Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

ISSN: 0002-2470 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

Emissions from Carbureted and Timed Port Fuel

Injected Engines

Ralph C. Stahman & Andrew H. Rose Jr.

To cite this article: Ralph C. Stahman & Andrew H. Rose Jr. (1966) Emissions from Carbureted
and Timed Port Fuel Injected Engines, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 16:1, 15-18,
DOI: 10.1080/00022470.1966.10468433

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1966.10468433

Published online: 16 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2332

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
 RALPH C. STAHMAN,
Chief, Automotive Research Unit,
ANDREW H. ROSE, JR.
Emissions from Carbureted and
Chief, Engineering Research and
Development Section,
Laboratory of Engineering
Timed Port Fuel Injected Engines
and Physical Sciences,
A comparison was made between the exhaust emission characteristics of a popular make
Division of Air Pollution,
car when equipped with the stock carburetor and when equipped with a timed-port fuel
Robert A. Taft Sanitary
injection system. A brief optimization study was made to adjust the spark timing and
Engineering Center,
fuel flow characteristics to minimize emissions. Performance and economy were com-
Public Health Service,
pared between the fuel injected and carbureted versions. Emission measurements of CO,
U. S. Department of Health,
C02, and hydrocarbon were made in road tests by proportional sampling and through the
Education, and Welfare,
California Cycle by continuous nondispersive infra red instrumentation.
Cincinnati, Ohio

I his study compared the emis-
sions from a passenger car equipped
with timed port fuel injection to those
from the same car equipped with a
standard carburetor. Performance and
economy were evaluated with a manual-
transmission vehicle to permit repeat-
able steady-state operating conditions
on a chassis dynamometer over the full
range of speed and load between 15 and.
65 miles per hour at five-mph incre-
ments. After a break-in period of
three weeks, in which approximately
1600 miles were accumulated, the vehicle
with a standard carburetor was tuned to
factory specifications and road tested to
establish parameters from which a
road-load developed power curve could
be derived for the chassis dynamometer
and to establish the acceleration charac-
teristics of the carbureted engine.
Absolute manifold pressure and engine
speed were used to fix engine power out-
put.
Engine temperatures were allowed to
stabilize at each test condition before
data were collected. Performance and.
economy data were also obtained for
the test vehicle equipped with the in-
jector set at manufacturer's recom-
mended conditions, and with an emis-
sion-optimized injector. Emission data
were obtained for the manual-trans-
mission vehicle used in the performance
and economy tests, and a similar vehicle
equipped with automatic transmission.
The test vehicles were 1963 Chevrolets
equipped with standard 283 cubic inch
V-8 engines and a 3.08:1 final drive
ratio. Bench checks of the carburetor
and distributor from both cars estab-
lished that they were within manufac-
turer's specifications.
The fuel injection system used for
these tests is a timed, port injection
system with speed-density control. Fuel
flow from the injector nozzles is inter-
mittent and timed to a fixed part of the
engine cycle so that fuel delivery occurs
only during a portion of the intake
stroke when the air velocity is high.
The fuel nozzles are located in the
branches of the engine intake manifold
adjacent to each cylinder-head intake
passage. The nozzles are of the closed,
constant-pressure type and operate at
approximately 500 psi. The amount of
fuel delivered is directly proportional to
both manifold pressure and engine
speed. The position of the metering
element is established by a diaphragm
controller that senses engine vacuum.
A deceleration fuel cut-off is provided so
that no fuel is injected when manifold
vacuum exceeds 22 inches hg. An elec-
tric fuel pump supplies fuel to the
metering pump at about 10 psi. The
pump system includes a vapor diverter
and return line to the tank. The
throttle body of a standard Rochester
carburetor is used to control air flow.
Test Procedure
Performance-economy measurements
were made on a single-roll chassis dy-
namometer having 50.5 inch diameter
rolls coupled to a 300 horsepower Ward-
Leonard power absorption unit.
Torque reaction was read by means of a
hydraulic load cell, while average roll
speeds, upon which power output deter-
minations were based, were obtained
with a Standard Electric Time chrono-
tachometer. Automatically controlled
air conditioning equipment maintained
constant ambient temperatures and
humidity in the test vehicle chamber,
while a blower maintained airflow over
the test vehicle equal to simulated
vehicle speed.
The vehicle was equipped with the
following items of instrumentation:
(1) Thermocouples for coolant water
temperature (in and out), oil
sump temperature, and carbu-
retor air temperature.
(2) Oil pressure gauge.
(3) Manifold vacuum gauge (Wallace
and Tiernan).
(4) Engine tachometer (sensing igni-
tion breaker pulses).
(5) A degree wheel on the crankshaft
vibration damper for timing
measurements and a pickup for
remote timing indication.
(6) Remote hydraulically actuated
spark timing control.
(7) Spark plug and exhaust manifold
temperature thermocouples dur-
ing emission studies.
Emission optimization and compari-
son measurements were made on a modi-
fied Clayton Model C-150 two-roll
dynamometer on which a 175-horse-
power Dynamatic eddy current dyna-
mometer was substituted for the stand-
ard Clayton hydraulic power absorption
unit. Engine air consumption was
measured with a Meriam laminar flow
element mounted at the engine air
cleaner inlet; the element gave one inch
of water depression per 100 cfm of air
consumption. For operation on the
California test cycle,1 a road load was
programmed into the eddy current
power absorber and a fly-wheel pro-
vided vehicle inertia characteristics.
The emissions were measured on a con-
tinuous basis by nondispersive infrared
instruments and by techniques pre-
scribed by the California Motor Vehicle
Pollution Control Board for hydro-
carbon, carbon monoxide, and carbon
dioxide. These analyses were supple-
mented with samples of exhaust ob-
tained with a proportional sampler.2
Emission optimization measurements
were run at steady-state conditons.
Exhaust emissions on the road were

