 red 15.40 330.62 Tas 13.97 300-10 6675 a
AOnLey ML 1903 BSH 190.21 S.b2 Geb] L001NG O09 15.10 300.31 8-72 13.84 275.26 1.99 8
Bouse Mt 1904 46d DPT.4R 5614 Gb .6%H 19.747 -8.9 14,83 304,73 7.94 22,8) 283.74 7.39 a
ME ANTS IST VYT. DS oy 0.690 an.ils Hed S.1L 3bb.9d 8.04 13.87 286.47 7.38 3
S(U.0rv. t 0606 TA34 Oe4 0.007 o.a20 19 0.29 10.49 0-64 = 0.08 12.63 0.62

—-b7-


-22-
performance regression statistics and to variations in other cycle
parameters. Results of these test programs will appear in a

separate technical report.

3. Transient Engine Dynamometer Control System

The transient control system used in the baseline program
was a digital/analog hyprid, employing closed-loop analog speed
control and open-loop analog torque control. (See Figure IV-B-1).
a digital cassette recorder served as a source of continual command
signals,, and also recorded speed/load feedback signals from the
engine on a separate cassette tape. The digital command signals
from the cassette keypoard were converted to analog control vol-
tages within a Texas Instruments 960B Computer. The TI 960B was
programmed for several tasks, the most important of which were
transient engine control for emission testing (Task D), and manual
steady-state engine control through the keyboard for system
calibration (Task A). The analog control circuitry and the
digital/analog interfacing were designed by LABECO, Inc. of
Mooresville, Indiana.

Test cell hardware included General Electric motoring dynamo-
meters and their associated G.E. control circuitry, which comprised
the major portion of the speed ioop of the control system. The
speed control circuitry, was a simple closed-loop system employing
proportional control (1.e., dynamometer speed was a linear function
of command voltage), with a proportional feedback loop al lowing for
the generation of compensatory error voltages.

The torque control loop was somewhat more complex. Torque
control was an open loop system in the sense that parts of the
system were not electrical, i.e., the engine and its operational
characteristics were integral components of the "circuit." Figure
IV B-2 details the typical load vs. throttle position characteris-~
tics of an Sl engine. (Throttle position is expressed in terms of
the voltage applied to a throttle actuator servo motor; the clutch-
driven actuator opened and closed the throttle linkage in propor-
tion to the applied voltage.) Actual engine load was measured by a
torquemeter (torsional strain gauge type with slip rings) mounted
in line in the driveshaft between dynamometer and engine.

The ECTD control system controlled torque through three
separate analog input volcages to the servo motor (See Figure
IV B-1): 1) a “pre-position" throttle command voltage proportional
to the commanded torque, 2) a speed correction voltage to allow for
the variations in load vs. throttle position with engine speed
(Figure IV B-2), and 3) a simple torque error (Command minus
Feedback) voltage for fine tuning. In short, this linear “pre-
position” system attempted to follow nonlinear engine load/throttle
voltage characteristics witn corrections for non-linearity provided
by the limited error voltages and by additional circritry (See
Footnote 2/, Table IV B-3).


To comply with chis interpretation of Congressional intent, a
Program was undertaken to orocure actual in-use 1969 heavy-duty
engines. The engines sought for the baseline were selected based
on overall engine operating condition and closeness to OEM config-
uration but not on the vehicle body type, function, or usage
pattern,

2. Selection Criteria

The following criteria were established to identify potential
baseline engines:

(1) AlL engines must be 1969 Model Year and should be
installed in a vehicle registered as a 1969 model year
vehicle with a GVWR greater than 8,500 lb.

(2) The test engines must be in good operating condi-
tion, must be in their original configuration (i.e., must
have original carburetor, distributor, and engine block),
must not exhibit evidence of excessive o11 consumption,
and should not have been subjected to more than 80,000
miles of operation.

(3) The engine's original carburation and ignition system
should not have been modified from OEM specifications.

(4) The engines shall not have received a major overhaul
(i.e., valve grind, valve replacement, or compression rings
replacement).

EPA realized that engine selection was a critical element
in establishing a valid baseiine of 1969 model year gasoline-
fueled heavy-duty engines. The engines inspected were evalu-
ated according to the selection criteria outlined above, and
then placed into Class A, B, or C, depending upon how closely
the selection criteria were met. Classes A, 8, and C were defined
as:

Class"A" - Engine 1s in its original configuration, meaning it
has never been overhauled, rebuilt or modified, it has
the original carburetor, discributor, cylinder head and intake
manifold, and has never had the carburetor modified (i.e.,
rebuilt with different jet sizes, power valve, choke arrange-
ment, governor, etc.). Engine does not currently need an
overhaul or major repair and has not accumulated more than
80,000 miles;


-27-

mode, and early in the baseline program, controller performance in
each mode was analyzed. Basea upon the high void rates associated
with "torque control" mode due to the lack of cold engine drivea-
bility in the early moments of a cold start (resulting in stallea
engines and voided tests) the decision was made to operate in
“speed control" for the baseline program. The dynamometer control-
led engine speed during momentary stumbles at the cold start,
precluding stalling of the engine and substantially reducing the
likelihood of a void cest.

