ad-a145515 clean-burninnodiesel end nes(u) sod …
TRANSCRIPT
AD-A145515 CLEAN-BURNINNODIESEL END NES(U) SOD HWES RESEARCH INST 1/
SAN ANTONI 0TX ARMY FUELS AND LURICANTS RESEARCH LARU A H E DEZMANN AUG 83AFLRL-169DAAKD82-CDDO0
SN S ED 0/G217 NIIEEEEEEIIEIII fII.IIIflIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII**~fIIEEEEEEEIIIIEE
EN
11111 12812.211111- 13.6IIII1IIIIoo
IIIII '
II1111I 2 lili' 14 ___l=_
MiCROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST Cl-tRT
FATONAL. 6eflEA OF STANDAROS- '963-0
.... . .. . . . . . . . .. • , ,h • . . ... . . . .. . . . . '.0.. .. . . . . . . . - I - I H
CLEAN-BURNING DIESEL ENGINESIn INTERIM REPORTtU0 AFLRL No. 169In
By
H. E. DietzmannI Department of Emissions Research
Energy Systems Research DivisionSouthwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas
Prepared for
U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research LaboratorySouthwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas
Under Contract to
U.S. Army Belvoir Research and Development CenterMaterials, Fuels. and Lubricants Laboratory
Q. Fort Belvoir, Virginia8L t.,J Contract No. DAAK70-82-C0001L.
2Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
9 DTICAELECTE August 1983
B 84 09 11 055
Disclaimers
The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of theArmy position unless so designated by other authorized documents.
Trade names cited in this report do not constitute an official endorsement or appro-val of the use of such commercial hardware or software.
DTIC Availability Notice
Qualified requestors may obtain copies of this report from the Defense TechnicalInformation Center, Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
Disposition Instructions
Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator.
. ......" ' " ' '- ... ..... T ... ... ..lips
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)
READ INSTRUCTIONSREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM
1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER
AFLRL No. 169 1.4 Sb ____________
4. TITLE (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVEREDInterim Report
CLEAN-BURNING DIESEL ENGINES September 1982-August 19836. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER
SwRI-6800-175/17. AUTHOR(s) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s)
H.E. Dietzmann DAAK70-82-C-0001
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESSES 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK
Department of Emissions Research, Energy AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS
Systems Research Division, Southwest ResearchInstitute, San Antonio, TX 78284
11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE
U.S. Army Belvoir Research and Development August 1983
Center, Materials, Fuels, and Lubricants Lab, 13 NUMBER OF PAGES
Ft. Rplunir VA 22060 6014. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS 15. SECURITY CLASS (otis repo~rt)
[Ij different fron (,,ntrrllin g ."Oft-e Unclassified
U.S. Army Belvoir Research and DevelopmentCenter Logistics Support Lab 1sa. DECLASSIFICATION, DOWNGRADING
Ft. Belvoir VA 22060 SCHEDULE
16 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of 'lis Report,
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered iln Block 20, if different from Report,
18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
This project was conducted for U.S. Army Belvoir Research and DevelopmentCenter under a contract issued to U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants ResearchLaboratory, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas.
19. KEY WORDS (Co~nrtnle on, reverse side if necessap % and identfy hIsv tss'k niumhers
Forklifts Perkins 4.203.2 diesel e.igineDiesel engines Deutz F3L 912W diesel engineEmissions
20. ABSTF&CT (Conrtiue on reverse side if necessary' and identify b) block number)
,Gaseous and particulate emissions were measured from two diesel forkliftengines under a variety of steady-state conditions. A MIL-F-46162A(MR)military referee grade fuel was used to determine CO, CO2, NOx, HC,particulate, sulfate, organic sulfides, phenols, DOAS odor, sulfur dioxideand aldehyde emission rates from a Deutz F3L 912W and a Perkins 4.203.2diesel engine. Emission rates were reported in g/hp-hr, g/hr, andobserved concentration, i.e., ppm, percent, or g/m3 .
Dr FORM 1473 EDITION OF 1 NOV 65 IS OBSOLETE
D I JAN 73 UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (k'hcn Data Entered)
FOREWORD
Work Directive 18, "Clean Burning Diesel Engines," was issued on September 13,
1982 under Contract DAAK70-82-C-0001 to the U. S. Army Mobility Equipment
Research and Development Command (MERADCOM; currently the Belvoir Research
and Development Center). The engineering and analytical efforts of this program
were conducted by the Department of Emissions Research of Southwest Research
Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas 78284. This program was
identified within Southwest Research Institute as Project 02-6800-175.
This project was under the overall supervision of Harry E. Dietzmann, manager of
the Chemical Analysis Section. He was assisted by Dr. Lawrence R. Smith
(chemical analysis) and Mr. Orville J. Davis (engine gaseous and particulatei emissions). Emission testing was initiated in January 1983 and was completed in
April 1983. Mr. Tim Lee of Belvoir Research and Development Center, STRBE-
GMW, was the project technical officer, Mr. James Stephens served as the overall
program manager, and Mr. M. E. LePera, Belvoir Research and Development Center,
STRBE-VF, served as project coordinator.
f cAcecC3 Oen FoP-r- --
,T -trlt A._1
!
I1' t it v Cod/-
Distr spec: . i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
. INTRODUCTION .................................................... 7
A. Objective ..................................................... 7B. Scope ........................................................ 8
II. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES, ENGINES, PROCEDURES ................ 9
A. Engine Description ............................................. 9B. Fuel Description ............................................... 13C. Dynamometer Description ....................................... 15D. Gaseous Emissions (Group I) ..................................... 15
I!. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS .......... 20
A. Description of the Analytical Procedures .......................... 20B. Accuracy of the Analytical Procedures ............................ 24
IV. RESULTS .......................................................... 26
A. Group I - Emissions ............................................ 26B. Group II - Emissions ............................................ 34C. Group III -Emissions ........................................... 42
V. SUMMARY ......................................................... 50
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................... 52
VII. REFERENCES ...................................................... 55
APPENDIX -- 13-Mode Emission Results .................................... 56
3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
I Several Views of the Deutz F3L 912W on the Test Stand 11
2 Several Views of the Perkins 4.203.2 on the Test Stand 14
3 Several Views of Gaseous and Particulate EmissionsInstrumentation 17
4 Exhaust Gas Sampling and Analytical Train 19
5 Several Views of Groups II and III Sampling Systems(used with Deutz F3L 912W and Perkins 4.203.2) 21
6 Effect of Engine Load on Hydrocarbons, CarbonMonoxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen Emission RatesFrom a Deutz F3L 912W at Two Engine Speeds 31
7 Effect of Engine Load on Hydrocarbons, CarbonMonoxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen Emission RatesFrom a Perkins 4.203.2 at Two Engine Speeds 33
8 Effect of Engine Load on Particulate Emission RatesFrom a Deutz F3L 912W at Three Engine Speeds 37
9 Effect of Engine Load on Particulate Emission RatesFrom a Perkins 4.203.2 at Three Engine Speeds 38
10 Effect of Engine Load on Sulfur Dioxide Emission RatesFrom a Deutz F3L 912W at Three Engine Speeds 40
11 Effect of Engine Load on Sulfur Dioxide Emission RatesFrom a Perkins 4.203.2 at Three Engine Speeds 41
12 Effect of Engine Load on Sulfate Emission RatesFrom a Deutz F3L 912W at Three Engine Speeds 44
13 Effect of Engine Load on Sulfate Emission RatesFrom a Perkins 4.203.2 at Three Engine Speeds 45
4
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
I Test Matrix for Deutz F3L 912W and Perkins 4.203.2Emission Tests 8
2 Engine Break-In Schedule Used for Deutz F3L 912Wand Perkins 4.203.2 (40-Hour Engine Schedule) 10
3 Deutz F3L 912W Engine Performance Data 12
4 Perkins 4.203.2 Engine Performance Data 13
5 Comparison of Test Fuel (AL-7225-F) toMIL-F-46162(MR), MIL-F-46612B(ME), andEPA D-2 Emission Specifications 16
6 List of Group I Emission Measurement Equipment 18
7 Sampling and Analysis Methodology for UnregulatedEmissions 22
8 Unregulated Emission Procedural Sample Rates andAccuracy 25
9 Gaseous and Smoke (Group 1) Emissions FromDeutz F3L 912W Diesel Engine 27
10 Gaseous and Smoke (Group II) Emissions FromPerkins 4.203.2 Engine 28
11 Summary of 13-Mode Emissions Data 29
12 Summary of Emission Rates and ConcentrationMinimum and Maximum Values for the Deutz F3L 912Wand Perkins 4.203.2 Over Complete Test Matrix 32
13 Particulate, Sulfur Dioxide, and Sulfate (Group II)Emissions From a Deutz F3L 912W Diesel Engine 35
14 Particulate, Sulfur Dioxide, and Sulfate (Group II)Emissions From a Perkins 4.203.2 Diesel Engine 36
15 Aldehyde Emission Rates From a Deutz F3L 912WDiesel Engine (mg/hp-hr) 46
5
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table Page
16 Aldehyde Emission Concentrations From a DeutzF3L 912W Diesel Engine (ppm) 46
17 Aldehyde and Ketone Emission Rates From a DeutzF3L 912W Diesel Engine (mg/hr) 46
18 Aldehyde Emission Rates From a Perkins 4.203.2Diesel Engine (mg/hp-hr) 47
19 Aldehyde Emission Rates From a Perkins 4.203.2Diesel Engine (mg/hr) 47
20 Aldehyde Emission Rates From a Perkins 4.203.2Diesel Engine (ppm) 47
21 Summary of Aldehyde and Ketone Emission RatesFrom a Deutz F3L 912W and Perkins 4.203.2 Operatedon a MIL-F-46162A(MR) Fuel, AL-722-5 48
22 Organic Sulfide Emission Rates From Perkins4.203.2 (mg/hr) 49
23 Diesel Odor Analysis System (DOAS) Results forthe Deutz F3L 912W and the Perkins 4.203.2 49
6
/ t . . ...... .. .....low
I. INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Army currently uses electric forklifts in handling hazardous materials.
Although these electric forklifts have certain inherent desirable characteristics,
i.e., no pollution or noise, the logistics involved in field operations using electric
forklifts has prompted the U.S. Army to investigate possible alternatives. One
alternative is the diesel engine. The diesel engine has many advantages, i.e.,
mobility, cost, maintenance, but there is a major concern when these vehicles are
used in areas with limited ventilation.
A. Objective
The objective of this program was to obtain exhaust emission rates from two diesel
engines used in forklift trucks. This emissions characterization was accomplished on
engines provided by MERADCOM and included gaseous and particulate emissions of
potential concern when these diesel forklift trucks are operated in confined areas
such as ammunition storage igloos. The method used to evaluate these engines was
the modal steady-state procedure used in the 13-mode Federal Test Procedure.(I)*
This project is the first step in defining the limits of acceptability for using diesel
forklift trucks in areas of limited ventilation. The end use of these data will allow
comparisons between engines; allow the Army to evaluate the emission rates versus
Threshold Limit Values (TLV) from OSHA standards for the selected contaminants;
identify and rank order contaminants from the engine in terms of priority of
importance in worker health and well-being; and provide a data base from which a
procurement specification for forklift diesel engines can be established.
B. Scope
The two diesel forklift engines provided by MERADCOM for this study were a Deutz
F3L 912W and a Perkins 4.203.2. The test fuel was a MIL-F-46162A(MR) provided
*Underscored numbers in parentheses designate references at the end of this report.
