|
EPA
Approved Dynamometer Test Proves Reduced Emissions and Improved
Performance
California
Dynamometer and Emissions Test Analysis
On July
17, 2007 a late model Dodge pickup truck equipped with a Cummins diesel
engine was taken to Olson Ecologic Lab, an EPA approved dynamometer
testing facility in California.
The vehicle was given a standard emissions dynamometer test with
and without a Hydrogen Boost hydrogen generator operating. Notice I did not say with and without
the Hydrogen Boost system operating, because the whole system was not
used. Only the hydrogen generator
was installed and running at 30 amps.
This was not a test that was
recommended by me to show the benefits of the Hydrogen generator. I would have recommended a hard
working, high throttle test protocol.
This test never used the engine to produce anywhere near maximum
power/torque. The test was
basically equivalent to a leisurely drive around the city, with many
minutes of idling and only one short stretch of 58 mph driving and a couple
shorter 30 mph stretches. This may
be an okay test for emissions but certainly not for performance, but we
still got some useful data from the test data forwarded to us by the
testing facility.
Of course the expectation of
the people sponsoring the test was to see a great increase in mileage and
reduction in total and individual emissions. If they wanted that sort of results I
could have told them what sort of test protocol needed to be performed.
Never-the-less we did get some valuable information by examining
the raw data. First let me
describe the raw data.
The computer disk we were
given contained three usable files containing over one thousand
paragraphs of numbers separated by commas. I knew that this sort of file could be
more easily analyzed by putting the information into a spread sheet, so I
opened the file with a spreadsheet program and the data fell into
place. There were 58 columns and
1062 rows on the spread out data.
Only a few columns were important and were not too difficult to
find, though I had to make a few assumptions as to what the abbreviations
were. For instance I assumed that
the columns labeled THCd, COLd,
NOXd, CO2d%, TORQUE, Tr
mph. and HPdy, indicated hydrocarbon, carbon
monoxide, nitrous oxides, carbon dioxide emissions, torque, tire speed,
and horsepower output at each of the 1062 data points during the
test. Another column labeled HHCd may have indicated heavy hydrocarbons or
particulate matter in the exhaust.
If so there was a 16.2% reducing in particulate matter with the
hydrogen generator operating.
I concentrated on the usual
emissions and the torque/horsepower columns. I saw no abbreviation that could easily
translate into fuel consumption so to get any indication of fuel
consumption I was forced to use CO2 emissions as a % of the exhaust to
give some indication of fuel used.
This could not have been done with a gasoline engine because the %
CO2 would always be near constant.
But with a diesel with no throttle and no exhaust recycling (I
don’t know if this engine has EGR) we could get some indication of fuel
used by looking at CO2 emissions.
The fact that with the use of hydrogen the HC and CO emissions
were reduced, thereby producing more CO2 emissions without using more
fuel, does skew our results to the conservative side if we use CO2
emissions as an indication of fuel consumption.
Analysis
First
let me list the total accumulations of the amounts from the spreadsheet.
|
|
HC
|
CO
|
NOx
|
CO2
|
HHCd
|
torque
|
|
test 3
|
7914.8
|
21388.5
|
85920.7
|
608.179
|
12606.2
|
19930.9
|
|
test 5
|
6810
|
18653.8
|
88029.2
|
628.961
|
10580.8
|
19749.3
|
|
test 6
|
5502.7
|
22573.2
|
86914.1
|
616.695
|
9853
|
20009.5
|
|
Test 3 to 5
|
14.0%down
|
12.8%down
|
2.45%up
|
3.42%up
|
16.2%down
|
0.91%down
|
Looking just at the totals of the columns we get the
chart above, but that does not show the whole story. In the chart above test 3 indicates the
pre-installation baseline test, test 5 indicates the test done with the
hydrogen generator operating, and test 6 is a post test baseline
repeat. The bottom row indicated
the increase or decrease with the use of the hydrogen generator above or
below the baseline amount.
It was
determined by analyzing the Purdue
University
dynamometer tests that the use of a hydrogen generator at idle and low
throttle settings was a waste of energy because we were not taking
advantage of the hydrogen we produced at low throttle settings. Analysis of this test also shows the
same thing. In fact it shows that
not only mileage was affected, but emissions as well. Since we had 1062 data points to
separate out the low throttle settings from the medium throttle settings,
we could segregate the results and see what the hydrogen generator would
do for us if we just turned it on when the throttle setting was
appropriate. During examination of
the spreadsheets I found that when this truck engine produced less than
30 ft pound of torque the hydrogen was not appropriate, at least not at
the 30 amp production rate used on this test. So I separated the below 30 ft lb
torque data points from the greater than 30 ft lb torque data point and
got the following summary:
|
Torque
|
NOx
|
HC
|
CO
|
torq/CO2
|
|
0-30
|
up 24%
|
up 2%
|
dn
6.2%
|
dn
84%
|
|
30-80
|
dn 3%
|
dn
31.4%
|
dn
19.1%
|
up 6.5%
|
This
obviously shows a marked decrease in all emissions at throttle setting
above 30 ft lb torque output. If
the test had even challenged the engine at a high throttle setting we may
have seen some real savings in the torque/CO2 emissions column. The engine is capable of hundreds of ft
lbs of torque so even running at 80 ft lbs at 58 mph cruise was nothing
of a test for Hydrogen Boost. Our
testing and experience has shown that Hydrogen Boost is especially
beneficial at higher throttle setting with diesel engines. But even at the low throttle settings
and torque outputs of this leisurely test drive, the benefits of Hydrogen
boost are clearly seen, in mileage expectations as well as emissions
reductions.
Summary:
Use of
the hydrogen generator at moderate throttle setting common to city
driving on this diesel powered pickup truck gave the following results:
3% reduction in NOX emissions
31.4% reduction in volatile hydrocarbon emissions
19.1% reduction in carbon monoxide emissions
16.2% reduction in heavy hydrocarbon (particulates)
emissions
6.5% increase in torque per %carbon dioxide emissions
(indication of fuel consumption)
Use of the Hydrogen Boost fuel heater and engine treatment
would give better results.
|