When compared with tne ECTD control system, the control system
at SwRI differed in support instrumentation, and in the case of the
torque-control loop, in basic design. The torque control input to
the throttle servo motor was entirely error-based, 1.e., the torque
command and feedback voltages were fed into a differencing ampli-
fier; the amplifier output drove the servo motor. SwRI also ran in
speed control mode, and in compliance with the revised regression
statistics,

The ECTD "Pre=position" type system was originally selected to
guarantee sufficiently rapid throttle response to widely varying
torque commands. During che baseline program, however, frequent
calibration difficulties resulted in regularly deficient controller
performance, due to both the non-linearity of the engine's throt-
tle-position function and the insufficient voltage achievable
from the torque error amplifier. (Above a certain amplifier gain,
considerable oscillatory motion of the throttle actuator was
encountered. The point of excessive oscillation represented the
maximum yzain allowable; in some cases this gain was too low to
overcome the non-linear characteristics.) Based upon the perform-
ance of the system at SwRI, a torque controller utilizing torque
error as the major controlling input ts equally responsive as a
“pre-position" system, does not suffer from engine-to-engine
variations in non-linear throttle operational characteristics, and
1s significantly easier to calibrate.

In general the ECTD control system proauced repeatable results
within the revised cycle performance criteria. Enough difficulty
in calibration was experienced, nowever, to warrant modification
of the controller to one wnose primary torque controlling input is
error-based. An alternative solution 1s to use a pre-position type
control system with sufficient memory capacity to allow calibration
through a comprehensive matrix tapping of the engine's throttle
voltage characteristics, i.e., record the throttle voltage neces-
sary for any combination of speed and torque. These matrix values
could be stored into memory directly, or used to determine con-
stants of higher-oraer polynomial algorithms (pre-programmed into
the computer) to allow closer following of the non-linear throttle

LI/ SwRI operated without ambient humidity controls,but this had no
significant effect on HC and CO emission levels.


HEAVY DUTY OFNGTME COLE TEST EMESSTOMs SUMMARY == 19697 HASELINE ENGINE OS)

MAY 2H. V4Ie

MFor an CID: Aer FNGIO: HIGL=T SLUL RATED OHP! NZA | RATFO REME ONZA
COMMENTS: V96o NLT #22
MODE NO, I Mur NO. 7 . Hone NO, FY MODE NO. & DISP COVE
waren eee nee wreeee nonce anne nnn nenenne-- WE VALI
HC co NOX uc co NOX M> VAL TU
Hon2n6 tn 2201 VIA, PYTAI. 164, 17667, 5455H, 395, 2G, LTNT2. L9G. = -22NE. AST. LH GH, 8
Hoo207 FR 2202 VM. FIDE. 176, 17257. SH1G9, = He 2H2L TING. 2000, «2169, NNATI. LTT A
MEAN! J1SO. FDIAT.S LTO. 12462. 55953. 35. 2NSIL T23AL NOGA. ©2975. N00. ABHL. N= 2

SsTD.DEVv, 519.2 SiW.6 Aen 790-7 = 1126-8 067 12.7 9363 59,9 3a 42.9 Sea


are

MEAVY tULY

30

COMM NIG

NUMER

Test

796048 Int
(96649 fre
Nyeets bn

MPAGE

S1O.DLV,

COPE

1501
1sue
1503

Bae Hak,

Wore Test

tutsslons

SUMMARY

- 1969 uA

ele

1969 WLI

mODF

qin.
$662,
sr,
433.

45.0

wl
ms
No.
oo
WI,
F3085.
35049,
34895.

Loan.

Eno 10s

162,

crs

NOY 246

F361 SHOE

OnE

AGB,
oni.
ARIAT,

7647,

1332.2

HO. 2

So7al.
KbITe.
SH4ne,
53969,

6409.8

wag

RATED APS

Je.
32.
42.

14.4

Mane

2686,
2010,
2528,
2608,

79.2

81-

N/A

NO. 4

27890.
270%.
26162,
27024.