7
by the U. S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research Laboratory (AFLRL) at Southwest
Research Institute. Emissions characterization was accomplished on both engines
over the test matrix presented in Table 1. Emission rates are reported in g/hp-hr,
g/hr and observed concentrations, i.e., ppm, percent, or pj g/m 3 .
TABLE 1. TEST MATRIX FOR DEUTZ F3L 912W ANDPERKINS 4.203.2 EMISSION RESULTS AND PROCEDURES
Power,% Max hp Engine Speed, rpmat Speed Curb Idle Intermediate Peak Torque Rated hp
2 111111 1 I III 111111 1111117 NR I I I
12-1/2 NR I I I25 I II I II I II I II37-1/2 NR I I I50 NR I II III 111111 1 III75 NR I I I
100 NR III III IIIIII I II III
Group Emissions Measured/Included
I HC, CO, CO2 , NOx(NO + NO 2 ), Smoke, 12 Test ConditionsGroup I alone
II Particulates, Sulfates, and S0 2 , 4 Test Conditionsfor Groups I and II
III Aldehydes (includes Acrolein), Odor TIA by DOAS, Phenols,Organic Sulfides, 6 Test Conditions for Groups 1, 11, and III
NR denotes Not Required
8
II. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES, ENGINES, PROCEDURES
A. Engine Description
This program involved emission mapping for gaseous, particulate, and unregulated
emissions from two diesel engines that are candidates for use in forklift trucks to be
used in handling hazardous materials. The two engines were made available for the
entire duration of the program and were provided in new condition.
1. Deutz Engine Description
The first engine tested in this research effort was a three-cylinder, air-cooled
Deutz F3L 912W. This engine is rated at 48 hp at 2650 rpm. A new test engine
supplied by MERADCOM was delivered to Southwest Research Institute in Decem-
ber 1982. The engine was installed on the test stand, and an engine performance
map was obtained. Results of the performance map indicated that there were
apparent problems with the engine. Concerns over testing the engine were relayed
to MERADCOM and Deutz technical and field service representatives. Deutz
representatives concurred that the engine was not in satisfactory operation condi-
tion and that it was not appropriate to test that engine. The engine was shipped to
Deutz (Atlanta) for diagnostics, and the results of the engine inspection were
reported to the MERADCOM Project Officer.
A new replacement engine was provided by Deutz and was installed on the test
stand. Results from the performance map cn the replacement Deutz F3L 912W
were satisfactory, although the engine produced 44 hp instead of the 48 hp at 2650
rpm. The 80-hour engine break-in and emission test program proceeded without
incident until program completion. The engine "break-in" schedule is presented in
Table 2. Several views of the Deutz F3L 912W on the test stand are illustrated in
Figure 1. The engine performance data for the Deutz F3L 912W are presented in
Table 3.
9
TABLE 2. ENGINE BREAK-IN SCHEDULE USED FOR DEUTZ F3L 912WAND PERKINS 4.203.2 (40-HOUR ENGINE SCHEDULE)
Total Deutz F3L 912W Perkins 4.203.2Step Time per Step Time, hr RPM Load, lb RPM Load, lb
1 0:30 0:30 800 15 800 182 0:30 1:00 1200 25 1200 303 1:00 2:00 1400 25 1400 304 1:00 3:00 1600 25 1600 305 1:00 4:00 1800 40 1800 486 1:00 5:00 2000 38 2000 45
7 7 hours cycling 0:05 800 0 .. ..(Total time: 0:25 1200 33 1200 4012:00 hours) 0:05 800 0 .. ..
0:25 1600 33 1600 40
8 8 hours cycling 0:05 1200 0 .. ..(Total time: 0:25 1800 48 1800 5720:00 hours) 0:05 1200 0 .. ..
0:25 2200 45 2200 54
9 l0 hours cycling 0:15 1200 41 1200 50(Total time: 0:15 1600 42 1600 5030:00 hours) 0:15 1400 42 1400 52
0:15 1800 40 1800 48
10 10 hours cycling 0:15 1600 50 1600 60(Total time: 0:15 2200 37 2200 4540:00 hours) 0:15 2000 39 2000 45
0:15 2600 41 2400 53
General Comments: A Gulf 2D fuel (EM-409-F, tank 6) was used for enginebreak-in; Mobil Del Vac was the engine oil used. The 40-hour break-in was runtwice on both engines to give 80 hours on each engine. Engine was stopped every 8hours for oil check, belt tension check, etc. Engine oil was changed at 40 and 80hours. Engine data recorded included air, fuel and oil temperatures, fuel rate, beamload, engine rpm, and time of day.
10
E-.
cu
-- 4
CuC7,
TABLE 3. DEUTZ F2L 912W ENGINE PERFORMANCE DATA
ExhaustEngine Dyno Engine, Fuel Temperature,
RPM Load, lb hp Rate, lb/hr OF(OC)
1200 82.0 25.01 10.91 911(533)1400 83.0 29.05 11.92 1015(546)1600 83.5 33.40 14.00 1033(556)
1800 80.0 36.00 14.60 1023(551)2000 77.7 38.85 15.96 1016(547)2200 74.2 40.81 17.17 1015(546)
2400 71.4 42.84 18.30 1030(554)2600 67.5 43.88 19.93 1045(563)2650 64.8 42.93 20.01 1017(547)
Idle Speed = 596 rpmHigh Idle Speed = 2761 rpm
General Comments: Engine was run using air cleaner supplied by MERADCOM.Engine ran very good, no vibration from idle to high idle speed. No engine crankcaseblowby was observed.
2. Perkins Engine Description
The second engine was a four-cylinder, water-cooled Perkins 4.203.2 diesel engine
rated at 59 hp at 2500 rpm. The engine was run using the inlet and exhaust
restrictions provided by the Perkins representatives. The 80-hour engine break-in
on the Perkins 4.203.2 is presented in Table 2, and engine performance data are
presented in Table 4. The engine was received in satisfactory operating condition
and underwent the 80-hour engine break-in and emission test program without
incident. The test engine produced 53 hp instead of the rated 59 hp at 2500 rpm.
Figure 2 illustrates the Perkins 4.203.2 on the test stand. Both engines were tested
without alternators.
12
TABLE 4. PERKINS 4.203.2 ENGINE PERFORMANCE DATA
ExhaustEngine Dyno Engine, Fuel Temperature,
RPM Load, lb hp Rate, lb/hr OF(OC)
900 93.8 21.15 7.75 849(454)1100 98.3 27.03 10.20 905(485)1300 101.5 32.99 11.88 968(520)
1500 103.5 38.81 13.60 993(534)1700 97.0 41.23 14.60 981(527)1900 92.5 43.94 16.62 989(532)
2100 91.8 48.20 17.70 1021(549)2400 88.9 51.12 19.53 1058(570)2500 85.0 53.13 22.00 1190(643)
Idle Speed = 500 rpmHigh Idle Speed = 2785 rpm
General Comments: No problems with engine installation, engine 80-hour break-in,or during emission testing.
B. Fuel Description
The original intent of this program provided for the emission testing to be conducted
using a I-percent sulfur MIL-F-46162B(ME) supplied by the U. S. Army Fuels and
Lubricants Research Laboratory (AFLRL) at Southwest Research Institute. At the
time testing was to begin, it was determined that AFLRL did not have any of the
MIL-F-46162B(ME) nor were there immediate plans to obtain any. However,
AFLRL did have MIL-F-46162A(MR). To have acquired the MIL-F-46162B(ME) fuel
would have required several additional weeks.
In reviewing the fuel specifications for sulfur content, it was apparent that the
1-percent sulfur level was three to four times higher than fuel sulfur in commercial
or military fuels. In order to reach the 1-percent sulfur level, it would be necessary
to add abnormally large amounts of tertiary butyl disulfide. With the interest in
trace organic sulfides and diesel odor in the exhaust, it was recommended that
13
r-4
0V
7--
4-4I
0 0- 0
rid2
144
emission tests be conducted with a currently available referee grade fuel, namely
MIL-F-46162A(MR). The MIL-F-46162A(MR) fuel specifications are similar if not
identical in most aspects to the EPA D-2 emission certification fuel specifications.
Table 5 summarizes the fuel specifications of MIL-F-46162A(MR), MIL-F-46162B
(ME), and EPA D-2 certification fuel, as well as actual fuel analysis of the fuel used
on this program.
Emission tests conducted on high-sulfur fuels (i.e., I-percent sulfur) would probably
produce proportionately higher sulfur dioxide and sulfate. The amount and nature of
trace organic sulfides could be influenced by the specific sulfur additive if large
quantities were added to increase the fuel sulfur, although no experimental data are
available for confirmation. With concurrence of the Project Officer, all emission
tests were conducted with MIL-F-46162A(MR) instead of the originally proposed
MIL-F-46162B(ME).
C. Dynamometer Description
A 250-hp Midwest wet gap eddy current dynamometer determined the load on the
Deutz F3L 912W, and an adjacent 175-hp Midwest dry gap eddy current dynamo-
meter measured the engine load on the Perkins 4.203.2. Fuel was measured using a
Flotron. An 8-inch stainless steel dilution tunnel was used to collect particulate
samples. All equipment was calibrated prior to testing using accepted applicable
procedures, i.e., Federal Register, SAE, EPA Recommended Practice, etc. Several
views of the test equipment are illustrated in Figure 3.
D. Gaseous Emissions (Group I)
The measurement of gaseous emissions was accomplished using analytical equip-
ment, procedures, and calculations specified in the Federal Register for 13-mode
certification testing. The specific analytical instruments used in this study are
listed in Table 6, and several views of this equipment are also illustrated in Figure 3.
A flow schematic of the gaseous emissions instrumentation is shown in Figure 4.
15
One set of gaseous, particulate, and unregulated emissions instrumentation was used
to obtain emissions data on this program. The proximity of the two test stands and
the common exhaust allowed ready changing between the Deutz F3L 912W and the
Perkins 4.203.2 engines.
TABLE 5. COMPARISON OF TEST FUEL (AL-7225-F) to MIL-F-46162A(MR),MIL-F-46162B(ME), and EPA D-2 EMISSION SPECIFICATIONS
Fuel Specifications FuelMIL-F- MIL-F- EPA D-2 Analysis
46162A(MR) 46162B(ME) Emissions AL-7225-F
Gravity, °API 33-37 NA 33-37 36.1Density, g/mL 0.84-0.85 Report NA 0.844Flash Point, oC >56 Report >49 60Cloud Point, °C <-13 <-13 NA -21Pour Point, oC <-18 <-18 NA -24Viscosity, cSt, @ 40 0 C 2.2-3.2* 1.9-4.1 2.0-3.2* 2.2Distillation, oC
IBP 171-204 Report 171-204 16610% Recovered 204-238 Report 204-238 21950% Recovered 243-282 245-285 243-282 24490% Recovered 288-321 330-357 288-321 296EBP 304-349 <385 304-349 358
Carbon Residue(10% Bottom) <0.20 <0.20 NA 0.15
Ash, wt% <0.02 0.02 max NA 0.01Cu Strip Corrosion Report I max NA IAAcceleration Stability,
mg/10 0 mL 1.0 max 1.5 max NA 0.60Neutral Number < 0.01 < 0.2 NA 0.01Aromatics, vol% > 27.0 Report > 27.0 27.5Sulfur, % 0.35-0.70 0.95-1.05 0.2-0.5 0.35Cetane Number >42 40-45 42-50 48
*Viscosity at 37.80C(IOOOF)
16
000
00
03-
-4
0
17)z
,
0
1-.<
o,-io
* In0 r *
_]"= ' - o I n
' " [Llt..! 0
TABLE 6. LIST OF GROUP I EMISSION MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT
Chemical DetectionExhaust Species Symbol Technique Instrument
Carbon Monoxide CO NDIR a Beckman 315
Carbon Dioxide CO 2 NDIR a Beckman 315
Oxides of Nitrogen NOx CLb SwRI w/EPA Design
Hydrocarbons HC FIDc SwRI w/Beckman 402 Detector
Smoke --- Opacity PHS Smokemeter
aNDIR denotes nondispersive infrared
bCL denotes chemiluminescent analyzer
cFID denotes flame ionization detector
18
3 !. -r
3 ! 3
I O I • i~
fn j
"L~JII Wi" -" l - l/ i
" - " "- .:k,
2 .o . - -- - -- - -- - - - '--1 .
