Evaluation of the European PMP Methodologies during On-Road Testing

Heejung Jung, Kent C. Johnson, Thomas D. Durbin, Ajay Chaudhary, and David R. Cocker IIICollege of Engineering-Center for Environmental Research and Technology

(CE-CERT), University of California, Riverside

Jorn D. Herner, William H. Robertson,Tao Huai and Alberto AyalaCalifornia Air Resources Board (CARB)

David KittelsonDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota

Overview Diesel particle size distribution Background Objectives Experimental setup Results Conclusion

www.cert.ucr.edu

Typical diesel particle size distributionsNumber, surface area, and mass weightings are shown.

Courtesy of David Kittelson

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

Diameter (nm)

No

rmal

ized

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (

1/C

tota

l)dC

/dlo

gD

p

Number Surface Mass

Fine ParticlesDp < 2.5 m

Ultrafine ParticlesDp < 100 nm

NanoparticlesDp < 50 nm

Nuclei Mode - Usually forms from volatile precursors as exhaust dilutes and cools

Accumulation Mode - Usually consists of carbonaceous agglomerates and adsorbed material

Coarse Mode - Usually consists of reentrained particles, crankcase fumes

PM10Dp < 10 m

In some cases this mode may consist of very small particles below the range of conventional instruments, Dp < 10 nm

PM2.5

Background

Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) is essential to meet current diesel PM (Particulate Matter)regulation.

Current gravimetric method will have increasing difficulty quantifying PM mass emissions.

Background Particle Measurement Programme (PMP) is

an extensive multi-nation research initiativeunder the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

Driving forces for PMP arehealth effects and measurement.

Sensitivity and transient response.

Objectives

Critical evaluation of the proposed European PMP method for determining particle emissions from heavy-duty diesels and its potential in California for PM measurement and in-use screening.

Particle mass vs particle number.

CE-CERTs Mobile Emisssion Lab (MEL)

Diluted Exhaust: Temperature, Absolute Pressure, Throat P, Flow.

Gas Sample Probe.

Secondary Dilution System* PM (size, Mass).

Drivers Aid.

CVS Turbine: 1000-4000 SCFM, Variable Dilution.

Gas Measurements: CO2 %, O2 %, CO ppm, NOx ppm, THC ppm, CH4 ppm. Other Sensor: Dew Point, Ambient Temperature, Control room temperature, Ambient Baro, Trailer Speed (rpm), CVS Inlet Temperature.

Engine Broadcast: Intake Temperature, Coolant Temperature, Boost Pressure, Baro Pressure, Vehicle Speed (mph), Engine Speed (rpm), Throttle Position, Load (% of rated).

Dilution Air: Temperature, Absolute Pressure, Throat P, Baro (Ambient), Flow, Dew Point (Ambient).

Secondary Probe.

GPS: Pat, Long, Elevation, # Satellite Precision.

Exhaust: Temperature, P (Exhaust-Ambient), Flow.

www.cert.ucr.edu

Gravimetric vs PMP measurements

CVSBlower

2.5 um size cut

Secondary dilution

Pump

Filter sampling system

2.5 um size cut

Primary dilutionat PMP (150C)

Secondary dilutionat PMP

Evaporation tube(300C)

Condensation particle counter(cut-off at 20nm)

Vehicleexhaust

Courtesy of W. Robertson for MD-19 diagram

www.cert.ucr.edu

MEL CVS MEL secondary diluter Filter sampling train (gravimetric)

PMP diluter TSI 3790 CPC (20nm)TSI 3760 CPC (11nm)TSI 3025 CPC (3nm)

MEL PMP TSI 3760 CPC (11nm) TSI 3025 CPC (3nm)

TSI 3022 CPC (7nm)TSI DusTrakTSI-EEPS (5.6nm)Dekati Mass Monitorf-SMPS (10nm)

Primarydilution

Secondarydilution

Sampling & Measurement

MEL CVS MEL secondary diluter Filter sampling train (gravimetric)

PMP diluter TSI 3790 CPC (20nm)TSI 3760 CPC (11nm)TSI 3025 CPC (3nm)

MEL PMP TSI 3760 CPC (11nm) TSI 3025 CPC (3nm)

TSI 3022 CPC (7nm)TSI DusTrakTSI-EEPS (5.6nm)Dekati Mass Monitorf-SMPS (10nm)

Primarydilution

Secondarydilution

Sampling & Measurement

Flow diagram of PM measurement system off the CVS tunnel

PMP system

mass

Experimental condition

Chassis: Freightliner

Engine: 2000 EPA Certif CAT C15 475 Hp

Certification NOx: 3.7 g/bhp-hr (US EPA)

Certification PM: 0.08 g/bhp-hr (US EPA)

PM Control: JM CRT retrofit

NOx Control: No Catalyst

Old 86 (1 mile)

62nd St. (2.8 miles) A-B

Polk St.Tyler St.

