Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NEW ENGINE AND POLLUTIONCONTROL TECHNOLOGY
MTC 6901
Lars Eriksson
MTC AB
INFORMATION FOR THE LIBRARYPublisher Project PublishedMTC AB MTC 6901 2000-03Box 223 Client
136 23 Haninge NaturvårdsverketAuthor
Lars ErikssonTel: +46 8 500 656 00Fax: +46 8 500 283 28
REPORT No
MTC 6901
ISSN 1103-0240ISRNASB-MTC-R--00/2--SE
Title and subtitles of the report.New engine and pollution control technology
Language
EnglishNo of pages 25
Abstract
This project is an annual recurrent investigation of some state of the art vehicles and is financed
by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. This study includes two passenger cars; a
bifuel car (gas /gasoline) and a small diesel car.
The bi-fuel car is a Volvo 850 SE vehicle. This car which can run with either gas or gasoline
fuels was tested in accordance with three driving cycles, NEDC, FTP-75 and US-06. The tests
were carried out for both gas and gasoline. Furthermore, the car was also tested in sub-zero
temperatures (- 7OC). The emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons
(HC) were lower when the gas fuel was used compared with gasoline, whereas the NOX-
emissions were higher when the power source was gas. The emissions of methane were higher
for gas than gasoline fuels. There were no significant differences in fuel consumption between
the two fuels used. Besides standard measurements, some unregulated hydrocarbons were also
measured during all two tests.
Vehicle 2 was a VW Lupo. The most interesting question was if the fuel consumption was as
low as the manufacturer claims. The study clearly showed that the consumption was so low,
lower than 0 3 litre per 10 km for test in accordance with the FTP-75 driving cycle and just
Suggestion of keywordsPollution, New engines, Fuel consumption
Title of seriesMTC AB
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
3
New EngineAnd
Pollution ControlTechnology
Lars ErikssonMTC AB
2000-03-08
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
4
ABSTRACT
This project is an annual recurrent investigation of some state of the art vehicles and is
financed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. This study includes two
passenger cars; a bifuel car (gas /gasoline) and a small diesel car.
The bi-fuel car is a Volvo 850 SE vehicle. This car which can run with either gas or gasoline
fuels was tested in accordance with three driving cycles, NEDC, FTP-75 and US-06. The tests
were carried out for both gas and gasoline. Furthermore, the car was also tested in sub-zero
temperatures (- 7OC). The emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons
(HC) were lower when the gas fuel was used compared with gasoline, whereas the NOX-
emissions were higher when the power source was gas. The emissions of methane were higher
for gas than gasoline fuels. There were no significant differences in fuel consumption between
the two fuels used. Besides standard measurements, some unregulated hydrocarbons were also
measured during all two tests.
Vehicle 2 was a VW Lupo. The most interesting question was if the fuel consumption was as
low as the manufacturer claims. The study clearly showed that the consumption was so low,
lower than 0.3 litre per 10 km for test in accordance with the FTP-75 driving cycle and just
above 0.3 litre for NEDC tests. The emission levels were below the limits for all regulated
components, for tests in accordance to the NEDC cycle. For FTP-75, the NOX emissions were
higher than the limit (A14-regulation) whereas the emission of CO, HC and particles were
well below the limit.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
5
SAMMANFATTNING
Detta projekt är ett årligt återkommande projekt där “state of the art” bilar eller andra bilar
som bedöms som intressanta. Projektet är finansierat av Naturvårdsverket. Denna studie
omfattar två bilar, en bifuel-bil (gas / bensin) och en liten dieseldriven bil.
Bifuel-bilen var en Volvo 850 SE. Denna bil kan köras på endera gas eller bensin och bilen
testades i enlighet med tre olika körcykler, NEDC, FTP-75 och US 06. Testerna utfördes med
både gas- och bensindrift. Bilen utsattes även för prov vid låg temperatur (- 7O C).