I'>44
19
Ill. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
The analytical procedures used to measure the unregulated emissions are summar-
ized in this section. Detailed descriptions of most of the procedures, along with
discussions of their development, validation, and qualification, are available in
Interim Report II, "Analytical Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Pollutant
Emissions From Motor Vehicles," developed in a related EPA project.( 2 3 ) Several
views of Group I, II, and III sampling systems are shown in Figure 5.
A. Description of Analytical Procedures
The unregulated emissions evaluated in this project, along with the methods for
sampling and the procedures used in the analyses, are listed in Table 7. Aldehydes
and ketones, organic sulfides, and phenols represent groups of compounds. The
respective procedures separate and identify a number of individual components
within each of these groups. The analytical procedures involved in this project are
briefly described in the following subsections.
1. Aldehydes and Ketones
The collection of aldehydes (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, propionaldehyde,
crotonaldehyde, isobutyraldehyde, benzaldehyde, and hexanaldehyde) and ketones
(acetone and methylethylketone) is accomplished by bubbling exhaust through glass
impingers containing 2,4 dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) in dilute hydrochloric acid.
The aldehydes and ketones (also known as carbonyl compounds) react with the DNPH
to form their respective phenylhydrazone derivatives. These derivatives are
insoluble or only slightly soluble in the DNPH/HCI solution and are removed by
filtration followed by pentane extractions. The filtered precipitate and the pentane
extracts are combined, and then the pentane is evaporated in a vacuum oven. The
remaining dried extract contains the phenylhydrazone derivatives. The extract is
dissolved in a quantitative volume of methanol, and a portion of this dissolved
extract is injected into a liquid chromatograph and analyzed for several individual
aldehydes and ketones using an ultraviolet detector.
20
-4
Cl,
z 4
0 0tz a
0
ciin
0 -
-4 L
cc *44
214
TABLE 7. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYFOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
Compound Sampling Method of Analysis
Aldehydes and Ketones Impinger Dinitrophenylhydrazone derivative.Liquid chromatograph withultraviolet detector (LC-UV)
Sulfur Dioxide Impinger Ion chromatograph
Carbonyl Sulfide (COS) Trap Gas Chromatograph with flameand Organic Sulfides photometric detector (GC-FPD)
Sulfate 47-mm filter Barium Chloranilate derivative(BCA). Liquid Chromatographwith ultraviolet detector(LC-UV)
Particulates 47-mm filter Weighed using microbalance
Phenols Impinger Gas Chromatograph with flameionization detector (GC-FID)
DOAS Trap Liquid Chromatograph withultraviolet detector (LC-UV)
2. Sulfur Dioxide
The concentration of sulfur dioxide in exhaust is determined as sulfate using an ion
chromatograph. Sulfur dioxide is collected and converted to sulfate by bubbling
dilute exhaust through two glass impingers containing 3-percent hydrogen peroxide
absorbing solution. The samples are analyzed on the ion chromatograph and
compared to standards of known sulfate concentrations.
3. Carbonyl Sulfide and Organic Sulfides
The collection of carbonyl sulfide (COS) and the organic sulfides, methyl sulfide
[dimethylsulfide (CH 3 )2 S], ethyl sulfide [diethylsulfide (C 2 H5)2S ] and methyl
disulfide [dimethyl disulfide (CH 3 )2 S2 ], is accomplished by passing exhaust through
Tenax GC traps at -76oc. At this temperature, the traps remove the organic
sulfides from the exhaust. The organic sulfides are thermally desorbed from the
22
traps into a gas chromatograph sampling system and injected into a gas chromato-
graph equipped with a flame photometric detector for analysis. External organic
sulfide standards generated from permeation tubes are used to quantify the results.
4. Sulfate
The exhaust is vented into a dilution tunnel where it is mixed with a stream of
filtered room air. In the tunnel, the SO3 reacts rapidly with water in the exhaust to
form sulfuric acid aerosols. The aerosols grow to a filterable size range within the
tunnel and are collected on a fluorocarbon membrane filter. Particulate sulfate
salts are also collected on the filter.
Sulfuric acid collected on the filter is then converted to ammonium sulfate by
exposure to ammonia vapor. The soluble sulfates are leached from a filter with a
measured volume of an isopropyl alcohol-water solution (60 percent IPA). A fixed
volume of the sample extract is injected into a high-pressure liquid chromatograph
(HPLC) and pumped through a column of strong cation exchange resin in Ag+ form
to scrub out the halides (CL-, Br-) and then through a column of strong cation
exchange resin in H+ form to scrub out the cations and convert the sulfate to
sulfuric acid. Passage through a reactor column of barium chloranilate crystals
precipitates out barium sulfate and releases the highly UV-absorbing chloranilate
ions. The amount of chloranilate ions released is equivalent to the sulfate in the
sample and is measured by a sensitive liquid chromatograph UV detector at 310-313
nanometers. All the reactions and measurement take place in a flowing stream of
60 percent IPA. The scrubber and reactor columns also function as efficient filter
media for any solid reaction products formed during passage of the sample through
the column system.
5. Particulate
The "particulate" is collected on 47-mm Pallflex filters. The amount of "particu-
late" collected is determined by weighing the filter on a microbalance before and
after sampling.
23
6. Phenols
Phenols (phenol; salicylaldehyde; m-cresol/p-cresol; p-ethylphenol/2-isopropyl-
phenol/2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol; 2,3,5-trimethylphenol; and
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol) in exhaust are sampled and quantitatively analyzed with
a gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with a flame ionization detector. The exhaust is
passed through two Greenburg-Smith impingers in series, each containing 200 mL of
I N KOH chilled in an ice bath. The contents of each impinger are acidified and
extracted with diethyl ether. The samples are partially concentrated, combined,
and then further concentrated to about I mL. An internal standard is added, and the
volume is adjusted to 2 mL. The final sample is analyzed by the use of a GC, and
concentrations of individual phenols are determined by comparison to external and
internal standards.
7. Diesel Odor Analysis System (DOAS)
The DOAS separates and measures the quantity of the odorous components present
in a collected diesel exhaust sample eluted from an exhaust sampling trap charged
with Chromosorb 102. The separation is achieved by liquid-column chromatography
on a silica-type adsorbent, and the detection unit is a UV detector sensitive to
254-mm radiation.
B. Accuracy of the Analytical Procedures
A difficult, but very important, endeavor was the determination of procedural
accuracy for each analytical method. The primary difficulty involved those
procedures in which the exhaust compounds are trapped or absorbed, an extraction
or subsequent reaction is performed, and then a portion of the extraction is
analyzed. The decision was reached to initially define the accuracy in terms of a
"minimum detection value" (MDV). The MDV, as used in this report, is defined as
the value above which it can be said that the compound has been detected in the
exhaust (i.e., at a measured value equal to the MDV, the accuracy is equal to plus or
minus the MDV). Determination of accuracy over the entire range of each
procedure was beyond the scope of this project.
24
For compounds collected by bag samples, the MDV was determined from the
instrument detection limits only, and is independent of the sampling rate and
duration. For compounds which are concentrated in impingers or traps, the MDV is
dependent on the instrument detection limit, chemical workup, sampling rate, and
sampling duration. The MDV's listed in Table 8 were derived using the listed
sampling rate and a 10-minute sampling period.
TABLE 8. UNREGULATED EMISSION PROCEDURAL SAMPLERATES AND ACCURACY
Procedural MDVSample Minimum for 10 minFlow, Detection Values SS Test,L/min ppm U g/mj mg/hour
Aldehydes and Ketones 4Formaldehyde 0.01 15 2Acetaldehyde 0.01 20 2Acrolein 0.01 25 3Propionaldehyde 0.01 25 3Acetone 0.01 25 3Crotonaldehyde 0.01 30 3Isobutryaldehyde 0.01 30 3Methylethylketone 0.01 30 3Benzaldehyde 0.01 45 5Hexanaldehyde 0.01 40 5
Sulfur Dioxide 4 0.05 135 15Organic Sulfides 0.13
Carbonyl Sulfide 0.001 3 <1Methyl Sulfide 0.001 3 <1Ethyl Sulfide 0.001 3 <1Methyl Disulfide 0.001 5 <1
Sulfate 14 <0.01 6 <1Particulate 14 ---- <50 <5Phenols 14
Phenol 0.03 125 15Salicylaldehyde 0.03 150 15m-/p-cresol 0.02 100 10Five phenols* 0.02 250 302-n-Propylphenol 0.05 75 102,3,5-Trimethylphenol 0.01 50 52,3,5,6-Tetramethylphenol <0.01 25 5
*Includes sum of p-ethylphenol + 2-isopropylphenol + 2,3-xylenol + 3,5-xyleno +2,4,6-trimethylphenol
25
IV. RESULTS
This section presents the results of emission tests conducted on both engines for
Group I (CO, C0 2 , NO x , HC, smoke), Group II (particulates, sulfur dioxide, sulfate),
and Group Ill (organic sulfides, DOAS odor, phenols, and aldehydes).
A. Group I--Emissions
Gaseous and smoke emissions were obtained at each engine load and speed in the
test matrix shown in Table I. The specific steady-state speed and load combina-
tions were selected to represent the range of possible forklift operation and would
serve to identify emission trends on both engines. Group I emission results for the
Deutz F3L 912W are presented in Table 9, with brake specific emission rates being
expressed in g/hp-hr and mass emissions (g/hr) as well as observed concentrations.
Table 10 provides similar Group I emissions data from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
1. 13-Mode Emission Results
The test matrix of this program included the steady-state test conditions of an EPA
13-mode emissions test. These data were processed to provide 13-mode emissions
results for both engines, which provides a comparison of engines using a reference
test procedure. The computer printout of the 13-mode emissions data is presented
in the appendix. These data are summarized for both engines in Table 11. In
reviewing the 13-mode results, the brake specific hydrocarbons (BSHC) for the
Deutz F3L 912W was 0.454 g/hp-hr, BSCO was 1.627 g/hp-hr, and BSNOx emissions
were 4.445 g/hp-hr. The Perkins 4.203.2 engine produced a BSHC of 3.215 g/hp-hr.
The 13-mode EPA heavy-duty diesel engine emission standard is 1.5 g/hp-hr BSHC,
25 g/hp-hr BSCO, and 10 g/hp-hr BSNOx + BSHC. Other options involving
trade-offs between BSHC and BSNOx are also available. Comparison of the Deutz
F3L 912W and Perkins 4.203.2 engine emissions to the EPA standard is not suggested
since these engines were not necessarily designed to meet the heavy-duty diesel
engine standard.
