development of an on-road heavy - duty emissions research

Center for Environmental Research and Technology

University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering

Development of an On-Road HeavyDuty Emissions Research Laboratory

University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering - Center for Environmental

Research and Technology

Presentation To

Mobile Sources Technical Review Subcommittee October 23, 2001



Sponsors and Funding Agencies

YEAR ONE • Diesel OEMs

– Detroit Diesel, Caterpillar, Cummins, Volvo, International, Mack • USEPA • California Air Resources Board • South Coast Air Quality Management District

YEAR TWO • USEPA • Cummins (3 years), Detroit Diesel (Pending) • California Air Resources Board • California Energy Commission • South Coast Air Quality Management District (Pending)



CE-CERT PERSONNEL

Faculty: cker; Wayne Miller; Joe Norbeck

Engineering Staff: Mitch Boretz; Kent Johnson; Dave Pankratz; Chan Seung Park; George Scora; Matt Smith; Bill Welch

Technicians: Don Pachoca; Terry Traver

Graduate Students: Lin Chen; Ben Lin; Yuan Lon

Visiting Professor: Hongchang Zhou

Eight Undergraduate Students

Matt Barth; David Co



Outline of Presentation

• Background and Motivation • Design and Technical Approach • Initial Evaluation and Results • Future Research Agenda



Operational Requirements

• CFR requirements – Real time @1Hz HC and NOx

– CO and CO2 either real time or via bag – Fuel consumption by direct measurement or via CO2

– 1% Calibration standard accuracy

• Cycle requirements • Calibration requirements • Size and weight requirements • System data logging and control



Technical Challenges and System Flexibility

• Need to demonstrate reproducibility and equivalence with engine dyno testing and certification (meet CFR requirements)

• Need to speak several languages in evaluation and use of data – Emissions as function of load – Emissions as function of distance – Comparison with chassis dyno – Comparison with engine dyno

• Need modal emissions (real time) for all pollutants Including particulates – Organic and elemental carbon – Full chemical speciation of semi-volatile and particulate

• Need to be able to test large fleet of vehicles at minimum time and cost



Basic Systems Overview

• 53 ft. refrigerated container trailer with air ride suspension

• Horiba smooth approach orifice CVS/dilution tunnel system

• Gaseous emissions bench with dilution calibration system

• Comprehensive data acquisition/control system on Labview platform

•GPS based driver’s aid

• Support equipment (275 kW generator, HVAC)


University of California, RiversideBourns College of Engineering

Un ive r s it y o f Ca lifo rn ia Rive r s id eCE-CERT

Utility Subpanel

480 Volt

120/208 Volt

Control and Analytical Subpanel

Electrical Vault



Base PC

(DGPS

error calculation

at 1 Hz )

com1

Rover PC

DGPS/INS (INS 150Hz

Error Var. 15Hz

GPS Corr. 1Hz

Output 10Hz)

com2

GPS

RM Position guided

Driver’s aid

Interface (Update rate 10Hz,

HUD included)

com3RM

com2GPS

com1IMU

com4

GPS Guided Driving Cycle Aid for HDV

System Overview

I/O 1PPS

I/O 1PPS



Verify the Analytical Systems

• Propane material balance @ 98+% • Independent measurements of:

– Fuel flow – Load (torque) – NOx (3 analyzers)

• Mobile and stationary calibrations



Propane Injection Mass Recovery

Test ID CVS flow

Concentration THC

Mass Inject

Mass Recovered Recovery

# ppm C1 g g % 200107180940 2500 85.9 29.77 29.68 100.3% 200107190901 2501 84.5 29.13 28.86 100.9% 200107191032 2500 83.6 29.17 28.89 101.0% 200107261315 2500 83.9 29.11 28.92 100.7% 200107261359 2500 83.2 28.93 28.69 100.8% 200108061239 2500 82.8 28.56 28.42 99.5% 200108061326 2499 82.4 28.67 28.51 99.4% 200108061412 2499 83.9 29.11 28.94 99.4% 200108061456 2500 83.3 28.98 28.76 99.2% 200108131002 2500 82.1 29.36 29.62 100.9% 200108131428 2500 80.1 29.02 29.04 100.1% 200108140843 2500 81.4 29.27 29.13 99.5% 200108140928 2500 80.4 29.00 28.67 98.8% 200108141015 2500 80.2 28.84 28.55 99.0% 200109061103 2499 82.8 29.40 29.19 99.3% 200109061103 2499 82.8 29.40 29.21 99.4% 200110010901 2500 84.2 29.27 29.13 99.5%