Emissionerna av kolmonoxid (CO) och oförbrända kolväten (HC) var lägre vid gas- än vid
bensindrift medan NOX-emissionerna var högre vid gasdrift. Också metanutsläppen var högre
med gas som bränsle. Det var ingen signifikant skillnad i bränsleförbrukning mellan de två
bränslena. Förutom standardmätningar mättes även utsläppen av några oreglerade
föroreningar.
Bil 2 var en VW Lupo. Den mest intressanta frågan inför dessa prov var om bilen hade så låg
bränsleförbrukning som angivits av tillverkaren. Testerna visade tydligt att så var fallet. Vid
FTP-75-testerna var bränsleförbrukningen lägre än 0.3 liter per 10 km och vid NEDC-testerna
strax över. Emissionsnivåerna av alla reglerade komponenter var under gränsvärdena för
NEDC-proven. För FTP-75 var NOX-utsläppen något högre än gränsvärdet enligt regulation
A14. För CO, HC och partiklar var dock utsläppen lägre än gränsvärdena.
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 6
2. EXPERIMENTAL ............................................................................................................................................ 7
2.1 VEHICLES AND FUELS2.2 DRIVING CYCLES ............................................................................................................................................ 82.3 ANALYSIS OF REGULATED COMPONENTS...................................................................................................... 102.4 ANALYSIS OF UNREGULATED COMPONENTS ................................................................................................. 10
3. RESULTS......................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1 VEHICLE 1 [BI-FUEL CAR]............................................................................................................................. 113.2 VEHICLE 2 [DIESEL CAR] .............................................................................................................................. 21
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
6
1. INTRODUCTION
The amount of unwanted pollutants originating from passenger vehicle exhaust gases decrease
with time. The main reason is due to the fact that the number of older cars without catalytic
exhaust cleaning systems decreases year by year. Also the quality of engines, exhaust
cleaning systems and fuels tend to be better with time.
This project is an annual recurrent investigation of some of the state of the art vehicles for the
actual year and is financed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
The objective of this investigation (year 1999) was to determine the exhaust emission and fuel
consumption of two different types of passenger vehicles (the vehicles were chosen by the
Swedish EPA). The first car was a bi-fuel vehicle, which can operate with either gas or
gasoline fuel. The second car was a small diesel vehicle.
Besides standard measurements the amount of some unregulated pollutants should also be
measured.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
7
2. EXPERIMENTAL
2.1 Vehicles and fuels
This study includes two vehicles:
A. Volvo 850 SE 2.5 [bi-fuel]
Fuels [used in tests] Reference gasoline and Bio-gasRated power: 106 kW @ 5400 rpmWeight: 1500 kgModel year: 1996Odometer: 60428 kmGear box: A4Displacement: 2.435 litre
This car is a bi-fuel car and the fuels, which can be used, are gasoline and gas and it is
possible to drive the car in either gas or gasoline mode. However, from the start gasoline fuel
is automatically chosen. The power source is a 5-cylinder gasoline engine with a rated power
of 106 kW at 5400 rpm. The engine is equipped with 2-valves per cylinder.
B. VW Lupo 1.2 TDI 3L
Fuel [used in tests]: Reference dieselRated power: 45 kW @ 4000 rpmWeight: 830 kgModel year: 2000Odometer: 9104 kmGear box: ASG 5Displacement: 1.191 litre
“Der 3-liter-Lupo” was presented at the International Car Saloon in Paris, as the car with the
lowest fuel consumption in the world (lower than 0.3 litre diesel per 100 km).
The power source is a 1.2 litre 3-cylinder diesel engine with a rated power of 45 kW at 4000
rpm. The engine is equipped with a newly developed high-pressure (~ 2000 bar) fuel injection
system, with one injection pump per cylinder.
The car is also equipped with a new type of “smart” gearbox. By driving in economic mode
the gearbox works automatically. It is also possible to use the gearbox in the same way as in
racing cars (e.g. sequential and without clutch pedal).
In order to reduce the fuel consumption the engine is automatically turned off in the “idle”
mode while driving the car at the economy mode.