26
E
'-4 CZI C4 NN 4N NCq * m C1 ; mO W
ol~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~VU r,00 !0 1 %M0 -40 O00 s fl W -
a 0 0INO 0 4t00N 0 r-_ %N 00 v'U1^0 0NN C4r. 00 00 0me C4
0N W
1-4 ~ 'O -asr Dr4 r0 0 0 ON o0r 0 m , DW 14 m04 Iv 0'%~ %D " 0 % 0 a
a -(aw z0
EE0-.0N'~m "O C CAo*- 4-% 0 *Q tO r4% M ~ * C4 "N
"OOW m 'WN -;t.. w00O N It a 14 (1% % 0 P
N mMC47 .0N. 9 **0' -:~ 0!N0 -N* 9 e -4t~N
r bM; OU 0DNO.- 0 0 0 l * I% N t .010- %D .0 %Df~% m "t t*EJ. e
- 00--- 00- 90 0--% m W 000-- 00 -N 0 S t00 MONN % N- (7
E a o% 4a oo( : nr 0 no0 n%w U0 4r ,r 1 p 0 % N * m m C 4 C 0 - e 4 - t
0 C 0NN N -r-I'. -%I - e4 0-( 00 0 C4 CN eq000 C
00.
0 00 00 50 *0 0000 0000 00000C 000l 0000 0000C 000A
-- N -- -- -- N -- N -- N -- --n uI~
0
0 - u
V i 00000 00% N'.O- -0 0 N1%* t 0l% coo 00
I! m - --- N NNN AM
27
r% @'WN Q0* ~ ~O ,a go 4 rE 00f% UrE (4 N M .9 0 4, N%D~ % cci~ 0@ -t EWN*. P0 soeI 0000Q 00 W% 00- - - - - -. N -N~ -N * ~ %* ~ N 0t. ~0
to0
x k -00m N * " ON N 0.W %f% 4t m %N% 0.DU0 0-U4'a.a M O% 0% E~.-.p f%0 47UJ O 4 0 W% - ..0%% m ~ J~O N%00 t-%Nf 0a0 - 000
zC1 .2 LO t 14 %0 r4 00 00%0 WO O00 ;k 4 % -0 .t--NC4 % 0.
0 -.*0~ - - - - -
-r 0 0 w0-f N~~0 m%%0U O%%0 D W"0-'U%1 m U (1
U N 0U0%p f"N*m.0 mN% F **-. '0% NU% z *4." W%*m
rO4%0 'O 4% -* Nf4 %D UN % - .r4t 0% r-.* C40 NO (% ;2
0, u
I4 0NN Nl 00(Ii 000 NN W% 0 % % 4 f-I % N " 0 0 U%.D m 0 0 t0 CI 7 %V & 0 N N ~ N 0 0.
r4 6NNN NNNI -- - U
1 0
~0(A *000D00 0000 000 0000 M~0 000 00 0
00 a, -000 00 0Cr C W 1 a 00 00 000 0N r 00 000
0 4 N 0 E
%D Pl -' '0 M g~9 m%- -~ N00 e0%N 00C00 *00 ,r a ^ -r- -
E-Z 00 O 0-00 0 - 0 - -N00 -- (4 M -(14 fl.% V4
C28
TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF 13-MODE GASEOUS EMISSIONSDATA, g/hp-hr
Brake Specific Emission Rates, g/hp-hrEngine Engine Deutz F3L 912W Perkins 4.203.2
Mode Load, % Speed, rpm HC CO NO,, HC CO NO,
I - - - Idle --- --- --- --- --- ---2 2 Peak-Torque 5.26 20.05 27.52 68.76 118.45 55.433 25 Peak-Torque 0.39 1.59 7.88 7.19 7.24 10.424 50 Peak-Torque 0.20 0.42 4.56 2.69 2.56 7.44
5 75 Peak-Torque 0.13 0.40 4.44 1.37 1.31 5.846 100 Peak-Torque 0.14 0.55 2.33 1.23 1.11 5.067 --- Idle --- --- --- --- --- ---8 100 Rated 0.25 0.94 3.09 1.04 3.28 3.16
9 75 Rated 0.36 1.08 4.49 1.68 2.65 3.3810 50 Rated 0.50 1.88 4.06 3.04 6.56 3.5611 25 Rated 1.27 4.84 7.17 9.21 13.45 7.1412 2 Rated 19.73 86.05 46.47 73.00 212.93 43.02
13 - -Id le-- -- --- - - - - -
Cycle Composite Using 13-Mode Weight Factors
Deutz F3L 912W Perkins 4.203.2BSHC : 0.454 3.215BSCO : 1.627 5.438BSNOx 4.445 5.361
The 13-mode data presented represents engine operation under steady-state opera-
tion and may not reflect the emissions due to heavy repeated accel/decel modes of
operation characteristic of typical forklift operation. Previous experience indicated
that steady-state tests do not typically predict transient emission rates. This isconfirmed by EPA developing a transient cycle for heavy-duty engine certification
to replace the 13-mode.
2. Emission Trends
The variety of engine speed and load combinations provided an opportunity to
determine the effect of engine load on brake specific emission rates at peak torqueand rated speeds for both engines. The effects of engine load on BSHC, BSCO, andBSNOx emission rates at 1600 rpm (peak torque) and 2650 rpm (rated) for the Deutz
29
F3L 912W are illustrated in Figure 6. BSHC emissions were less than 0.4 g/hp-hr at
25 percent or greater load at 1600 rpm, but increased dramatically to 5.3 g/hp-hr at
2 percent load. The BSHC emission rates at 2650 rpm were somewhat higher (1.27
g/hp at 25 percent load), increasing to 20 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. Mass emission
rates for hydrocarbons ranged from 11-17 g/hr over the entire range of loads at
2650 rpm. The HC g/hr emission rate at 1600 rpm varied from 3-5 g/hr over the
range of loads. At 2650 rpm, HC raw exhaust concentrations ranged from 106 ppmC
to 172 ppmC, while HC exhaust concentrations ranged from 45-72 ppmC at 1600
rpm.
The effect of engine load on BSCO emissions is shown in Figure 6. The BSCO
emissions at 2650 rpm were less than 5 g/hp-hr at 25 percent or greater load, but
increased significantly to 86 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. BSCO emissions at 1600 rpm
for the Deutz F3L 912W followed similar trends, i.e., the BSCO at 25 percent or
greater load was less than 2 g/hp-hr but increased to 20 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load.
Mass CO emission rates ranged from 34-71 g/hr at 2650 rpm as compared to 7-19
g/hr at 1600 rpm. The CO concentrations for the Deutz F3L 912W ranged from
177-371 ppm at 2650 rpm. At 1600 rpm, the CO concentrations varied from 54-151
ppm.
Figure 6 also illustrates the effect of engine load on BSNOX emission rates from the
Deutz F3L 912W. The general emission trends observed with CO and HC were also
observed with NOx, i.e., relatively low BSNOx at 25 percent or greater load (7
g/hp-hr), escalating to 46 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load at 2650 rpm. At 1600 rpm, this
increase was not quite so dramatic where the BSNOx went from 8 g/hp-hr at 25
percent or greater loads to 28 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. Mass NO x emission rates
ranged from 31-140 g/hr at 2650 rpm to 22-114 g/hr at 1600 rpm. NOx
concentrations ranged from 129-470 ppm NO x at 2650 ppm as compared to 114-585
ppm NO x at 1600 rpm.
A summary of the range of emissions reported for the Deutz F3L 912W over the
entire test matrix is presented in Table 12. This table includes the three primary
methods of expressing emissions, g/hp-hr, g/hr, and ppm. Smoke opacity ranges are
also included for reference.
30
8.0
1600 KRe
265O RPM
- 6.0 g is.oi1.
4.0_ 10.0
2.0 .
5.0-S~
Enq.ne Load, 0 25 51 75 1100
Enqine Load. 4
2040 q/hp-hr 2%
650 RPM2 600 RPM
15 -
S2010
10 K
50 0lo -- l. Wad
SS
Engine Load. 0 nleLa,
40 40
1600 RP 2S RiM
0
20 20 0 -
0\ 00 -
0 q-
05 0O 75 100 n2S so 7s 100iqul Wne Load. O
FIGURE 6. THE EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON HYDROCARBONS,CARBON MONOXIDE AND OXIDES ON NITROGEN EMISSION RATES
FROM A DEUTZ F31, 912W AT TWO ENGINE SPEEDS
31
TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF EMISSION RATES AND CONCENTRATION MINIMUMAND MAXIMUM VALUES FOR THE DEUTZ F3L 912W AND
PERKINS 4.203.2 OVER COMPLETE TEST MATRIX
Exhaust Emission Deutz F3L 912W Perkins 4.203.2Species Rate/Conc. Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
HC g/hp-hr 0.13 19.75 1.04 122g/hr 2 17 13 115ppmC 24 172 464 1280
CO g/hp-hr 0.33 86.05 0.88 213g/hr 4 71 10 266ppm 54 371 195 1348
NO x g/hp-hr 2.33 126.30 3.16 61.90g/hr 12 140 6 186ppm 99 585 128 1380
Smoke opacity 0.5 2.5 0.5 7.5
The effect of engine load on BSHC, BSCO, and BSNOx emissions for the Perkins
4.203.2 is illustrated in Figure 7. The BSHC emissions increased from 7-8 g/hp-hr
at 25 percent load to 69 and 73 g/hp-hr at 1500 rpm and 2500 rpm, respectively.
Mass HC emissions ranged from 48-115 g/hr at 3500 rpm and from 41-70 g/hr at
1500 rpm. Observed HC concentrations varied from 464-1104 ppm at 2500 rpm to
540-960 ppm at 1500 rpm.
Figure 7 also illustrates the effect of engine load on BSCO emission rates from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine. The BSCO emission rate was less than 14 g/hr at 25 percent
or greater load but increased substantially to 213 gfhp-hr at 2 percent load at 2500
rpm. At 1500 rpm, the BSCO emissions were less than 8 g/hp-hr at 25 percent and
greater engine loads and increased to 118 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. The CO mass
emission rates ranged from 103-266 g/hr at 2500 rpm as compared to 39-89 g/hr at
1500 rpm. Raw CO exhaust concentrations varied from 494-1348 ppm at 2500 rpm
and 274-624 ppm at 1500 rpm.
BSNOx emission trends from the Perkins 4.203.2 are also presented in Figure 7. At
2500 BSNOx, emission rates were less than 7 g/hp-hr at 25 percent or greater loads
and increased to 43 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. The NOx mass emission rates ranged
32
20 69 g/h-hr 62% load 173 9/hp-hr 6 2 load
1500 RPM1 2500 RPM.0 a$0
10 O10 *
09 lO
S 5
25 50 7° ..o 25 so 75 100Enqjnq Load. Enqine Load,
so -80
.SO0 RPM 2500 WPM
.0 60 - 60 1
0
20 0
• -.
A a 0 0 2 S s o 5 0 0
Enqne Load, E Enqne Load,
so 40
25W O1500 RIp
60 )D
S 40 20,C i 20
40020 10
0 0
0 25 so ?S 100 InqsAa Load.anqia load. .
