P.1 

OAR Box 1830 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

16) IV-B-12 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/13/2008 7:20:51 AM Sheet 16 of 232 
^_% y 

P.2 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

JUN I4I988 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: 

FROM: 

Proposed Test Plan for Passive Onboard Refueling 

Control System 

John J. Gabrysiak, Chemical Engi 

Standards Development and Suppo rt Branch 

TO: 

THRU: 

Ralph C. Stahman, Chief 

Test and Evaluation Branch 

John F. Anderson, Senior Project Manager 

Standards Development and Support Branch 

Chester J. France, Chief / A 

Standards Development and^'Sup 

Charles L. Gray, Jr., Directd 

Emission Control Technology 

This memorandum describes the final phases of testing for 

our simplified onboard refueling system. The proposed tests 

should address the majority of the major concerns raised by the 

parties present at the recent MVMA briefing on April 13, 1988. 

Specific scenarios mentioned at the briefing which were felt 

may affect the overall performance of our system include: 

using a high RVP fuel, positioning the tank at various angles 

other than horizontal, using dissimilar dispensed fuel/tank 

fuel temperatures, and filling with a variety of dispensing 

nozzles. 

I have broken the test plan 

address each of the aforementioned 

listed in order of priority. All 

emission unless otherwise noted. 

into five 

concerns. 

tests will 

"phases" which 

The tests are 

measure g/gal 
P.3 

Phase 1 

Purpose: Determine the effects of fuel RVP on the system's 

ability to control refueling emissions. The testing 

will all be performed with strict compliance to the 

procedures described in the NPRM, paying particular 

attention to fuel RVP and temperatures. The 

following test matrix is proposed: 

Fuel Fuel RVP (psi) 

Flow 

(GPM). 9.0 10.5 11.5 

3 TTests 

4 2 " 

5 2 " 1 test 1 test 

10 2 " 1 • 1 " 

A total of 12 tests will be performed in this phase. 

Assuming 3 tests/day, this phase will take one week to complete. 

Phase 2 

Purpose: Determine the effect of opening the .050 inch 

orifice in the existing sending unit. This may 

affect shut-off at low fuel fill rates. The 

tests proposed here will be run according to NPRM 

procedures. 

Test: Run a refueling test at both 5 and 10 GPM fuel 

fill rate with the .050 orifice open and tied 

into vapor vent line. 

Fuel Type: 9.0 RVP Federal Test Fuel 

Temperatures: Per NPRM procedures 

This phase consists of a total of two (2) tests and can be 

completed in one day. 
P.4 

Purpose: 

Phase 3 

Determining the effect of tank position on the 

system ability to refuel. This test sequence 

will simulate a car that is refueling on a grade 

of 10° from horizontal. The only effect this 

should have is a slight change in tank capacity. 

Although no effect on system control is expected, 

it is conceivable that the liquid seal may be 

affected at low flows and various angles, thus 

emissions will be measured. The following tests 

are proposed: 

Configuration 

10° A 

10° B 

10° C 

10° D 

Fuel flow (GPM) 

1 Test 

1 " 

1 " 

1 " 

10 

1 Test 

1 " 

1 " 

1 " 

FRONT 

OF _. 

VEHI--E 

FRONT 

£IDE VlFVN/ 

a vehicle on a grade with the 

Toll Z L^T!\^"!^ ^ t„. rear- (see fig»«, 

The angle from horizontal is 10°. 
P.5 

Fuel Type: 9.0 RVP Federal Test Fuel 

Temperatures: Per NPRM procedures 

This phase consists of a total of eight (8) tests and can 

be completed in three days. 

Phase 4 

Purpose: Determine the effect of dissimilar dispense 

fuel/tank fuel temperatures on emissions and fill 

characteristics. This test will simulate the 

extreme scenario of filling a hot fuel tank with 

cold, high RVP fuel. The stock tank and the 

modified tank with onboard refueling control will 

be tested under the following conditions. 

Fuel Type: 11 1/2 RVP 

Fill Rate: 10 GPM 

Tank Temperature (10%): 100°F 

Dispense Fuel Temperature: 70°F 

This phase consists of a total of two (2) tests and can be 

completed in one day. No emissions will be measured in this 

phase. 

Phase 5 

Purpose: Determine the effect of conventional dispensing 

nozzle type on fill characteristics. Low flow (5 

GPM) final shut-off, and high-flow (10 GPM) 

premature shut-off, will be examined. All of our 

testing to date has been done with an OPW 11A 

nozzle. The other nozzles we wish to examine are 

the Husky 1+X and Emco-Wheaton A2000. These two 

nozzles, along with the OPW, make up 

approximately 90 percent of the nozzle market. 

No emissions will be measured in this phase. 

Data we are interested in include the number of, 

and points at which nozzle shut-off occurs, and 

gallons dispensed. Qualitative observations such 

as occurrence of spit-back and function of 

automatic shut-off should also be recorded. The 

following test matrix is proposed: 
P.6 

Nozzle Type 

Husky 1+X 

Emco-Wheaton A2000 

In addition to the 

tank will be tested with 

tests for each flow rate). 

Fuel flow rate (GPM) 

5 10 

2 Tests 

2 " 

above tests, 

the OPW 11A 

2 Tests 

2 " 

the 

at 5 

stock (unmodified) 

and 10 GPM (run 2 

The tests in this phase will evaluate the fill 

characteristics of our system pay-ing special attention to 

premature kick-offs and nozzle shut off upon filling the tank. 

A total of twelve tests will be performed in this phase. These 

can be completed in four (4) days. 

A summary of this test plan is given below, 

Phase 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Scenario 

Various RVP Fuels 

Open .050 orifice 

Various tank positions 

Dissimilar tank/fuel temp. 

Various nozzle types 

Total Tests 

Tests 

12 

2 

8 

2 (no emissions) 

12 (no emissions) 

36 

A total of 8 work days will be required to carry the tests 

requiring emissions measurement (Phases 1-3). Allowing for 

weekly retention checks and other unanticipated downtime, 

Phases 1-3 should be completed in 3 weeks. Phases 4-5 can be 

completed in three days. Thus a total of four weeks should be 

allowed for completion of this plan. 

Review: 

Approved: 

Disapproved: 

Date: Ju ^ C i llFf 

Priority: 

cc: Karen Lostoski, SDSB 

Stan Syria, TEB 

Carl Fuller, TEB 

Ray Ouillette, TEB