To reduce the weight of the car, the Lupo is built with low weight materials like aluminium,
magnesium and plastic.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
8
2.2 Driving cycles
During these tests three driving cycles have been used, NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. The cycles
are described as graphs below, see figure 1 – 3. The tests have been carried out on a chassis
dynamometer in test cell 4 at MTC AB test laboratory, Sweden. The roller used was an
electric Clayton EIS 500 dynamometer. The dynamometer parameters were set according to
the A14 regulation. The test cell temperatures were set to + 20O and – 7O C respectively. A
standard cooling fan was used in the front of the cars during tests.
NEDC
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300Time [s]
Spee
d [k
m/h
] Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Figure 1. Driving cycle NEDC [EU 2000]. Phase 1 (40 to 430 s); Phase 2 (430 to 820 s); Phase 3 (820 to 1220 s)
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
9
FTP-75
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600Time [s]
Spee
d [k
m/h
]
Yct
Ys
Yht
Figure 2. FTP-75 driving cycle. Yct (1-505 s); Ys (506-1371 s); Yht (1971-2476 s)
US 06
0102030405060708090
100110120130140
1 51 101 151 201 251 301 351 401 451 501 551 601Time [s]
Driv
ing
spee
d [k
m /
h]
Figure 3. Driving cycle US 06
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
10
2.3 Analysis of regulated components
All tests were performed in test site number 4 at MTC's laboratory. All exhaust gas sampling
was carried out on diluted exhaust gases in a dilution tunnel that is designed to fulfil the
specifications in the literature (U.S. Federal Register 1986). The flow of diluted exhaust was 9
m3/min maintained by a venturi. The vehicles were driven on a chassis dynamometer, Clayton
chassis dynamometer system DC500, while following the driving schedules shown in Figures
1 – 3. Measurements of regulated emissions were in accordance with the test procedure using
a Horiba 9000 system. Regulated emissions were measured as follows: carbon monoxide
(CO) with a non-dispersive infrared analyzer (NDIR), total unburned hydrocarbons (HC) with
a flame ionization detector (FID), oxides of nitrogen (NOx) with a chemiluminescence
analyzer (CLA), and particulate emissions by means of Teflon-coated glass fiber filters
(Pallflex T60A20; Pallflex Inc).
2.4 Analysis of unregulated components
Particle size distribution (ELPI)
The particle number and size distribution was measured using an Electrical Low Pressure
Impactor (ELPI). The instrument operates by charging the particles in a unipolar positive
polarity charger and the particles are thereafter separated (in a 12-step impactor) according to
aerodynamic size (0.03 to 7 um) in a low-pressure impactor. The particles deposited at each
stage in the impactor produces an electrical current which is recorded with a time resolution
of 1 s. The number concentration measurement is based on assumed values for charging
probability of the particles, penetration through the impactor, and current measurement.
Masspectrometer (MS)
An Airsense 500 is used to monitor individual hydrocarbon components via the CVS system.
Airsense is a secondary ion mass spectrometer based upon the ion-neutral interaction
principle. Hg+, Xe+ and Kr+ with well-defined energies are used for the ionisation process. A
quadrupole mass filter is utilised for the mass analysis. In this study, only Hg+ ionisation
source was used and the time resolution is set at 100ms per compounds.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
11
3. RESULTS
3.1 Vehicle 1 [bifuel car]
The results from the tests of the bi-fuel car are shown in figures 4 – 15 and tables
1 – 5. All tests were repeated twice times. Generally, the emissions of carbon monoxide (CO)
and unburned hydrocarbons (HC) are lower when gas-fuels are used compared with when
gasoline is used. The NOX-emission seems to be higher for gas than for gasoline. The
emission levels of all measured components seem to be higher with decreasing ambient
temperature. However, this trend is more clearly for gasoline fuel.
As expected, the emission of methane is much higher for gas compared with gasoline. There
were not any significant differences in fuel consumption between the two fuels used in this
study.