Average 99.9% 95% Conf 1.47%

scfm



y = 1.0108x + 0.4167 R2 = 0.9936

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20 25 Fuel Rate, cc/s, from ECU

Fuel

Rat

e,cc

/s, f

rom

J. M

.



Carbon Balance between Fuel Consumption and CO2 mass emissions

y = 1.0465x - 0.0095 R2 = 0.9952

y = x

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Carbon CO2 mass (g/s)

Car

bon

Fuel

Con

sum

ptio

n (g

/s)

Results based on only good calibration (first one)

Note: There is a 5% difference between CO2 Carbon and Fuel Rate Carbon. This could be due to driver variations and Dyno fuel sensor calibration.



R2 = 0.9907

R2 = 0.972

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Load, %, from ECU

Load

, %, f

rom

J. M

. Verification of Load



On-Road Repeatability of WVU 5-Cycleis Good

• Example of relative error at 95% confidence limits after eight runs:

– Fuel used - 0.98% – Engine power - 1.25% – Tractor work - 1.19% – Driver deviations – 5.88%



WVU 5 Mode Cycle at Cabazon Up Hiil 1.5% Grade and a Head Wind

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Time (sec)

NO

x pp

m, T

HC

ppm

, Spe

ed m

ph

NOx THC Trailer Speed Target Speed



. Four-Phase HDD Cycle

City Urban Dyno T est Cycle CUEDC (Phase 1 Congested, Phase 2 Residential, Phase 3 Minor - Arterial, Phase Freew ay)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

T im e (sec)

Spee

d (k

m/h

r)

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4



CEUDC 4 Phase Test Cycle at Cabazon Up Hiil 1.5% Grade and a Head Wind

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Time (sec)

NO

x pp

m, S

peed

mph

, TH

C p

pm


On-Road CEUDC Test



CE-CERT Modal Emissions Testing Cycle for HDD

C E-C ER T cycle for M odel M odeling E m issions

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 T ime (sec)

Spee

d (m

ph)



CE-CERT Test Cycle at Cabazon Up Hiil 1.5% Grade and a Head Wind

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time (sec)

NO

x pp

m, S

peed

mph

, TH

C p

pm



University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering On Road Emissions on Route from Riverside to Victorvill

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

Time (sec)

CO

2 %

*100

, NO

x pp

m, S

peed

(mph

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Elev

atio

n (m

eter

s), L

oad

(%M

ax)

CO2% *100 NOx_ppm TrailerSpeed_mph ELEV Load %



NOx vs Fuel Consumption for a Trasient Freeway Cycle from Riverside to Victorvill

y = 5.97x + 9.99R2 = 0.87

y = 12.29x - 0.43R2 = 0.97

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5 10 15 20 25

Fuel Rate (cc/s)

NO

x (p

pm)

12.3/5.97 = 2.1

NOx vs. Fuel Consumption



Carbon Balance from CO2 and ECM Fuel Usage for a transient test cycleI-15/215 from Riverside to Victorville

y = 1.0162x + 0.2802R2 = 0.9199

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20CO2 Carbon (g/s)

ECM

Fue

l Usa

ge C

arbo

n (g

/s)



Future Research Direction

• Continue to develop several on-road driving cycles • Evaluate HDV activity with respect to driving cycle • Assess on-road repeatability of emission measurements • Develop empirical emission adjustment factors (speed, grade, altitude, wind,

temp.) • Correlate emission measurements with activity data and dynamic modal

measurements • Initiate emission program with 25 vehicle fleet • Develop real-time particulate measurement system • Improve analytical capability for organic species • Evaluate effectiveness of emission control devices and alternative fuels

development of an on-road heavy - duty emissions research

Documents