BI4.9

SEL INE

HATED REE

1470.
1434,
1874,
1492,

73.4

ENGINE (St

MODE

2vis,
29,
2759,
283),

78.6

N/A

NO. 4

30466,
30823.
29085.
3029).

638.0

DISP CODE
VALU
VALIU

ree


-8-

Class"B'' - Engine has been overhauled, but is in good ope-
rating condition, and has its original carburetor, distrib-
utor, heads, and intake manifold. Engine has not accumulated
more than 80,000 miles since being overhauled;

Class"C'' - Engine is in its original configuration, as in
Class A, but needs major repairs, or has accumulated greacer
than 80,000 miles.

The engine selection process used by ECTD and its contractor,
SCI, consisted of three main parts: initial screening, physical
inspection, and diagnostic evaluation. Initial screening, usually
by telephone, consisted of questioning the vehicle owners as to the
vehicle make and GVWR, mileage, engine displacement, past mainte-
nance history, and general operating condition of the engine. If
maintenance records were available, the owners were requested to
supply copies of these records, or at a minimum, allow inspection
of these records.

Vehicles which passed the initial screening process were
then inspected by a mechanic to verify the initial screening
information and record any pertinent information. The engine
was started and observed for proper operation in an attempt to
eliminate engines with obvious problems. A compression check
was done om many engines at this point. Finally, che distrib-
utor and carburetor found on the engine were verified as original
and proper by using part numbers. This was accomplished either
through direct communication with the manufacturer, or by-. using
service manuals. If, at this point, all of the selection criteria
were mec, the vehicle was procured by lease, loan, or outright
purchase,

The final step in the selection process was a major diagnostic
evaluation and tune-up of the engine. During this final phase che
engines were cleaned and given a compression check if this had not
been done earlier. Included in the engine diagnosis was an eval-
uation of the ignicion system, spark plug checks, fluid level
check, compression check, etc. The engines also received a tune-up
in which the ignition wires, spark plugs, PCV valve, belts, and
hoses were replaced. The rotor, points, condensor and cap were
teplaced and the oil, o1l filcer, gas filter, and air filter were
changed. In addition, any other non-emission-related part con-
sidered defective was replaced.

Manufacturers’ service manuals were used to obtain engine
tune-up specifications and in some cases the manufacturers provided
these tune-up specifications. Initially, carburetors and dis-
tributors were removed from the engines to be checked for proper
functioning and to determine 1f they mec original specifications.
The necessary equipment was aot available at SCI or EPA/MVEL, so
the manufacturers were requested to flow the carburetors and test


HFG 40
LOMME NTRS
HUD CER

TEST

Cone

Hoo22T Fs 2108

MF ALE

meove

DUTY ENGEL VOLE TEST EnESS Tots SuMMatr == 1969 HaStLINE

MAY ee

dary

ci: ya PHopn: CM9S0 TENNES RATED HHPE  ON7A

food WEE aet

MODF NO. 4

MOnF NO

4c co Nox ira ca NOK HC co NOK

995. 116, 14, 1ETOH, = OBO. = 32. BGT. PTH. 1328,
995, TEDW. 145, 11786. NOY. = 32. BGR. © LT ?K2. 1398.

-4S-

ENUINF IS)

RATED RPM? N/A

MODE NO, 4
HU co NOX
2316. 22689. 1019,
2376. 22689, 1019.

DIsP Cove



93
0%
0s
06
or
oA
oo
vw
12
ie)
we
1s
16
we
iE)
19
20
cal
ee

TAMLE 7

FUG TNE

Ves

V 300 64 1968
FA3U 915055
GUISE 26834 34
F330 UNSOSS
GAI50 WOSt2xt
WTA om JAR
GM 350 2 LPN
Fi00 1

VIGS 112656
GHIG6 AVRUCKLF
FOL OF
Fie Gel
CHER HACKET
DAN G62
Fiet we 19
F360 HGH
GIO TENNIS
561-3 SLUG

pessasg9053

aaa0505

me
yoann

tan 23.
3aynt.
2er.
Soibe
TS? 16
bGnt.
TRans
wine,
CaER yy
aor,
saan,
TonT,
Whe
WAZ,

ENTSSTONS
HASSE INE ENGINE (5)

HAY 26. 1979

ro

2ozrt,
agua,
T8155.
wP2b.
aned?,
G@yRIA,
Loe,
anor,
TLIlan,
22922.
FINaK,
59999,
5059.
sree
1alal
2anii,
agn2b,
63769.
55353.