In figures 9 – 14 the emission levels of some unregulated components are shown. The
distribution of these components is shown in figure 15. The unregulated components were not
measured online during the tests. The contents in bag 1 (from the first phase of the cycles, see
figure 1 - 3) were introduced in the MS-analyser. The levels in bag 2 –3 were very low (under
detection limit), so these results are not presented. Besides methane, the emissions of
unregulated hydrocarbons are higher for gasoline fuel compared with gas-fuel. Also the
content of “unknown hydrocarbons” are higher for the gasoline fuel.
Generally, the emissions of almost all measured components were lower during US 06 test
compared with the other two driving cycles. The explanation of this behaviour maybe due to
that the US 06 is a “hot driving cycle” whereas the other two are not (e.g. the catalytic
converter had already reached the “working temperature” before start). The FTP-75 cycle
gives rise to lower emission levels than the NEDC-cycle. This explanation may be that the
catalytic converter reached working temperature faster than in the NEDC cycles since the
FTP-75 cycle contains higher accelerations and higher speeds than the NEDC-cycle.
In table 1 – 5 the emission values for each “bag” and the weighted results are presented.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
12
CO-emissions
43,42 44,74
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
7,0
8,0
9,0
10,0U
S 06
[1]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -7
[1]
NED
C -7
[2]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [3
]
US
06 [4
]
NED
C [3
]
NED
C [4
]
NED
C -7
[3]
NED
C -7
[4]
FTP-
75 [3
]
FTP-
75 [4
]
Bag 3Bag 2Bag 1
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 4. CO emissions in g / km. Exhaust gases from US 06 is sampled in one bag whereas the gases from theother cycles are sampled in three bags.
Gas fuel Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsUS 06 [1] 0.55(6) 0.56US 06 [2] 0.83(1) 0.83NEDC [1] 2.21(0) 0.81(0) 0.16(3) 0.66NEDC [2] 2.51(2) 1.26(4) 0.13(2) 0.78NEDC – 7O C [1] 2.43(8) 0.88(2) 0.15(3) 0.71NEDC – 7O C [2] 3.43(5) 0.52(9) 0.08(0) 0.77FTP-75 [1] 0.77(6) 0.25(7) 0.64(6) 0.47 1 0.29 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.77(4) 0.79(2) 0.52(4) 0.71 1 0.75 2
Gasoline fuelUS 06 [1] 3.87(1) 3.87US 06 [2] 3.22(7) 3.23NEDC [1] 7.28(6) 0.02(7) 0.01(2) 1.36NEDC [2] 9.14(3) 0.00(7) 0.00(7) 1.69NEDC – 7O C [1] 43.41(7) 0.25(6) 0.17(8) 8.15NEDC – 7O C [2] 44.73(7) 0.26(8) 0.07(6) 8.30FTP-75 [1] 2.30(1) 0.03(9) 0.04(7) 0.51 1 0.003 2
FTP-75 [2] 1.89(1) 0.06(3) 0.05(8) 0.44 1 0.012 2
Table 1. CO emissions in g / km during driving cycles NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. 1 Results from UDC part.2 Results from HDC part.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
13
HC-emissions
0,032 0,043 0,0380,0340,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
7,0
8,0
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -7
[1]
NED
C -7
[2]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [3
]
US
06 [4
]
NED
C [3
]
NED
C [4
]
NED
C -7
[3]
NED
C -7
[4]
FTP-
75 [3
]
FTP-
75 [4
]
Bag 3Bag 2Bag 1
Figure 5. HC emissions in g / km. Exhaust gases from US 06 is sampled in one bag whereas the gases from theother cycles are sampled in three bags.