January 1 966 / Volume 1 6, No. 1 15


End of Injection Tinning
(20mph at 15.3" Hg. Man. Vac.)
a — 8 0 ° BTDC
0 — 20° BTDC
• — 40° ATDC
• - 1 0 0 ° ATDC
A - 1 3 0 ° ATDC
*-160°ATDC
Hydrocarbon
16 17 18
Air-Fuel Ratio
Fig. 1 . Effect of injection timing and air-fuel
ratio on exhaust emission and power.
evaluated by collecting a sample of
exhaust with the proportional sampler
on four routes in Cincinnati representing
freeway, residential, arterial, and busi-
ness traffic conditions. The collected
samples were returned to the laboratory
and analyzed as follows:
(1) Hydrocarbons by flame ionization
detection (Beckman Model 109
analyzer) and by nondispersive
infrared detection (Beckman
Liston-Becker Model 15 analyzer,
hexane sensitized).
(2) Carbon monoxide and carbon
dioxide by nondispersive in-
frared detection (Beckman
Liston-Becker Model 15 analyzer)
and by Orsat analysis.
(3) Oxygen by the Beckman para-
magnetic oxygen analyzer and by
Orsat analysis.
Fuel for the performance and economy
studies was Pure premium. Fuel for
the emission studies was a blend of
Indolene plus three cc TEL and a cut of
Phillips high-olefin stock. The modi-
fied Indolene fuel gave the following
analysis:
Saturates
Olefins
Aromatics
Specific Gravity 0.7404
End of Injection Timing
API 59.7 (20mph at 9.3" Hg. Man. Vac.)
' Bromine No. 26.4
Volume Temperature,
Recovered °F
I.B.P. 98
10% 142
50% 216
90% 306
EP 408
Effect of Injection Timing
and Air-Fuel Ratio
The first step in optimizing the in-
jector-equipped engine was to establish Fig. 2. Effect of injection timing and air-fuel
the effects of injection timing on horse- ratio on exhaust emission and power.
power and on emission levels of carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbon. The test
vehicle was operated at three steady-
state engine load conditions of 9.3, 15.3, was an investigation of the effect of
and 17.3 inches Hg manifold vacuum, ignition-timing variation on power,
corresponding to heavy load, road load, economy, and emissions. For these
and light load operating conditions. tests, the vehicle was operated at four
For each condition tests were made at constant speed levels of 20, 30, 40, and
speeds between 20 and 50 mph with the 50 mph at an air-fuel ratio of 16:1 and a
air-fuel ratio varied between 14:1 and manifold vacuum of 15.3 inches Hg;
20:1. Variation in air-fuel ratio was ignition timing was varied between 15°
accomplished by supplying a variable
and 40° BTDC. Because test drivers
vacuum signal to the injector speed believed that the 100° ATDC injection
density controller. This established
timing seemed to give the car a more
the fuel flow level independent of engine solid feel at the lean end than other in-
air consumption or engine intake mani-
jection timings under road-load condi-
fold vacuum. Fuel injection timing tions, 100° was chosen as the standard
was varied by utilizing a series of pump