FIGURE 7. THE EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON HYDROCARBONS,CARBON MONOXIDE AND OXIDES OF NITROGEN EMISSION RATES
FROM A PERKINS 4.203.2 AT TWO ENGINE SPEEDS
33
from 54-146 g/hr at 2500 rpm and 42-186 g/hr at 1500 rpm. Raw NO x exhaust
concentrations for the Perkins 4.203.2 ranged from 167-482 ppm NO x at 2500 rpm
and from 195-859 ppm NO x at 1500 rpm. Table 12 summarizes the minimum and
maximum emission rates (g/hp-hr and g/hr), ppm concentrations, and smoke opacity
for the Perkins 4.203.2 engine for all modes tested.
B. Group II Emissions
Specific analyses included in the Group 1I analyses were particulates, sulfur dioxide,
and sulfate. These emissions were collected at four engine speeds (idle, intermedi-
ate, peak torque, and rated) at 2- and 25-percent load and three engine speeds
(intermediate, peak torque, and rated) at 50- and 100-percent load. Emission rates
and concentrations from tests with the Deutz F3L 912W engine are presented in
Table 13, while results from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine are found in Table 14.
1. Particulate
The effect of engine load on particulate emission rates is presented in Figure 8 for
the Deutz F3L 912W engine for intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speeds.
Figure 9 illustrates the effect of engine load on particulate emission rates from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine. In reviewing these data, several trends were observed,
namely:
o At constant speed, particulate mass emission rates increased with
increasing load. The rate of particulate mass rate increase was more
pronounced at the intermediate and peak torque speeds.
o The 2-percent load condition produced significantly higher brake specific
particulate emission rates (g/hp-hr) than the higher loads.
o The Perkins 4.203.2 brake specific particulate emission rates ranged
from 0.55 g/hp-hr to 1.81 g/hp-hr under loaded conditions 25-100
percent load at the intermediate, peak torque, and rated speeds. At
34
We* 000 000 a 000 ,
I' -~00 0000) -4C 000 ( * 000(n e4WN- m m- -f-t) W ,
E *4- 0%IA00r-t 00- 00 000 *,r 3
000 00 000 000
V)-
F4 0 00 JT0 \O0- Oq 04I%0C ~a%~Q VI)r - C%40
0 m NU.-0O tNO M C4 t 4r
E -
.jt'I If.0U' 0
00 ,00 000 000 000;-t (
(1 M -t IN - - I e4 VIN - -D I
0 ~ ~ 00 ON 00 0 It m ON I It aII
35D
E U E
a, C ar-.. 0000 w rrCN -CN -- M-, P
0
MONU4t 43 00 rD-4 0000 00 C-'I
c-J 0 0 0 0 00 0
~CL< ~~00oG%0 0NN eq4 n00 %D 0 -t t.
m r,00 0- 2 - -- - ----
0 000 ul 000- f-OU.~ -000oz ~%U~ '-00 '.Df~W ~.ONE z- ~~\- 0 0
C4ooo
4-' 4: C 4t (W0 % %. r4 fn00 r-,0 -4 N
C1 1 C -- % - rN, m . 0 104
UG) 0 4D0 N OO\
2 +1 M N N -as NI N0 00 v(0
-t -k NNN U-t 0000 000 \
000 00 000 000r
000 0004 l0 00 C 00-0 -1 CN - N W- -N N - 0 CN
00
I a 0 0 0 I a 0 0 0 0 I CI 0
36
20 a
1100 a" 1100 RPM
-t o
0 2
0525 50 75 10O 25 50 76
Engi.ne Load, •Engne Load,
16 - 0.0 "
1600 FtPM 1600 R.pm
T .5
010
5.0
, O~2. 5
44
025 so 75 100 05 t s 75 0Engine L.oad,
Enqine Load,,
0 250 RPM
2650 Rpm
- 5 25
01
-. o
0 25 0 75 100 0 25 so 75 100Enqg ne Oad. I Enqine ed. %
FIGURE 8. EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON PARTICULATE EMISSION RATESFROM A DEUTZ F31 912W AT THREE ENGINE SPEEDS
37
, 12 N
20 20
1000 RPm 1000 RPM
C Cj
15S 15
- 10 C 1
- 10
55
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 S Ic-Enqie Oad, S Enqne Load.
20 8
1500 RPM 1500 RPM
. 0
0* 0
251 50 ? ,00 S 5 0
,0 £ 0I
- C 1o
. 0 5
S052
O 0
0 25 s0 75 100 0 25 50 100Egiqne Load, S EnQisne " oa,
40 " 20
2SOO RPM2500 RPM
0~30 - is5
- 20 10
lo 5
0 0
0 25 so 75 100togine Load. %ngine Load.
FIGURE 9. EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON PARTICULATE EMISSION RATESFROM A PERKINS 4.203.2 AT THREE ENGINE SPEEDS
38
2-percent load, the brake specific particulate e-nission rate ranged from
6.55-16.37 g/hp-hr.
o The Deutz F3L 912W brake specific particulate emission rates ranged
from 0.24-1.03 g/hp-hr for the loaded conditions (25-100 percent load)
at the three engine speeds, i.e., intermediate, peak torque, and rated.
At the 2-percent load, the brake specific particulate emission rates
ranged from 5.17-11.28 g/hp-hr.
2. Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide emission rates and concentrations from the Deutz F3L 912W and the
Perkins 4.203.2 engines are presented in Tables 13 and 14, respectively. The mass
and brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates are presented as a function of
engine load at several engine speeds in Figures 10 and 11 for the Deutz F3L 912W
and the Perkins 4.203.2 respectively. Several trends are apparent from these
results, namely:
* At constant speed, sulfur dioxide mass emission rates increase with an
increase in load at all three speeds (intermediate, peak torque, and
rated), probably as a result of more fuel (and sulfur) being burned.
* Significantly higher brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates were
observed at the 2-percent load at the intermediate, peak torque, and
rated speeds, than at 25-100 percent loads.
" Brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates ranged from 0.87-1.72
g/hP-hr at the 25-100 percent loads for intermediate, peak torque, and
rated engine speeds for the Perkins 4.203.2.
* Brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates ranged from 1.09-2.72
g/hp-hr at the 25-100 percent loads at intermediate, peak torque, and
rated engine speeds for the Deutz F3L 912W.
39
040 -S
1100 RPM - 10 R
30 - 6
20 4
20 50 "1l02 07 O
0
. 0
0 2.; 5 's 100 0 25 50 75 100Engm Load % nqlne load.,
40 20
1600 RPM 1600 RPM
?1 5
I is
20 10
1 5
g0
10 S
25 SO 75 100 u A 1O00gngq e Loald, Enqlne Woad,
2650 RPM 265 DU FL92ATTRPMEGNESED20
025 so 7 1001 so050 10 0gagiCRR Load. EnCqin* Wad. I&
2650 FRPM 265 DUZ L92ATHRPMEGNESED
40
40 10.0
1000 RPM 1000 RPM
30 0
N -N
20 5.0
P" 2.5
So 0
" l II" 0'•
25 50 75 100Enqne Load, Enqine Load,
40 *16
1500 RPM 1500 RPM
30 " 12
b- 4
5 075 10 25 SO 75 10Engine Woad, %Engine Woad,
40 16
2 500 RP'M a ; 2500 RPFM
S
30 12
10 4
00
25 s0 76 100 25 so 75 100Enqine Load, 8 Enqine Load.8
FIGURE 11. EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSION
404 1 6
RAE RO 2EKIS2 032A8 HREEGNESED
al ..
.7 0|
3. Sulfate
Sulfate emission rates were obtained at various engine speeds and loads for both
engines. Sulfate emission rates for the Deutz F3L 912W and the Perkins 4.203.2 are
presented in Tables 13 and 14, respectively. The effect of engine load on sulfate
emission rates at three engine speeds is illustrated in Figures 12 and 13 for the
Deutz F3L 912W and the Perkins 4.203.2 engines. The sulfate emission trends from
both engines were quite similar and are summarized below:
* Sulfate brake specific emission rates (g/hp-hr) were significantly higher
at engine loads of 25 percent or less.
* Sulfate mass emission rates (g/hr) increased as the engine load (and fuel
consumption) increased at all three speeds for both engines.
* In general, less than 5 percent of the fuel sulfur was converted to
sulfate.
C. Group III Emissions
Exhaust emissions included in the Group III analyses include aldehydes and ketones,
organic sulfides, phenols, and DOAS odor. This section presents the results of these
analyses for both engines. The Group III analyses were performed at 2-percent load
(idle, intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speed), 50- and 100-percent load
(intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speeds).
1. Aldehyde and Ketone Analysis
The aldehyde and ketone emission rates, expressed in mg/hp-hr, are presented in
Table 15 for the Deutz F3L 912W engine. Observed concentrations for each
aldehyde and ketone for these same tests are presented in Table 16, and absolute
emission rates expressed in mg/hr are found in Table 17. The aldehyde and ketone
emission rates from the Perkins 4.203.2 are found in Tables 18 (mg/hp-hr), 19
(mg/hr), and 20 (ppm). Summaries of the total aldehyde and ketone emission rates
from both engines are presented in Table 21. In general, these results are
summarized below:
42
* Formaldehyde was the predominate aldehyde detected, generally accoun-
ting for 30-50 percent of the total detected.
* Formaldehyde concentrations were less than 0.5 ppm for all testconditions for the Deutz F3L 912W engine and less than 3.2 ppm for alltest conditions with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
* Brake specific aldehyde emission rates increased with a decrease in load
at constant speed for the Deutz F3L 912W engine.
" Aldehyde and ketone emission rates for the Perkins 4.203.2 engine werehigher than the Deutz F3L 912W engine on all modes tested.
2. Organic Sulfides
Organic sulfides were collected on Tenax-GC traps for analysis by gas chromato-graphy using a flame photometric detector. Samples were collected on the same tenmodes as for other Group III analyses on both engines. No organic sulfides weredetected in exhaust of the Deutz F3L 912W engine for any of the ten modessampled. Organic sulfide emission rates from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine arepresented in Table 22, and minimum organic sulfide detection limits are shown inTable 8. Based on the limited data available, the following generalizations are
made:
• Carbonyl sulfide was the predominate organic sulfide measured on thePerkins 4.203.2 engine; no organic sulfides were detected with the Deutz
F3L 912W engine.
0 At constant load, carbonyl sulfide mass emission rates increased with an
increase in engine speed with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
* With the Perkins 4.203.2 engine at constant speed, the carbonyl sulfide
mass emission rates decreased with an increase in load.
43
0. 0.4
1100 RPM 1100 RPM
0.4 0.3
O 0.4 g 0.2
0 0 .1
0 0 LI * III
25 50 75 100 0 25 so 75 100
EngLne Load, S Engine Load,
0.8- 0.4
1600 RPM 1600 RPM
0.6 0.10
o 0.4 0.
0. 2
0 1 0 45 1- 0Engino oad, E noqne LOad.
1.6 0.3-
2650 IRM 2650 RPM
1.2 . 0.6
0 0. 0
* 0o., • L o.WS0.4 b 0.2'
2 5 50 5 100 1 I 0 0
FIGURE 12. EFFECT OF ENGINE LOAD ON SULFATE EMISSIONRATES FROM A DEUTZ F3L 912W AT THREE ENGINE SPEEDS
44
m.. .. ill
0.8 0.8-
1000 RPM 1000 RPM
_._0.6 f o.6_
I
Engine Load. t Engine Load,
S0.4 0 0.4-
, -
150 : " I s R r .,
0.
25 50 75 100 a sEnqne Load, E Engine Load, '
1.6 :. 8 "I
2500 RPM 2500 RpM
0..