Pagt NO.

cis

Sa. ye
41.57
SI?
37.30
2nety
PAGS
45.90
$0.27
29.37
66.03
B5.25
42.10
40.47
60.50
Fa.
55.10
ra

31.60
35,10

~1]00-—

SITE

RONAN NE UNE ERE OEY


Heavy MUTY  FeaGint  Teansteut Eersstons  SUMM ne - 1969 BASkLINE ENDINE OS)

tay eee Lely

rane so Ctps set ENGIU? Fink SHOE RATED BPE NZA | RaTtu Rpm Na
COMM. ESE 1969 HLT wns
NUMHER GRAMS 7 HHP -11H a/AHP-HA ACTUAL GRAMS / MILE WEIGHED GRAMS/LB FUEL OISP CODE
- - oo eeneenee B= VALIO
Test C-O1nG ue co nOK asec HHP = ERO uc co Nox HC co NOK VALIO
Pankow ote p508 221.06  Seeh O.TM) Walt -pleo 17.12 VOl.o7 Tele Ih.Go 263.05 0.67 x
W9oH00 MH 1SU4 220,78 3-07 0.764 WA.dd) -tee 17.07 318.24 T.3h 15.46 288.25 6.62 x
Poebol M1503 212.68 S696 TST 22.76) -)5e1 17.83 296,06 8.27 16.9 260.95 7,85 x
fepndt PLO bs02 ati.ys 5.60 0.756 Lo.9eS  -boed 15.2] 280 Teoh 15.27 2Bh.tb read x
Pobba4 HL 1805 219,75 AE ge 129 22.0el S64 24.55 3B4,90 8643 19,22 301-44 60 x
ROOLOT HLT 1508 254.16 Seto 0.716 EP.GOL 1464 20.47 350.05 6.99 18,34 313.61 b.2t x
woulae mt 1s07 260.90 See a 29d WAZ ID 21.37 150,96 = 7664 18,50 303.82 ob) 8
Koolol mt tsa6 215,85 Seok 0.166 1A.A99  - 10.0 20.10 319.48 8.31 Q7,72 2861.79 7,33 cS)
MEANT een, 49 5.45 O.Tly ALAIN - 16% 20.73 315.22 7.97 1B.11 292.61 6.91 2
S1D.Orv, AT.7d) Gee y.049 o.s9 0.6 0.90 22.26 0.47 0.55 15.5u 0.5)

-L3—-


ME AVY DUTY ENGIIE TRANSIENT EMISSIONS SUMMAHY == 9 196% BASELINE ENGINE CS)

MAY ee V4Td

AFOS 40 clos Joo ENOTD? GHssu TENTS Ralf Blips NZA RATED PPHE NWA
COMMENT CE 1469 WOT web
WRAMS 7 HiIP~tie W7AHP-HR ACTUAL ‘ GRAMS / MILE WEIGHTED GRAMS/LB FUEL DISP CUDE
a eas a es ae vat
Test CODING uc co ar ost eC HHr~ te FRHOW ne cu HO co NOK H= VALID
HOO?D? UL. fol 9.70 46.57 ats 0.078 H.S61  -12.0 14.0) 211,96 B.S B4,51 2d6,19 B.3h x
BOoe lB fr 2402 9-50 161.07 Sed 0.679 18.296 -1 464 13.56 201,29 8.06 13.99 207.76 6.32 a
HOE MEE 2203 Weel 149.54 4eho 0.678 49.021 ~909 42.17 221.33 8.09 12.17 221.24 K.UY H
sunzes me 2104 8.59 150.397 well O.6eT 20.72 -1.68 13.82 241,93 6-70 13.70 239.82 6.65 a
KOD2e2 HL NOD web d 15138 Sent 0.097 20.90) -1.0 14.89 246.92 6.70 14.42 239,15 6.49 : Bb
mean: Aso4 150.36  &ebB 0,665 0.21 4319663 236.73 Te16 13.45 233.40 7.08 ne 3
SID.OeV. F feen 106 16 0026 ye04p 4.9 1.37 13.57 0-80 4.15 10.54 0.88


-13-

Finally, when engines required by the sampling plan could
not be procured by the previously described method, ECTD chose
another procurement route. If a particular heavy-duty engine could
moc be procured from a heavy-duty vehicle, but the same engine,
identical in all respects, was also sold in light-duty trucks, then
the engine was procured from a light-duty truck under EPA Contract
No. 68-03-2683 with EG & G Automotive Research of San Antonio,
Texas. This method was used to procure three of the baseline
engines which then underwent the normal inspection and tune-up
procedures.