setting. Figure 4 illustrates the trends
drive shafts set to give injection timings in brake specific fuel consumption
varying from 80° before top dead center
(BSFC) (pounds fuel per horsepower
(BTDC) to 160° after top dead center hour) and specific hydrocarbon emission
(ATDC).
(pounds hydrocarbon per horsepower
Figure 1 presents data from a series of hour) for a family of vehicle speeds.
tests in which injection timing was Distinct minima in the brake specific
varied from 80° BTDC to 160° ATDC fuel consumption data coincide with
and air-fuel ratio was varied between maximum power spark timing. The
14:1 and 20:1 with the test vehicle op- specific emission data, however, show no
erated at 20 mph at a road load manifold maxima or minima in the region studied.
vacuum of 15.3 inches Hg. Injection On the basis of these data, it was
timing had no significant effect on hy- reasoned that retarded spark timing
drocarbon emission, carbon monoxide
emission, or engine horsepower. Spot
checks at other speed and load levels
62% confirmed that, in the range tested,
0.95
14% injection timing had no effect on emis- 14" Manifold Pressure
24% sions or performance. Figures 2 and 3 16:1 Air Fuel Ratio

present the effect of air-fuel ratio on :0.90

emission and performance at 17.3 and
9.3 inches Hg at 20 mph. The mini- 0.85
End of Injection Timing mum hydrocarbon concentration level
(20mph at 17.3" Hg. Man. Vac.)
14
at around 17:1, indicated in Figs. 1, 2, 5 0.80
and 3, was consistent for all speeds and
12 g loads. Horsepower peaked at an air- 0.75 .025 »
fuel ratio below 14:1, and the drop of
10 |
carbon monoxide concentration to less
.020
than 0.5 percent for air-fuel ratios of
15:1 or greater also were consistent for
all speed and load ranges tested. These
4 fc
data also indicate that increase in air-
S
a. fuel ratios above 17:1 with this injection .010
2 •> system would result in an increase in
I
hydrocarbon emission with greatly re- 005 a.
0 15 20 25 30 35 40
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 duced engine power. Spark Advance (BTC)
Air-Fuel Ratio

Fig. 3. Effect of air-fuel ratio on exhaust Effect of Ignition Timing Fig. 4 . Effect of spark timing on specific fuel
emission and power. The second step of the optimization consumption and specific emission.

16 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

 Table I—Emission Improvements with Fuel Injection, 7 Mode California
gle Advance
Vacuum Advance
Cycle on Chassis Dynamometer
S
with Original /
Distributor /
o

Manufac- Spark
c 5 turers' Spark and A/F
Carburetor Settings Optimized Optimized
) 5 10 15 20 /-->/- CO, % Continuous lust. 4.5 1.4 1.1 0.4
Inches Mercury S.S ~ HC (IK); ppmC Continuous Inst. 5200 5500 3700 2600
CO, % Proportional Sample 5.0 0.9 0.7 0.3
., .... ^'/Original HC (IR), ppmC Proportional
Modified,'^/ Sample 7000 6000 3500 2900
HC (FIA), ppmC Proportional
_ Sample 11500 7800 5500 4100
/
/ Centrifugal Advance
-