60th St. (0.95 miles)60th St. (1.9 miles)

Farm Roads

AB

C D E

Fillmore St. (1 mile)

Old State St. ?

F

A1

62nd St. (3.4 miles) A1-B

F

111

On Road Indio to Blyth

On Road Transient Cycles

Riverside (CE-CERT)

On Road Cruise Cycle (I10)

Location

PM mass results on mg/bhp-hr

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

OnRoadHills

OnRoadFlat

ETCURBAN

AB

ETCURBAN

BA

ETCCRUISE

West

ETCCRUISE

East

ARBCREEP

CD

ARBCREEP

ED

UDDSABCD

UDDSEDCB

PM

(m

g/b

hp

-hr)

Gravimetric

TSI Dustrak

Dekati DMM

2007 Emission Standard 10 mg/bhp-hrfor an FTP Engine Dyno Test

2007 In-Use Emission NTE 30 mg/bhp-hr

PM mass results on filter weight basis

-0.020

-0.010

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

OnRoadHills

OnRoadFlat

ETCURBAN AB

ETCURBAN BA

ETCCRUISE

West

ETCCRUISE

East

ARBCREEP CD

ARBCREEP ED

UDDSABCD

UDDSEDCB

Fil

ter

Wei

gh

t (m

g)

220 ug

PMP testing 3 Sigma * Ref Filter Stdev (2.5 * 3 = 7.5ug)

Current improved operationRef Filter Stdev = (1.5 * 3 = 4.5 ug)

Time

1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Par

ticl

e S

ize,

Dp

(n

m)

89

20

30

40

50

60

70

8090

10

100

1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7

Particle size distribution

Fast-SMPS data

Urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS)

Particle number rate (#/mile) on driving cycles

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10

1.E+11

1.E+12

1.E+13

1.E+14

1.E+15

1.E+16

OnRoad Hills OnRoad Flat ETC URBAN ETC CRUISE ARB CREEP UDDS

Par

ticle

s C

ount

(#/

mi)

MD 3790 MD 3025 MD 3760 MEL 3025 MEL 3760 CVS 3022

EURO # Standard 8E11 #/mi (light duty)

20nm (PMP)

3nm 11nm 7nm3nm 11nmCut-off diameter

Coefficient of variation for all CPCs and PM mass on driving cycles

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ETC URBAN ETC CRUISE ARB CREEP UDDS

CO

V P

erce

nt (

%)

MD_3790 MD_3025 MD_3760 MEL_3025 MEL_3760 CVS_3022 NOx PM

CPC data COV Based On #/mi

Cut-off diameter

20nm 3nm 3nm 11nm11nm 7nm(PMP) mass

Conclusion Gravimetric PM filter mass measurements were near detection limits

for most of driving cycle, which makes it desirable to explore new PM measurement protocol.

The CPC particle number count levels follow a trend that is consistent with the size cuts of the respective instruments. The 3022 CPC, which was connected to the primary tunnel as opposed to below the PMP system, also showed higher counts than the other CPCs below the PMP system when volatile nucleation particles formed.

The particle number measurements using PMP method showed a lower coefficient of variation than the PM filter mass measurements. One potential advantage of particle number measurements is better repeatability at low mass levels.

www.cert.ucr.edu

Acknowledgements

The funding for this research is from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) under contract No. 05-320.

Dr. Marcus Kasper of Matter Engineering Inc. Mr. Jon Andersson of Ricardo Dr. Andreas Mayer of Technik Thermischer Maschinen (TTM). for their assistance in developing the test plan procedures, in

carrying out the experiments, and in analysis of the data. Mr. Donald Pacocha, for his contribution in setting up and

executing this field project, the data collection and quality control.

Joint Research Center (JRC) of the European Commission

Thank you!

Questions?

Backup slides

Driving cycle (UDDS)

UDDS (Schedule D)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

Time - seconds

Veh

icle

Sp

eed

- m

ph

ETC (European Transient Cycle)

ARB Creep cycle

HHDDT Creep mode cycle

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101

111

121

131

141

151

161

171

181

191

201

211

221

231

241

251

Time - seconds

Spe

ed -

mph

Courtesy of W. Robertson at CARB

Particle health effects

PM mass will continue to be an important metric.

Ultrafine P