5. Result of Selection and Procurement Actions

The procurement efforts described above resulted in the
twenty-three baseline engines shown in Table IV~A-3. Every
effort was made to bring these engines to as close to original
configuration as possible. Table IV-A-4 outlines the steps which
were taken to prepare each baseline engine for testing. The
condition of these baseline engines 1s attested to by the fact that
none of the twenty-three engines experienced a mechanical breakdown
or failure during engine testing. All were in good operating
condition and tuned to manufacturer specifications.

In closing this section, it might be constructive to compare
ECTD's procurement efforts to the sampling plan originally estab-
lished to guide this effort. The original sampling plan called for
ECTD to initially consider a sample of twenty-five engines which
were sold in 1969 gasoline-fueled HD vehicles. Of the 25 engines
initially desired, only 23 were included in this baseline program.
As will be shown in section C, only 23 engines were necessary to
establish dependable baseline results. The mileage criteria, less
than 80,000 miles, was met by 70% of the sample used. Figure
IV-A-1 shows the variation in the total miles accumulated on
the 23 baseline engines. 87% of the engines used were actu-
ally taken from heavy-duty vehicles; 13% were heavy-duty engines
taken from a light-duty truck chassis. Only one engine had under-
gone a major rebuild.

Finally, Table IV-A-5 compares the sampling plan (Table
IV-A-2) to the final baseline (Table IV-A-3). Table IV-A-5 shows
that the guidance of the initial sampling plan was followed close-
ly. Small sales volume, large cubic inch displacement engines were
not available for this baseline program. However, the sales-
weighting used to determine the average emissions would have
Minimized the impact of these larger engines on the final baseline
results. ECTD's procurement efforts were highly satisfactory in
light of the goals established. Over 80% of the 1969 market was
represented by the engines procured, and all engines were brought
near to OEM specifications prior to testing.


-97-

BASELINE ENGINE IDLE
EMISSION TEST SUMMARY TABLES

3 TABLES


-19-

The transient procedure was identical to that described in the
February 13, 1979 NPRM with two exceptions:

a) Four separate bag samples were taken during each hot
and cold cycle (as opposed to the recommended one), this
was done so that emission data could also be collected
for the separate urban and highway segments within the
total cycle. 1/

b) The regression line tolerances specified as strict criter-
1a for the validation of transient tests were judged too
restrictive based upon the experience acquired in the baseline
program, and were relaxed. (See Table IV B~1.)

The proposed criteria in che NPRM were derived prior to tne
accumulation of substantial transient testing data. Based upon a
comprehensive review of the baseline data, use of the stricter NPRM
criteria led to significantly higher void rates, with no apparenc
gain in emission repeatability or test quality.

These higher void rates were due primarily to contral system
Limitations. The ECTD transient controller represented a first
attempt, prototype system. Statistical reduction of tests per-
formed at SwRI under a control system of different design (see
Section 3), indicated a somewhat better control capability, especi-
ally for engines with a high aegree of throttle performance non-
linearity. There is reason to believe that as future transient
control systems are refined, no real difficulty should be experi-
enced in meeting the statistical requirements of the February 13,
1979 NPRM. However, based upon che observation chat emission
sensitivity to the slightly relaxed criteria appeared to be mini-
mal, it 1s recommended that the statistical criteria be relaxed
prior to inclusion in the Final Rulemaking Action. The tolerances
presented in Table IV B-1 are adequate to guarantee repeatable and
representative emission results. These tolerances should be
subject to future revision, however, 1f they prove inadequate due
to the effects of advanced emission control technology on the
repeatability of the test procedure.

i/ Brake specific emissions for each bag were combined to produce
a composite brake specific emission number for the entire hot or
cold cycle. This was mathematically and experimentally equivalent
to a single bag resulc.


-438-

BASELINE ENGINE TRANSIENT
EMISSION TEST DATA SHEETS

23 ENGINES


HEAVY DUTY ENGINE LOLE TEST EMTSS£ou, SUMMARY -- 1969 UASELINE ENUINE (5)

MEY ree 1UTd

Por 30 cio: Yr ENGIN: Fol HLE Le RATED HPL NZA = RATED RPM? N/A
COMM. EE beng Wht #19
hum ER Hone WOLF mone NO, 2 MODE NO, 3 HODE NU, & OIsP COLE

wercren- B= vaLin
TEST CODE Ms VALIO
HOO2LY Te 19OL 2190, PHGID. 228, Siel. 27598, 59. 260), 22h20. 1744, 2720. 26418. I2ol. 8
00215 Teh 1902 W089, $0642. 220, «7055. Bed. = SZ. TOG, = 22579. 1688. = 2887, = DZD - DDSOY 8
Me anit 2926, PNGIT. «724, = O1HB, = 2hUNS. = 95-2654, 22350- 2618, 29870. 1200. N= 2
StO.bEV. ft 190.3 1630.9 5.9 1226.5 SKOLH SAI 1.6 320.8 39,7 96.9 2052.7 85.6

—93-


-3l-

5. Software Support/Data Reduction

Considerable amounts of software support were utilized in the
baseline program, both in evaluating the engine's performance over
the cycle and in the actual emission calculations.