00
F 0
4 45
0 25 50 75 1oo 50 ' 1oLaqo. Load. Roqne Load, I
FI00RE EFCTO ENIN 2OD 500UFAE MRPMNRAE
1.MA2EKNS 23. TTHE N.6 PED
TABLE 15. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM A
DEUTZ F3L 912W DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HP-HR)Engine
Test Speed, Load, Aldehyde Emission Rate. me/hp-hrNo. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonladehyde isobutyraldehydeMEK Benzaldehde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 600 2 23 NO 10 NO NO NO 5 275 NO NO3-2 1100 2 12 3 ND 3 ND 7 7 23 5 NO3-3 1600 2 1 1 3 4 4 ND 9 5 26 15 NO3-4 2630 2 133 40 71 37 ND 47 39 333 87 NO
3-5 1100 50 1.3 ND 0.3 ND ND 0.4 0.3 1.1 ND NO3-6 1600 50 1.9 ND 0.8 ND 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.2 NO 0.33-7 2650 50 3.9 0.2 1.0 ND 1.0 0.8 ND 1.3 0.3 NO
3-8 )100 100 0.3 NO NO 0.1 ND 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.3 NO3-9 1600 100 0.6 ND ND 0.1 ND 0.6 ND 0.6 0.2 NO3-10 2650 100 0.4 ND 0.1 0.1 ND 0.1 ND 0.6 0.3 NO
TABLE 16. ALDEHYDE EMISSION CONCENTRATIONS FROM ADEUTZ F3L 912W DIESEL ENGINE (PPM)
EngineTest Speed, Load, Aldehyde and Ketone Raw Exhaust Concentration, ppmNo. r __ % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehycle Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 600 2 0.09 ND 0.02 ND NO ND 0.01 0.24 NO NO3-2 1100 2 0.07 0.01 ND 0.01 ND 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.01 NO3-3 1100 2 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.02 NO3-4 2650 2 0.33 0.07 0.10 0.05 ND 0.05 0.04 0.34 0.06 NO
3-5 1100 50 0.06 ND 0.02 ND NO 0.02 0.02 0.06 NO NO3-6 1600 50 0.22 ND 0.05 ND 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.06 NO 0.013-7 2650 50 0.38 0.01 0.03 NO 0.05 0.03 NO 0.05 0.01 NO
3-8 1100 100 0.09 ND ND 0.01 ND 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.02 NO3-9 1600 100 0.14 ND ND 0.01 ND 0.02 NO 0.06 0.01 NO3-10 2650 100 0.07 ND 0.01 0.01 ND 0.01 NO 0.05 0.02 NO
TABLE 17. ALDEHYDE AND KETONE EMISSION RATES FROM A
DEUTZ F3L 912W DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HR)
EngineTest Speed, Load, Aldehyde and Ketone Emission Rate. mX/hrNo. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK BenLaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 600 2 5 ND 2 ND ND NO I 35 NO NO3-2 1100 2 7 2 ND 2 ND 4 4 14 3 NO3-3 1600 2 14 2 3 3 ND 7 4 21 12 NO3-4 2650 2 93 28 50 26 ND 33 27 233 61 NO
3-5 1100 50 15 ND 4 NO ND 5 4 13 NO NO3-6 1600 50 32 ND 13 NO 9 5 4 21 NO 53-7 2650 30 83 4 22 ND 21 16 NO 27 7 NO
3-8 1100 200 8 ND ND 2 ND 7 2 13 6 NO3-9 J600 100 20 ND ND 3 ND 21 NO 19 7 NO3-10 2650 100 17 ND 4 4 ND 5 ND 25 14 NO
46
TABLE 18. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM A
PERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HP-HR)
EngineTest Speed, Load, Emission Rate, me/hp-hrNo. rpm % ForMnldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 500 2 1350 330 NO 150 NO ND 90 110 ND ND3-2 1000 2 620 Ito ND 106 ND ND 62 100 98 330
3-5 1500 2 588 166 NO 83 NO ND 49 49 48 3043-8 2500 2 68 153 18 82 ND ND 42 32 96 240
3-3 1000 50 0.6 4.8 1.2 2.4 ND 1.2 1.9 1.8 2.2 1.43-6 1500 50 2.5 0.7 NO ND NO ND 0.2 2.1 1.2 1.43-9 2500 50 14.1 21.2 NO 9.6 NO 1.1 6.2 1.1 2.2 3.5
3-4 1000 100 5.9 1.0 NO 0.6 NO ND ND 1.0 0.7 3.73-7 1500 100 11.6 3.8 NO 1.4 NO ND ND NO 1.0 4.33-10 2500 100 11.7 1.1 1.3 0.5 NO 0.9 1,6 0.9 3.6 0.8
TABLE 19. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM APERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HR)
EngineTest Speed, Load, Aldehyde Emission Rate. m~ihrNo. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-I 500 2 135 33 NO 13 NO NO 9 I1 ND ND3-2 1000 2 310 90 NO 33 NO NO 31 50 49 1653-5 1500 2 470 133 ND 66 ND ND 39 39 38 243
3-8 2300 2 739 199 23 106 ND ND 55 41 125 312
3-3 1000 50 8 63 13 31 NO 1 25 24 28 I83-6 1500 50 49 13 ND NO NO ND 4 40 23 27
3-9 2500 50 352 531 NO 240 NO 28 155 28 55 88
3-4 1000 100 143 25 NO 15 ND ND ND 24 16 903-7 1500 100 426 141 ND 50 ND NI) ND NO 38 1603-10 2500 100 541 49 60 25 ND 42 72 43 168 36
TABLE 20. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM APERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINE (PPM)
EngineTest Speed, Load, Aldehyde Emission ppm .'No. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetwe Crotonaldehyde Isobuty e YdMEK Senzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 500 2 2.84 0.48 NO 0.16 NO NO 0.08 0.10 ND NI)3-2 1000 2 2.99 0.59 ND 0.27 NO Nn 0.13 0.20 0.13 0.483-3 1300 2 2.91 0.5 ND 0.21 ND Nn 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.453-8 2500 2 3.17 0.58 0.03 0.24 ND ND 0.10 0.07 0.15 0.40
3-3 1000 50 0.08 0.43 0.08 0.16 NO 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.053-6 1500 50 0.30 0.06 NO ND NO NO 0.01 0.10 0.04 0.053-9 2500 30 1. l 1.33 NO 0.53 No 0.05 0.28 0.05 0.07 0.11
3-4 1000 100 1.46 0.17 ND 0.08 ND NO Nf) 0.10 0.04 0.273-7 1500 100 2.61 0.39 NO 0.16 ND NO ND ND 0.07 0.293-10 200 100 2.28 0.14 0.13 0.05 NO 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.20 0.05
47
TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDE AND KETONE EMISSION RATESFROM A DEUTZ F3L 912W AND PERKINS 4.203.2 ENGINES
OPERATED ON MIL-F-46162A(MR) FUEL, AL-722-5
Total Aldehydes,* Percent FormaldehydeLoad, mg/hp-hr in Total Aldehydes
Speed %6 Deutz Perkins Deutz Perkins
Idle 2 215 2030 12 67Intermediate 2 60 1496 20 41Peak Torque 2 84 1287 21 46Rated 2 787 1231 17 46
Intermediate 50 3.4 17.5 38 3Peak Torque 50 5.2 8.1 37 31Rated 50 8.5 59.0 46 24
Intermediate 100 1.7 12.9 18 46Peak Torque 100 2.1 22.1 29 52Rated 100 1.6 22.4 25 52
*Total aldehydes are defined as the numerical sum of the individual emissionrates for formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, propionaldehyde, acetone,crotonaldehyde, isobutyraldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone, benzaldehyde, andhexanaldehyde.
3. Phenols
During this program, exhaust samples were collected for phenols analysis using
procedures developed by Southwest Research Institute for the Environmental
Protection Agency. Analysis of these samples by gas chromatography indicated
either no phenols or only trace phenols with both engines. The detection limits of
the phenols as measured by this method are presented in Table 23.
4. Diesel Odor Analysis System (DOAS) Odor
DOAS odor results from both engines are presented in Table 23. The DOAS from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine was generally higher (TIA 2.2 -_ 0.3) than the Deutz F3L 912W
(TIA 1.7 ± 0.3). No general trends were apparent as a function of engine speed or
load for either engine.
48
The higher Total Aroma of Intensity (TIA) values observed with Perkins 4.203.2 were
not surprising, considering that the Perkins also had higher unburned hydrocarbons,
aldehydes and ketones, and organic sulfides than the Deutz F3L 912W engine. These
species are all thought to contribute to or be an indicator of diesel exhaust odor.
TABLE 22. ORGANIC SULFIDE EMISSION RATES FROMPERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINE (mg/hr)
Engine Load, Carbonyl Dimethyl Diethyl DimethylTest No. Speed 96 Sulfide Sulfide Sulfide Disulfide
3-1 500 2 0.90 ND ND ND3-2 1000 2 3.41 ND ND ND3-5 1500 2 4.77 ND ND ND3-8 2500 2 45.08 ND 2.59 ND
3-3 1000 50 0.58 ND ND ND3-6 1500 50 0.94 ND ND ND3-9 2500 50 16.33 ND 1.55 ND
3-4 1000 100 1.00 ND ND ND3-7 1500 100 1.32 ND 0.43 ND3-10 2500 100 2.94 ND 3.42 ND
TABLE 23. DIESEL ODOR ANALYSIS SYSTEM (DOAS) RESULTS FORDEUTZ F3L 912W AND PERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINES
Engine Total Aroma of Intensity (TIA)Engine Speed Load, % Deutz F3L 912W Perkins 4.203.2
Idle 2 1.55 2.10Intermediate 2 1.55 2.17Peak Torque 2 1.71 2.07Rated 2 1.92 2.08
Intermediate 50 1.77 2.21Peak Torque 50 1.62 2.28Rated 50 1.71 2.52
Intermediate 100 1.72 2.17Peak Torque 100 1.41 2.57Rated 100 1.38 _-a
aSample contaminated
49
V. SUMMARY
This section summarizes emission results from the Deutz F3L 912W and Perkins
4.203.2 engines for Groups 1, II, and II emissions. The data for the Group I emissions
produced several general trends and observations:
* Both engines produced higher BSHC, BSCO, and BSNOX at low-load
conditions, regardless of speed.
* At constant load, BSHC and BSCO increased with increasing speed;
BSNOX showed mixed trends.
* At constant speed, BSHC, BSCO, and BSNOx increased with decreasing
load for both engines.
* The Perkins 4.203.2 engine had higher HC, CO, and NO x brake specific
(g/hp-hr) and mass (g/hr) emission rates than the Deutz F3L 912W.
Results of Group II emissions for particulate, sulfur dioxide, and sulfate also
produced some general trends, and are summarized below:
* At constant speed, particulate and sulfur dioxide emission rates in-
creased with increasing load.
* Less than 5 percent of fuel sulfur was converted to sulfate for both
engines.
" At constant intermediate, peak torque, and rated speeds, sulfate in-
creased with increasing load.
" In most cases, particulate brake specific emission rates were higher on
the Perkins 4.203.2 engine. Sulfur dioxide mass emission rates were
generally proportional to fuel consumed.
50
Aldehydes, organic sulfides, DOAS odor, and phenols (Group III) were measured on
selected modes. These results are summarized below:
" Formaldehyde concentrations generally accounted for 30-50 percent of
the aldehydes and ketones detected.