Gas fuel Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsUS 06 [1] 0.032 0.032US 06 [2] 0.043 0.043NEDC [1] 1.370 0.832 0.131 0.489NEDC [2] 1.471 0.624 0.145 0.479NEDC – 7O C [1] 1.738 0.568 0.131 0.506NEDC – 7O C [2] 2.505 0.502 0.142 0.638FTP-75 [1] 0.524 0.177 0.345 0.295 1 0.057 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.471 0.354 0.399 0.390 1 0.056 2
Gasoline fuelUS 06 [1] 0.034 0.034US 06 [2] 0.038 0.038NEDC [1] 1.102 0.002 0.001 0.205NEDC [2] 1.252 0.002 0.001 0.232NEDC – 7O C [1] 6.945 0.121 0.014 1.310NEDC – 7O C [2] 7.764 0.105 0.012 1.451FTP-75 [1] 0.375 0.000 0.009 0.509 1 0.003 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.335 0.001 0.007 0.440 1 0.012 2
Table 2. HC emissions in g / km during driving cycles NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. 1 Results from UDC part.2 Results from HDC part.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
14
NOX-emissions
0,00,20,40,60,81,01,21,41,61,82,02,22,42,62,8
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -7
[1]
NED
C -7
[2]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [3
]
US
06 [4
]
NED
C [3
]
NED
C [4
]
NED
C -7
[3]
NED
C -7
[4]
FTP-
75 [3
]
FTP-
75 [4
]
Bag 3Bag 2Bag 1 GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 6. NOX emissions in g / km. Exhaust gases from US 06 is sampled in one bag whereas the gases from theother cycles are sampled in three bags.
Gas fuel Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsUS 06 [1] 0.499 0.499US 06 [2] 0.488 0.488NEDC [1] 1.042 0.412 0.337 0.481NEDC [2] 0.796 0.261 0.341 0.410NEDC – 7O C [1] 1.637 0.492 0.469 0.687NEDC – 7O C [2] 1.411 0.421 0.489 0.644FTP-75 [1] 0.816 0.182 0.336 0.355 1 0.157 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.872 0.222 0.395 0.404 1 0.198 2
Gasoline fuelUS 06 [1] 0.237 0.237US 06 [2] 0.535 0.535NEDC [1] 0.694 0.028 0.101 0.197NEDC [2] 0.669 0.014 0.181 0.240NEDC – 7O C [1] 2.492 0.128 0.018 0.494NEDC – 7O C [2] 1.777 0.061 0.048 0.367FTP-75 [1] 0.553 0.033 0.173 0.179 1 0.037 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.516 0.023 0.131 0.154 1 0.172 2
Table 3. NOX emissions in g / km during driving cycles NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. 1 Results from UDC part.2 Results from HDC part.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
15
Methane-emissions
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2,0U
S 06
[1]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -7
[1]
NED
C -7
[2]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [3
]
US
06 [4
]
NED
C [3
]
NED
C [4
]
NED
C -7
[3]
NED
C -7
[4]
FTP-
75 [3
]
FTP-
75 [4
]
Bag 3Bag 2Bag 1
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 7. Methane emissions in g / km. Exhaust gases from US 06 is sampled in one bag whereas the gases fromthe other cycles are sampled in three bags.
Gas fuel Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsUS 06 [1] 0.028 0.028US 06 [2] 0.037 0.037NEDC [1] 0.980 0.724 0.116 0.387NEDC [2] 1.189 0.566 0.134 0.409NEDC – 7O C [1] 1.053 0.487 0.113 0.354NEDC – 7O C [2] 1.056 0.433 0.127 0.352FTP-75 [1] 0.369 0.156 0.314 0.244 1 0.053 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.346 0.331 0.363 0.342 1 0.051 2
Gasoline fuelUS 06 [1] 0.007 0.007US 06 [2] 0.006 0.006NEDC [1] 0.060 0.001 0.001 0.012NEDC [2] 0.055 0.000 0.000 0.010NEDC – 7O C [1] 0.275 0.002 0.001 0.052NEDC – 7O C [2] 0.296 0.001 0.000 0.055FTP-75 [1] 0.018 0.000 0.005 0.005 1 0.000 2
FTP-75 [2] 0.019 0.001 0.005 0.006 1 0.000 2
Table 4. Emission of methane in g / km during driving cycles NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. 1 Results from UDCpart 2 Results from HDC part.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
16
Fuel consumption
Fuel consumption is calculated in accordance to the carbon balance method. In the case of
bio-gas fuel the consumption is expressed in units of gasoline. These determinations are based
on an energy content of 48.4 MJ / kg for the gas fuel and 43.0 MJ / kg for gasoline. The
calculation method is described in MTC report 98/10.