The vast computational and memory resources of the Michigan
Terminal System's (MTS) AMDAHL V/7 Computer were made available
to the TI Controller through a standard phone communications
link (1200 BAUD). The MTS system served as a central processor
(host computer) which stored the numerous support programs used in
day-to-day baseline operations. These support programs and their
functions are summarized below.

Cycle Support System Function List

GENCYC - Generate a normalizedl/ cycle or mapping reference2/ file.
EDCYC - Edit opcodes3/ on normalized cycle or engine reference4/ file.
INPMFB  - Input mapping feedback5/ cassette into a file.

MANIPCYC - Manipulate normalized cycles and unnormalize them

MAKECAS - Make a mapping or engine reference cassette (command tape).

Test Processing System Function List

INPEFC - Input engine feeabacx cassette into a file.

CYCPERF - Monitor performance of engine feedback file (perform
statistical regression).

STOREDS - Store HD data sneets in the HD data base (emission data).

STOREEL - Store HD engine information.

PROCTEST - Process HD tests (perform emission calculations).

REPORT - Generate HD reports (output emission data).

RETRVDS - Retrieve HD data sheets to make changes.

1/ To normalize a cycle is to express each cycle parameter (RPM or
ft lbs) as a percentage of the maximum achievable.

2/ A mapping reference frie 1s used to control on engine during the
automatic maximum load curve generation. It consists of incremen~
tal step speed commands and wide-open throttle commands.

3/ Opcodes (Operational Codes) are aaditional data recorded on the
feedback tape, or present on the reference tape. They allow
monitoring of certain conditions (e.g., closed or wide-open tnrot-
tle), and can be used for additional control capabilities.
4/ Engine reference file 1s an engine-specific command tape used to
run the engine through the entire transient test.

S/ Feedback 1s the recorded speed and torque performance of an
engine, either during mapping or a transient test.


-14-

Table IV-A-4

Baseline Engine Maintenance Summary

Engine#/Model
1. Dodge 225-1

2. INC 392
3. Ford 391
4. THC 304
5. Ford 330
6. GM 351

7. Ford 330
8. GM 350

9. Chrysler 318-3

10. THC 345
Ll. GM 350
12. Ford 300

Pre-Testing Restorative Maintenance

Major tune-up*; replaced intake mani-
fold gasket and 2 broken studs on
intake manifold.

Major tune-up; carburetor flow checked
and adjusted at IHC-Fort Wayne.
Distributor replaced with OEM part
supplied by [HC-Fort Wayne.

Major tune-up; carburetor and dis-
tributor checked and adjusted by Ford.

Major tune-up; carburetor and dis-
tributor checked and adjusted by IHC.

Major tune-up; right cylinder head
gasket and right intake manifold gasket
replaced; carburetor flow checked and
adjusted by Ford.

Major tune-up; all hoses replaced;
distributor replaced with OEM part
supplied and adjusted by GMC; manual
choke installed.

Major cune-up; carburetor and dis-
tributor checked and adjusted by Ford.

Major tune-up; fuel pump replaced.

Major tune-up; distributor and carbur-
etor checked and adjusted at Chrysler;
Chrysler engineer assisted in pre-test
adjustment of governor.

Major tune-up; carburetor and dis-
tributor checked and adjusted at IHC.

Major tune-up; oil pan and gasket
replaced; carburetor replaced with OEM
model supplied by the manufacturer.

Major tune-up; accelerator pump re-
placea.


HEAVY ORUTY Fai bar 1969 BASELINE ENUINE (>)