* Formaldehyde concentrations were less than 0.5 ppm for all test
conditions for the Deutz F3L 912W engine and less than 3.2 ppm for all
test conditions with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
* Brake specific aldehyde emission rates increased with a decrease in load
at constant speed for the Deutz F3L 912W engine.
* In general, at constant load and aldehyde and ketone mass, emission
rates increased with an increase in speed, except at low load for the
Perkins engine.
" No phenols were found above the minimum detection limit for the two
engines tested.
" Carbonyl sulfide was the predominate organic sulfide measured with the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine; no organic sulfides were detected with the Deutz
F3L 912W engine.
* At constant load, carbonyl sulfide mass emission rates increased with an
increase in engine speed with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
* With the Perkins 4.302.2 engine, at constant speed, the carbonyl sulfide
mass emission rates decreased with an increase in load.
* The Diesel Odor Analysis System (DOAS) results from the Perkins
4.203.2 engine were generally higher (TIA = 2.2 ± 0.3) than the Deutz
F3L 912W (TIA = 1.70 ± 0.3). No general trends for DOAS odor were
apparent as a function of engine speed or load for either engine.
51
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of this program, several items have been identified as potential areas of
additional work. These are summarized below:
1. Most engine emissions appear to be greatest at low loads regardless of
the engine speed. Forklifts generally operate at low load and under essentially
continual transient conditions. Previous experience has indicated that steady-state
data cannot always predict transient emissions, particularly on a low-duty cycle.
Since a "forklift cycle" is not currently available, it is recommended that an RFP
issued by MERADCOM (RFP DAAK70-83-Q-0107 titled "Measurement of Pollutants
from Diesel Engine Forklift Trucks During Operations in an Ammunition Storage
Area") be modified to include monitoring engine parameters such as engine speed,
fuel and exhaust temperatures. This would allow development of a "forklift cycle"
at a minimal cost to MERADCOM, since forklift trucks, fuel, drivers, operators, and
facilities will be available all at one time at one place and could be performed
concurrently.
The availability of this transient cycle would allow determining emission rates based
on a cy,:le developed from data collected during field operations. It is also
consistent with EPA's philosophy, that is, requiring all heavy-duty diesel engines to
be certified using the EPA heavy-duty engine transient cycle. Virtually all forklift
engine manufacturers also produce heavy-duty engines and are quite familiar with
the transient cycle.
2. Initially, it was planned to use 1-percent sulfur fuel, i.e., MIL-F-46162B
(ME); however, due to time constraints and lack of immediate availability of the
MIL-F-46162B(ME) fuel, the MERADCOM Project Manager approved the use of
MIL-F-46162A(MR) for this program (at 0.35-percent sulfur). During this program,
there were several discussions with MERADCOM regarding the effect of fuel sulfur
level on emissions, particularly sulfur dioxide, sulfate, and trace organic sulfides. It
is generally agreed that an increase in fuel sulfur level will produce a corresponding
proportionate increase in sulfur dioxide and sulfate, although experimental data to
confirm this are not available. As mentioned earlier, the nature and quantity of the
trace organic sulfides may be influenced by the specific sulfur additive that is used
52
to increase the fuel sulfur level. Also, the question of the influence of natural
versus added sulfur has not been investigated, at least to our knowledge.
3. After MERADCOM has established the test protocol and specifications
for diesel forklift acceptance to MERADCOM, it is quite likely that several engine
manufacturers may have diesel engines that are acceptable in every manner except
emissions. These manufacturers may wish to add after-treatment devices (i.e.,
catalytic traps) to their engines to reduce emissions, particularly if this is already
allowed in Great Britain. These devices are reportedly effective and are currently
used in handling hazardous materials in England.
Although these devices may allow a nonconforming engine to meet the emissions
specification during an acceptance test, it should be demonstrated to MERADCOM
that these devices have demonstrated durability during typical forklift operations
and that on-site catalytic trap regeneration is possible. Other areas of possible
concern would be the use of after-treatment devices with the MIL-F-46162B(ME)
high-sulfur fuel and its influence on sulfate formation. In addition, limited work
may be warranted to investigate the formation of selected unregulated emissions
(i.e., sulfate, aldehydes, odor) during engine malfunctions, such as plugged air
cleaner, high exhaust back-pressure, engine overfueling, and injection pump nis-
timing.
4. After MERADCOM has established the emission limits and test proce-
dures for diesel forklift purchase specifications, it should be of concern to
MERADCOM to develop a level confidence that ensures that engines purchased will
meet the emission standards. There are essentially two variables that affect
emission rates. The first variable is test-to-test variability and is influenced
primarily by the analytical instrumentation, engine reproducibility, etc. It is likely
that EPA has some data to provide some indication of this variability on large
heavy-duty diesel engines. We are not aware of any data available for test-to-test
variability on forklift-size diesel engines. If this is not available, MERADCOM may
wish to conduct replicate 13-mode (or transient forklift if the cycle is available) to
determine standard deviation on one or more candidate diesel engines to establish
confidence limits on this size engine.
.3
The second, and probably most critical, is the engine-to-engine variability of
production engines. Again, EPA may have data available on the engine-to-engine
variability during certification of heavy-duty engines, but extrapolation to small
engines may not be appropriate. MERADCOM may wish to include in the purchase
specifications that a certain percentage of production engines (i.e., four out of five
engines) pass the emission tests, or alternatively, randomly select production
engines for an emissions audit (test).
_54
VII. REFERENCES
1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 86, Subpart D, "Emission Regula-
tions for New Gasoline-Fueled and Diesel Heavy-Duty Engines; Gaseous
Exhaust Test Procedures," pp. 428-460, 3uly 1, 1982.
2. Smith, L. R., Parness, M. A., Fanick, E. R., and Dietzmann, H. E., "Analytical
Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions From Vehicles Using
Middle-Distillate Fuels," EPA/600-2-80-068, April 1980.
3. CRC-APRAC Project No. CAPI-1-64, "Development and Evaluation of a
Method for Measurement of Diesel Exhaust Odor Using a Diesel Odor Analysis
System (DOAS)," 3anuary 1979.
55
APPENDIX
13-MODE EMISSION RESULTS
* Deutz F3L 912W Engine
* Perkins 4.203.2 Engine
57
0X 11 0 0N ~ 0 66
I I .i . . . .. .
6wm No fa I QI1.- . 1. . ow 1 Z I
X~ I xIII I tC Z I z 1
60 00 C; C4~~0
I CD0 L) I . . * . . . . . 3 L.0 .* 11 Ma- :00111;0: %ON 10* aDx I6 -0 I ONon n W I "1n0 1* 6~-t qlr In W I AcC6-* I
I Io 0 1 S0. * ** . . .*6 I*' 0 6
N I 00Z CL Iq'C 6aW0 0 N 0 ~ V 0
I Ii0 IL - - - -- -
-I w I I
r- I 6 - I I6
1 0 66i U 6 -0 cy'0%- n 0 N0%1~ 6 w66- .6 m 0 1(
- I 6 I 06)VN .
z 0W m~a Q001NOIOW)00006 9% %000 1 1W1N1-16=
Z 0 u 6. II .06 .N)C%0 66 lIZ .....
- 6 X I N ~' I I I N-................................ 2M2N2 mIn -O Z - .6 6
C-i l .. 6 CD 0 IWZZ I'-D-j C -C CL ~ ,'O N ~ 0iP)
CLI v-I0I6W 6% 6W I0 -n In%0in10U' vIf r -NI W - N
o. an vk lo ,NVo 001 a %D1~ *0 %o0r~io Q0Q~ C D ID %0 6 0
WIn WZ~ u(DVt~
W , C0I- 0 66 I no In V"umvn 1 1 1 :>0
o z n 1 I-"nn0n - .I I I60 000n00u--J rn 6J M n0F N 00M0 n N N OD00 n ~ :I' I'OIOII
W 1 1IrN m6i10 , I +~0 N66 .. I - c I 66 6 6 16 .W Q-~ w II n* 6660%Dr - L
0 =0x I I I 6 6 I 4L)((" c06W n 6620x .UI6 26 m I'.~w0- O0VlO r- C r01*nNntN -t I -o Il m Cn-)
I L)6 V)a.I.-6 ... ... 0 f r C0- N"00~ 6u-)16-t00W0I-0-D I-I lW
VI oe : i o 6* N0I ~ O'Qi0*. - 6% 020 Z2W 0- 6 1 61 6 x XIS itON r~~ 0~- s 6 01/)100D
z 63 2 I lL'm I I I a (D maI N W * c6- 600- wV n:66 6**6
. .0 . 66 .. . .6).. .- I
0E 0 00 00 00 nIntnUAW 6 6) 6 , 6 I06 0It)of % * O'0000*4 6n
W6 .. .. .. .. 6 i 0 :2 % ~ 0 IiIn2I a- x 0N0ON0 NN0 I K n *N*0I I u0 W660r - 0 N W 6* MDii~ r-) 6 '
I Co , I IaIi~ * . ~
6W 0 v -e W n0 0 N N TN w
In 039 UI N N 6.UN UN I I I I . -
120. 6L I6 0tr- 6ru% II - -6In0 0 0 6 Lf0% uq 0
1 N InZ -W In 0 66 W 0 6-N n IN n v NNin 0 r - I y
I I ----- 0cK c~- 6 59
I 1 0- 1f~ f - O N 6 Il on I 0 IS a1 Oa f
6 0 I I I ~~ 0 I N U'I1'-V
I I XII , I ........ I
I _j( iI NOD
I CZ *** ._N 1 Ix.JZI
I I L. 0. 1 C 0% o XI00N0A 0 W00000. InI
1(h 3 N V WN ~ 0 OaO I wI~~~_ I - -
A O I I ZI
aOD I zN N 4 l ~ O i -': z Lrz Iz In 0PnVs r-, 'r-aI
Iaav X X : . P' . :2 . ! . .1 Cy ax 0 0 r - ,O
WI z~I CL I I I Io
I ~ I I I c ) LI ~ I I I CL I............. - -
Is~ za V. .V 0% 00%
03 I mOO I IN03ON0CQa0.0NZV;4SII I.I'I V I .O I . ... ... .. I I uiI If--4 s
0. WtI I - . CL I-) Ol 'i U CL N 0%arN 0A0Q% 0 ()%NN
-J lea L OI t4N%N N N.O 0 a00N IU. U 10000000000000 00
)I -s ODI I . . . . . . . I
I XI I t- I v am mz-o -VF -4 Lxxxxi
I o I C DO A C - AI a0 awDzz-CO
0% 0.1 I- . OD 3 I to CO CD
V- l' I z U LAI
0 U. 5 ID w N N 00 0 0000000 i A0 I -1 11 0:W.J N j I ODI~ O CU Q v~ %I nC ;o 0 or s
W ix I j I N .0 ~ N . . . gui Do _
U7 m ~ If V in In IV 1.0 AI n In6N0000ti I I I% OD 0
~J. . .0C.N.0.I. N..C. a . o. . ItaI 0 1.-I ..j O I 4a ; a ;w0wwNI I I oooc
-L) WI UN Iy * -4 M 0W t1- U I I w 16 00- NA0 VI iIJ -0 1 &on n u21* 5 I -JS' O 0V 0 U~ Io A08 b56 N 0 .Wr 4A U. OX .
8W SO Z II O- IL xI I I I z0 56 0N~V - N3O) 0Ix
L6 IX W IL at ta It6 nn z I 0a
-I- I 9C C hi. I 0%'O 0%~ Il S0 I CO In- N N- V
W a- I- ..J I I W L Z 6 ** .. .