0,99
1
0,94
9 1,63
5
1,67
08 2,18
81
2,13
43
1,14
1
1,18
2
0,95
1
0,97
7 1,62
8
1,66
17 2,38
54
2,40
68
1,14
6
1,13
4
1,40
91
1,42
57
1,62
34
1,57
6
1,10
7
1,13
7
1,38
1,41
39
1,57
7
1,58
98
1,10
3
1,10
3
0,78
6
0,80
1
0,89
3
0,81
6
0,94
2
0,97
0
0,76
3
0,77
7
0,87
6
0,88
2
0,93
1
0,92
7
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -7
[1]
NED
C -7
[2]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [3
]
US
06 [4
]
NED
C [3
]
NED
C [4
]
NED
C -7
[3]
NED
C -7
[4]
FTP-
75 [3
]
FTP-
75 [4
]
Bag 3Bag 2Bag 1
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 8. Fuel consumption in litre per 10 km. Exhaust gases from US 06 is sampled in one bag whereas thegases from the other cycles are sampled in three bags.
Gas fuel Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsUS 06 [1] 0.991 0.991US 06 [2] 0.949 0.949NEDC [1] 1.635 1.409 0.786 1.058NEDC [2] 1.671 1.426 0.801 1.078NEDC – 7O C [1] 2.188 1.613 0.892 1.262NEDC – 7O C [2] 2.134 1.576 0.816 1.196FTP-75 [1] 1.141 1.107 0.942 1.069 1 0.682 2
FTP-75 [2] 1.182 1.137 0.970 1.100 1 0.662 2
Gasoline fuelUS 06 [1] 0.951 0.951US 06 [2] 0.977 0.977NEDC [1] 1.628 1.380 0.763 1.037NEDC [2] 1.662 1.414 0.777 1.057NEDC – 7O C [1] 2.385 1.577 0.876 1.258NEDC – 7O C [2] 2.407 1.590 0.882 1.369FTP-75 [1] 1.146 1.103 0.931 1.065 1 0.648 2
FTP-75 [2] 1.134 1.103 0.927 1.061 1 0.636 2
Table 5. Fuel consumption in litre per 10 km during driving cycles NEDC, FTP-75 and US 06. 1 Results fromUDC part. 2 Results from HDC part.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
17
Unregulated emissions
The results from measurements of unregulated components are presented in figures 9 –15. All
values are counted in mg of actual component per km. For NEDC and FTP-75 the emissions
are sampled during the first phase of the cycles, see figure 1 and 2. For US 06, the emission
represent the hole driving cycle, see also figure 3.
263,
1
284,
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
GASOLINE
GAS
Figure 9. Emissions of C2H4 in mg / km.
256,
7
224,
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 10. Emissions of C3H6 in mg / km
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
18
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 11. Emissions of C4H6 in mg / km
227,
15
218,
44
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 12. Emissions of C6H6 in mg / km
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
19
1107
,6
1033
,7
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 13. Emissions of C7H8 in mg / km
973,
2
902,
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 14. Emissions of C8H10 in mg / km
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
20
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [1
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [1
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
US
06 [1
]
US
06 [2
]
NED
C [2
]
NED
C -
7 [1
]
NED
C -
7 [2
]
FTP-
75 [2
]
Methane
UnknownhydrocarbonsC8H10
C7H8
C6H6
C4H6
C3H6
C2H4
GAS
GASOLINE
Figure 15. Distribution of hydrocarbons
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
21
3.2 Vehicle 2 [diesel car]
The results from the Lupo tests are presented in figures 16 - 20 and in tables
6 – 10 below. All tests were repeated twice times. One of the most interesting questions
before the start of this study was to see if the fuel consumption was as low as the manufacture
claims, below 0.3 litre diesel per 10 km driving.