TRATISTENT

may 2u— 1919
MP OS “o cin: su ENGINES 64 350 2 1 UPN RATED BHPs NZA | RATEU RPMS NZA
COMM. NTS? sueo MET WED
NUMBER GHAMS 7 RHP =H @7BHP UR ACTUAL “ GRAMS 7 MILE WEIGHIEN GRAMS/LB FUEL = DISP COLE
— - - -- - B= VALID
TEST CODING nC co HUK RSFC WHP= HE ERROR HC co NOx HC co NOX M= VALID
TIoo MLE 1103 1647 109,22 5.34 0,649 1.399 1064 10.74 156.95 7-66 LAD 168.29 4
TH442 MLE 1102 4655 109.22 Set 0.626 17.276 166.63 7287 13,67 174.48 x
9566s HE FLOL 4.47 121.30 4.93 0.621 20.222 189.51 7.7 TeLy 195633 x
TY5564 NL 3104 9422 93.68 6293 0.616 19.451 141,68 10.469 6.47 152.07 x
TISS4S HL 1205 Ted 114,75 S.ut 0.627 17.12t 153.36 7.98 12.47 163.01 x
795940 Et 1206 bee 130,01 5.45 9.60) 19.874 204.43 8650 BID 217.99 99.07 8
TYSS4T WLI LOT DOL 178.16 5.29 0.597 19.216 6.4 B.A 705.86 7.86 9.90 231.43 6.66 b
T9556H WE F108 9.58 107.29 7T.ou 0.6548 1T.371G  - 1964 13.64 153.15 10-1} 14,52 163.05 10-76 K
Mr ANE he2b 126.13 5.36 0.616 19.1603 6.7 9.25 169.08 8.02 10,06 205.90 6.72 n= 3
STO.Dtv. & 1-14 15.08 0.08 0.029 0.734 3.6 1.32 27,84 0-43 1.39 33.26 U4

—54 -


Il. Summary

The U.S. EPA was mandated by the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments
to determine revised HC and CO emission standards for 1983 model
year heavy-duty engines. These revised emission standards were to
be based on a 90 percent reduction from the average of actually
measured emissions from uncontrolled (1969 model year) gasoline-
fueled engines.

To comply with the provisions of the 1977 CAAA, ECTD began
a baseline testing program. Under this program, in-use 1969 model
year heavy-duty gasoline-fueled engines were procured, brought to
manufacturer's specifications, and then were tested for emissions
using the transient test proedure and idle test procedure. Twenty-
three engines were tested on the transient procedure to determine
the baseline emission levels. A total of 64 valid tests were
conducted on the transient procedure.

Nineteen engines were tested on the idle test procedure to
determine baseline. A total of 55 valid idle tests were achieved.

Based on the results of these emission tests, the average of
the actually measured emissions is:

12.74 g/BHP-hr HC
155.18 g/BHP-hr co
9706.7 ppmc HC idle

4.6590 % (by volume) CO idle

The CAAA of 1977 require that the 1983 HD emission standards
for HC and CO be at least a 90% reduction from these emission
levels. Based on this requirement, the 1983 HD emission standards
proposed are:

1.3 g/BHP-hr aC
15.5 g/BHP-hr co
970 ppmc HC idle

0.47 % (by volume) CO idle

This baseline program also served to gain experience using the
transient test procedure, ana tolerances for the test were revised
from those proposed in Vol. 44, No. 31, Part IL of the Federal
Register on February 13, 1979 to allow more flexibility in conduc-
ting the test.


Heavy

MFUt 40

COMMS NEG 3

NUMER

west

Cube

HOOKS Pee
HOO1Ko Ta

1701
17102

MP ANT

STO.bEV.

HUTY  ENorNe Foc 1

EST CaESstous

SUMMARY

Clb: au ENGIDE

Lyne HLT ALT

NODE NO. 1

HC co NOK
4660. 1975, 106,
wri. 4626. 303,
3TLO. 3075, 304,
Jeres 2s. len

MAY 24s

M292 RACKET

MODF NO. Z

HC

2845. 49018.
4819. Selb).
7852. S1K9U,
1W7T.1 B2hewd

179

HATED BHP

HC
66. 492.
ss. 219,
60. 3Aas.
4 150.5

—-UU-

1969) HASELINE

N7A | RATED RPME ON7A
NO. 4 MODE
co NOK He
4838. 1379, 167,
2169. 982. 416.
3504. 1080. 292.
1687.5 139.7 170,97

ENGINE (S)

NO. 4

OISsP CUvE
B= VALIO
He vaALIO

Nn ee


-36-

Table IV B-7

Modal Baseline Emission Variability 1|/

Coefficients of Variation 2/(%)

Engine Valid Tests BSHC BSCO
(4) LHC 304 3 4.0 6.0
(9) Chrysler 318-3 2 2.0 18.0
(11) GM 350-2 3 2.0 7.0
(12) Ford 300 2 1.0 1.0
(13) IHC 345 2 7.0 «10
(14) GM 366 2 1.0 2.0
(15) Ford 361 2 18.0 1.0
(16) Ford 360 3 5.0 7.0
(17) GM 292 2 10.0 5.0
(19) Ford 361 2 6.0 2.0
(20) Ford 360 2 2.7 1.7
(21) GM 350-2' 2 5.2 2.1
(22) Chrysler 361 2 +50 3.0
(23) GM 366 3 1.8 4.4
Mean Modal C. of V.(%): 5.0 4.3

1/ Based upon the modified 9~-mode test procedure.