C I I SI k%0 % 6 OD. InN 5
C;W S C OCCO O O *II I I1 00W u.1 U fUU3iC NI- A Cw I I I I I. I %C(7 4 - n V ODIV -0301
z * C W0 C I I I aID I----------A-------------------1
520.d-- I I
I CL 2 Z 20 C C O I W, In_ 00 Oi C l* o I----------1- CNN N NI
I Z CL ICC
1 I . t- I. I0.- j I. I .- .- N.- wSW z- ma 0aNNC C t-PN
10100 -AO 0. NVr- N~U3 NO IN0~~ e N on Q I00 NI - N If% IN-- N -- I
I C I I I NI I
*i. I .IN VC- 00 N WNn I II W IO
60
DISTRIBUTION LIST
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CDRUS ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE CMD
DEFENSE DOCUMENTATION CTR ATTN: DRSTA-GSPE ICAMERON STATION 12 DRSTA-RG 1ALEXANDRIA VA 22314 DRSTA-NS (DR DOBBS) I
DRSTA-MTC 1DEPT. OF DEFENSE DRSTA-G IATTN: DASD-LMM (MR DYCKMAN) 1 DRSTA-M 1WASHINGTON DC 20301 DRSTA-GBP (MR MCCARTNEY) 1
WARREN MI 48090
CDRDEFENSE FUEL SUPPLY CTR DIRECTORATTN: DFSC-T (MR. MARTIN) 1 US ARMY MATERIEL SYSTEMSCAMERON STA ANALYSIS AGENCY
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314 ATTN: DRXSY-CM 1DRXSY-S 1
DOD DRXSY-L 1ATTN: DUSDRE (RAT) (Dr. Dix) 1 ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005WASHINGTON DC 20301
HQ, 172D INFANTRY BRIGADE (ALASKA)DEFENSE ADVANCED RES PROJ AGENCY ATTN: AFZT-DI-L 1DEFENSE SCIENCES OFC 1 AFZT-DI-M 11400 WILSON BLVD DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIALARLINGTON VA 22209 OPERATIONS
FT RICHARDSON AK 99505
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CDRUS ARMY GENERAL MATERIAL &
HG, DEPT OF ARMY PETROLEUM ACTIVITYATTN: DALO-TSE (COL NAJERA) 1 ATTN: STSGP-F 1
DAMA-CSS-P (DR BRYANT) 1 STSGP (COL CLIFTON) 1DAMA-ARZ-E (DR CHURCH) 1 NEW CUMBERLAND ARMY DEPOT
WASHINGTON DC 20310 NEW CUMBERLAND PA 17070
CDR CDRU.S. ARMY BELVOIR RESEARCH AND TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT
DEVELOPMENT CENTER ATTN: SDSTO-TP-S 1ATTN: STRBE-VF 10 TOBYHANNA PA 18466
STRBE-WC 2STRBE-G 3 CDR
FORT BELVOIR VA 22060 US ARMY DEPOT SYSTEMS CMD
ATTN: DRSDSCDR CHAMBERSBURG PA 17201US ARMY MATERIEL DEVEL &
READINESS COMMAND CDRATTN: DRCLD I US ARMY WATERVLIET ARSENAL
DRCDMR (MR GREINER) 1 ATTN: SARWY-RDDDRCMD-ST (DR HALEY) I WATERVLIET NY 12189DRCQA-E IDRCDE-SG I CDR
DRCSM-WCS (MR SCHEUBLE) I US ARMY LEA5001 EISENHOWER AVE ATTN: DALO-LEPALEXANDRIA VA 22333 NEW CUMBERLAND ARMY DEPOT
NEW CUMBERLAND PA 17070
8/84AFLRL No. 169Page 1 of 4
CDR CDRUS ARMY FOREIGN SCIENCE & TECH US ARMY RES & STDZN GROUP
CENTER (EUROPE)ATTN: DRXST-MT1 1 ATTN: DRXSN-UK-RAFEDERAL BLDG BOX 65CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22901 FPO NEW YORK 09510
CDR CDRDARCOM MATERIEL READINESS US ARMY FORCES COMMAND
SUPPORT ACTIVITY (MRSA) ATTN: AFLG-REGATTN: DRXMD-MD 1 AFLG-POP 1LEXINGTON KY 40511 FORT MCPHERSON GA 30330
HQ, US ARMY T&E COMMAND CDRATTN: DRSTE-TO-O 1 US ARMY YUMA PROVING GROUNDABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005 ATTN: STEYP-MT (MR DOEBBLER)
YUMA AZ 85364HQ, US ARMY TROOP SUPPORT COMMANDATTN: DRSTS-MEG (2) 1 PROJ MGR, ABRAMS TANK SYS, DARCOM4300 GOODFELLOW BLVD ATTN: DRCPM-GCM-S 1ST LOUIS MO 63120 WARREN MI 48090
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PROJ MGR, FIGHTING VEHICLE SYSCONSTRUCTION ENG RSCH LAB ATTN: DRCPM-FVS-SEATTN: CERL-EM I WARREN MI 48090
CERL-ZT ICERL-EH I PROJ MGR, M60 TANK DEVELOPMENT
P 0 BOX 4005 US ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE CMD (TACCM)CHAMPAIGN IL 61820 ATTN: USMC-LNO, MAJ. VARELLA I
WARREN MI 48090HQUS ARMY TRAINING & DOCTRINE CMD PROG MGR, M113/Mll3Al FAMILYATTN: ATCD-S 1 VEHICLESFORT MONROE VA 23651 ATTN: DRCPM-MI13
WARREN MI 48090
CDRUS ARMY TRANSPORTATION SCHOOL PROJ MGR, MOBILE ELECTRIC POWERATTN: ATS P-CD-MS ATTN: DRCPM-ME P-TMFORT EUSTIS VA 23604 7500 BACKLICK ROAD
SPRINGFIELD VA 22150
CDRUS ARMY MATERIEL ARMAMENT PROJ MGR, IMPROVED TOW VEHICLE
READINESS CMD US ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE CMDATTN: DRSAR-LEM ATTN: DRCPM-ITV-TROCK ISLAND ARSENAL IL 61299 WARREN MI 48090
CDR CDR
US ARMY COLD REGION TEST CENTER US ARMY EUROPE & SEVENTH ARMYATTN: STECR-TA ATTN: AEAGG-FMDAPO SEATTLE 98733 AEAGD-TE
APO NY 09403
HQ, DEPT. OF ARMYATTN: DAEN-DRMWASHINGTON DC 20310
8/84AFLRL No. 169Page 2 of 4
PROJ MGR, PATRIOT PROJ OFC CDRUS ARMY DARCOM US ARMY INFANTRY SCHOOLATTN: DRCPM-MD-T-G ATTN: ATSH-CD-MS-MREDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35809 FORT BENNING GA 31905
CDR PROJ MGR M60 TANK DEVELOP.THEATER ARMY MATERIAL MGMT ATTN: DRCPM-M60-E
CENTER (200TH) WARREN MI 48090DIRECTORATE FOR PETROL MGMTATTN: AEAGD-MM-Pr-Q 1ZWEIBRUCKEN DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYAPO NY 09052
CDRCDR NAVAL AIR PROPULSION CENTERUS ARMY RESEARCH OFC ATTN: PE-72 (MR D'ORAZIO)ATTN: DRXRO-EG (DR MANN) 1 P 0 BOX 7176
DRXRO-CB 1 TRENTON NJ 06828P 0 BOX 12211RSCH TRIANGLE PARK NC 27709 CDR
NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS CMDCDR ATTN: CODE 05M4 (MR R LAYNE)US ARMY QUARTERMASTER SCHOOL WASHINGTON DC 20362ATTN: ATSM-CDM 1
ATSM-TNG-PT 1 CDRFORT LEE VA 23801 DAVID TAYLOR NAVAL SHIP R&D CTR
ATTN: CODE 2830 (MR G BOSMAJIAN) IHG, US ARMY ARMOR CENTER CODE 2705.1 (MR STRUCKO) IATTN: ATZK-CD-SB 1 ANNAPOLIS MD 21402FORT KNOX KY 40121
JOINT OIL ANALYSIS PROGRAM -CDR TECHNICAL SUPPORT CTRIOIST AIRBORNE DIV (AASLT) BLDG 780ATTN: AFZB-KE-J 1 NAVAL AIR STATION
AFSB-KE-DMMC (CPT MORRIS) I PENSACOLA FL 32508FORT CAMPBELL KY 42223
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYCDR HQ, US MARINE CORPSUS ARMY LOGISTICS CTR ATTN: LPPATTN: ATCL-MS (MR A MARSHALL) 1 WASHINGTON DC 20380FORT LEE VA 23801
CDRCDR NAVAL FACILITIES ENGR CTRUS ARMY FIELD ARTILLERY SCHOOL ATTN: CODE 120 (MR R BURRIS)ATTN: ATSF-CD 1 200 STOVWALL STFORT SILL OK 73503 ALEXANDRIA VA 22322
CDR CHIEF OF NAVAL RESEARCHUS ARMY ENGINEER SCHOOL ATTN: CODE 473ATTN: ATZE-CDM 1 ARLINGTON VA 22217FORT BELVOIR VA 22060
CDR
NAVAL AIR ENGR CENTERATTN: CODE 92727LAKEHURST NJ 08733
8/84AFLRL No. 169
Page 3 of 4,.e
CDR, NAVAL MATERIEL COMMAND NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDATTN: MAT-08E (MR ZIEM) 1 SPACE ADMINISTRATIONCP6, RM 606 LEWIS RESEARCH CENTERWASHINGTON DC 20360 MAIL STOP 5420
(ATTN: MR. GROBMAN)CDR CLEVELAND OH 44135MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS SUPPORTBASE ATLANTIC NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDATTN: CODE P841 1 SPACE ADMINISTRATIONALBANY GA 31704 VEHICLE SYSTEMS AND ALTERNATE
FUELS PROJECT OFFICE
ATTN: MR CLARKDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER
CLEVELAfM OH 44135HQ, USAFATTN: LEYSF (COL CUSTER) 1 US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYWASHINGTON DC 20330 CE-131.2, GB-096
ATTN: MR ECKLUNDHQ AIR FORCE SYSTEMS CMD FORRESTAL BLDG.ATTN: AFSC/DLF 1 1000 INDEPENDENCE AVE, SW
ANDREWS AFB MD 20334 WASHINGTON DC 20585
CDR SCI & TECH INFO FACILITYUS AIR FORCE WRIGHT AERONAUTICAL ATTN: NASA REP (SAK/DL)LAB P 0 BOX 8757
ATTN: AFWAL/POSF (MR CHURCHILL) 1 BALTIMORE/WASH INT AIRPORT MD 21240WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH 45433
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGCYCDR OFFICE OF MOBILE SOURCESSAN ANTONIO AIR LOGISTICS MAIL CODE ANR-455
CTR (MR. G. KITTREDGE)
ATTN: SAALC/SFQ (MR MAKRIS) 1 401 M ST., SWSAALC/MMPRR 1 WASHINGTON DC 20460
KELLY AIR FORCE BASE TX 78241
CDRWARNER ROBINS AIR LOGISTIC
CTRATTN WR-ALC/MMIRAB-1 (MR GRAHAM) IROBINS AFB GA 31098
OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
DIRECTORNATL MAINTENANCE TECH SUPPORT
CTR 2US POSTAL SERVICENORMAN OK 73069
8/84AFLRL No. 169Page 4 of 4
k
AT
L ME