This study clearly showed that this car consumes small amounts of fuel. During the FTP-75
cycles, the consumption was lower than 0.3 litre (~0.29) whereas test in accordance with the
NEDC cycles resulted in consumption just above the 0.3 litre limit.
The CO and HC emission were higher during NEDC than for the FTP-75. Most of these
pollutants originate from the first part of the cycles in both cases. It was expected that the
emission of CO and HC should be lower from the diesel car compared with the bi-fuel car
with a gasoline engine. So it is interesting to note that the NOX emission were also lower.
However, it is difficult to compare the results since the emissions are counted in g / travelling
distance units and the difference in size and weight of the two cars are relatively large.
There were no significant differences in particle emission between the two test cycles used.
Also the pollutant of the particles seem to be constant over the cycles. (e.g. about same
amount of particles in all phases counted in g per km).
Since the emissions levels of methane were very low, these results are not presented in figures
and tables.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
22
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]
Bag 1Bag 2Bag 3
Figure 16. CO emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsNEDC [1] 0,274 0,003 0,103NEDC [2] 0,307 0,023 0,127FTP-75 [1] 0.200 0.007 0.018 0.050FTP-75 [2] 0.244 0.005 0.015 0.057
Table 6. CO emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
23
0,000
0,005
0,010
0,015
0,020
0,025
0,030
0,035
0,040
0,045
0,050
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]
Bag 1Bag 2Bag 3
Figure 17. HC emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsNEDC [1] 0.032 0.002 0.013NEDC [2] 0.046 0.003 0.019FTP-75 [1] 0.013 0.001 0.014 0.007FTP-75 [2] 0.024 0.004 0.014 0.011
Table 7. HC emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
24
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
0,50
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]
Bag 1Bag 2Bag 3
Figure 18. NOX emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsNEDC [1] 0.211 0.246 0.234NEDC [2] 0.230 0.240 0.236FTP-75 [1] 0,481 0,256 0,344 0,327FTP-75 [2] 0,310 0,219 0,308 0,263
Table 8. NOX emissions in g / km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
25
0,000
0,002
0,004
0,006
0,008
0,010
0,012
0,014
0,016
0,018
0,020
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]
Bag 1Bag 2Bag 3
Figure 19. Particle emission in g per km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsNEDC [1] 0.0147 0.0151 0.0150NEDC [2] 0.0164 0.0181 0.0175FTP-75 [1] 0,0166 0,0102 0,0160 0,0131FTP-75 [2] 0,0173 0,0115 0,0163 0,0140
Table 9. Particle emission in g per km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
26
0,000
0,050
0,100
0,150
0,200
0,250
0,300
0,350
0,400
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]
Bag 1Bag 2Bag 3
Figure 20. Fuel consumption in litre per 10 km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
Bag 1 Bag 2 Bag 3 Weighted resultsNEDC [1] 0.371(2) 0.264(3) 0.303(5)NEDC [2] 0.364(4) 0.274(5) 0.307(4)FTP-75 [1] 0,3500 0,2760 0,2770 0,292FTP-75 [2] 0,3140 0,2820 0,2720 0,286
Table 10. Fuel consumption in litre per 10 km during driving cycle NEDC and FTP-75.
New Engine and Pollutant Control Technology MTC 6901
27
Unregulated components
The same unregulated hydrocarbons as for the bi-fuel vehicle have been measured. The levels
were very low and often close to the lower detection limit of the MS-analyser. The results are
presented in table 11 below.
NEDC [1] NEDC [2] FTP-75 [1] FTP-75 [2]C2H4 19.66 12.78 0.32 0.39C3H6 5.48 ~ 0 ~ 0 0.78C4H6 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0.94C6H6 2.04 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0C7H8 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 2.37C8H10 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
Table 11. Unregulated components from the first phase of the cycles in mg / km.
There seems to be a big difference between the tests but almost all values are very low and
therefore, it is difficult to say if the observed differences are real or not. However, it is clear
that driving cycle NEDC gives rise to higher levels of C2H4 than the FTP-75 cycle.