2/ Modal data for engines 1-8 were voided due to a test procedure
error. Engine #4 was retested. Remaining baseline engines not
included here have only one valid 9-mode test.


TAKL Ot E SALE S-aF TIGHTER TPL FRISS TOs PAGE NO. ot
1060 BASELINE  FMGINE CG)

NAY 2a. 1070

+ NGINE WEIGHTING SIZE ne WrIGHTLU co WFIGHTED OX WEIGHTED
FACTORS pene He appr) co cera NOX
ab yates 9 0.02405 S  baROI, SZ IR OPTI. 559.4) 5463 1.307
On VINw ,6nnan 9 0.06329 VY WIT. ZETEC —OFTLIM. 6 tMG.74 ate 3.000
95 F130 1A S055 9 0.0918s $2193. 1947.89 74755. HEI. Sdee GAG
Ne OMID 246A SOI 9 0.06587 4s CTS ea re 37.3 1.700
OF FID onesASS 0 0.07116 6 TPL. AAG.4S —-U2HT. 3669.03 ent 2.0 )6
OH GAGA VOSTAKE 6 9.05698 ‘ 6hnt. — MOT.24 — WIDIAL  2aTOLAA 2ule 1.620
09 P3IH Mw TAY 0 0.03926 1 TAaG, 7.80 Tige. Sl. as. 1.801
Vt GM 359 2 LPs 9 0.0569 3 GIMB. AABN GAIT. 2562.26 so.3 2.864
12 Fo 1 0 0.05190 4 BID. MAS TNTAR, 3729.61 P94 16524
13) VI65S 11456 0.07468 a “ole. JT. 22922. L711. 64.0 4.932
Ve Gite aPUCKLE 0 O.0TATS ? 3898, 10-9h —ISWR. 2674.55 55.2 4.406
1S FasL 9 0.07165 1 Teel, 261.99 S39NY. 1708.51 uel t.332
fe Filed + Gor 0 D.07RKt 4 BIN. aus SSB. 876.72 40.5 1.563
V2 G22 BarkEt 9 0.0655R2 2 3AS?, 253.56 SIKOO, ISLS] 60.5 3.902
THD RGOe 9 0.03671 2 IAT J61-73 1elal. 519.00 Met 1.256
to evel ae 19 0 0.03565 2 SIND, 195-42 BOLI. ARG. 55.1 Ve7a4
20 FIG EG 9 0.0384) ? 4199, What) 40026. 1545.29 nes 1.718
21 G50 TNs 9 0.05896 1 1DTAG. 6lheet HIT6Y.  IOIZ4D 31.6 1.R00
22 Pel SLUG © 0.02532 2 beane. JIS.40 953953. 1409.97 INS D.R94
SALFS-WEICHTER COLE TESTS TOTAL? 97H? 4659063 44.73

80% MENUCT ION Fron QASEL DME: 970.7 4659.0 O.GT


-39-

c. Baseline Compilation and Standards Computation

The results of the testing efforts at EPA/MVEL and SwkI for
all twenty-three of the baseline engines are summarized in the test
results found in this section.

This section is divided into three main sub-sections:

L. Transient Cycle: Emission Test Summaries and Results
2. Idle Tesc: Emission Test Summaries and Resuits
3. Standards Computation and Discussion

Ll. Transient Cycie: Emission Test Summaries and Results

The data tabulations in this sub-section give a summary of all
emission data for the 23 baseline engines tested on the transient
test procedure. Data 1s included for valid and invalid tests.
Appendix LI contains more detailed information on each test con-
ducted.

Before presenting the actual data, a discussion of the less
obvious headings and codes used in the computer printout will aid
in using this information:

a) Manufacturer Code (MFG)

20 Chrysler

30 Ford

40 General Motors

270 International Harvester

b) Actual BHP-hr: The integrated brake~horsepower-hour
calculated from the actual speed and torque performance of an
engine run over the transient cycle.

c) % Error: The percent deviation of che integrated brake~
horsepower-hour over the actual transient test as compared to the
reference cycle integrated brake-horsepower-hour. (Based on the
sum of BHP from cold and hot cycle. Validation was determined
based on the individual value for each cold cycle and hot cycle.)

d)  Grams/mile: Weignted grams (cold and hot start) of each
pollutant over tne test cycle by miles instead of BHP-hr. The
mileage represented by the cycle is 6.47 mes.

e) Disposition Code (DISP)

B = Valid baseline test