Table II—Full Throttle Performance and Road Load Economy of the Standard
0-
Carburetor Versus the Optimized Fuel Injection System
Miles per Hour
20 40 60 -—Corrected Full Throttle Horsepower11—v—Brake Specific Fuel Consumption1'—.
1
"0
l i l
1000
1 1 i
2000
1 i
3000
i i
4000
Brake
Engine RPM Vehicle Standard Optimized Percent Horse- Standard Optimized
Speed Carburetor Injector Improvement powera Carburetor Injector
Fig. 5. Original and modified distributor
20 24.5 27.4 11.8 2.4 2.21 1.99
curves. 30 43.1 47.5 10.2 1.29 1.25
5.7
40 61.5 66.2 7.6 9.2 1.18 1.03
50 80.0 83.2 4.0 13.9 1.06 0.93
should significantly lower the exhaust 60 95.8 99.0 3.3 20.7 0.88 0.84
emissions. a
Horsepower values measured at the rear wheels.
The ignition timing of the injector- b
Pounds of fuel per brake horsepower-hour.
equipped car as received used a standard
Chevrolet distributor curve with the
basic timing advanced from four degrees Table III—Road Emissions on Four Driving Routes Comparing the Optimized
BTC (manufacturer's specifications) to Fuel Injection System to the Standard Carburetor
nine degrees BTC. The modified tim-
ing curve shown in Fig. 5 was obtained -—Residential—. -—Arterial—• -—Freeway—. -—Business—>
for the optimized injector system by Opt. Opt. Opt. Opt,
Inj. Carb. Inj. Carb. Inj. Carb. Inj. Carb.
changing the spring tension in the cen-
trifugal advance, disconnecting the Manual Transmission
vacuum advance, and setting the basic CO, % 1.9 5.7 1.5 5.7 0.9 5.0 3.2 4.9
timing at six degrees BTC. The re- HC (IR), ppmC 3400 5200 3200 6500 1800 3700 2700 6200
sulting spark-advance curve was steeper HC (FIA), ppmC 5700 10200 5000 11100 2700 6100 5000 10600
than that of the standard Chevrolet Automatic Transmission
distributor but had essentially the same CO, % 0.7 2.6 0.5 2.7 0.8 2.1 2.6 3.0
wide open throttle advance. Although H C ( I R ) , ppmC 1900 2600 2500 3600 1700 1900 2400 2700
HC (FIA), ppmC 2800 4600 3400 5900 2100 3400 3700 5000
the timing shifted from points A to
points B on the specific emission curves
of Fig. 4, there was little effect on
economy. Performance with Optimized (IR), 48 percent and hydrocarbon
The data in Table I illustrate the Injector System (FIA), 52 percent. For automatic
emission level reductions, measured The full-throttle performance of the transmission, the average carbon mon-
using the seven-mode California cycle, vehicle with the emission-optimized in- oxide reduction was 57 percent; hy-
as the engine was operated with car- jection system exceeded that of the drocarbon (IR), 23 percent; and hy-
buretor, with injector at original setting, carbureted vehicle throughout the speed drocarbon (FIA), 36 percent.
with the injector optimized for spark range tested, as shown in Table II. The emission reduction with auto-
timing as described in Fig. 5, and with This was also evident at part-throttle matic transmission was not as marked as
this plus a five percent enleanment of conditions, where the car was remark- with manual transmission. This was as
the air-fuel mixture. The continuous ably smooth with no flat spots in any expected, since the carburetor used with
instrument data incorporate the normal driving condition and showed an ability automatic transmissions is leaner than
weighting factors used with the Cali- to lug down to well below 500 engine that used with the manual transmission,
fornia cycle. The proportional samples rpm with no hesitation or bucking. the deceleration vacuum with automatic
were collected in the proportional sam- Economy with the optimized injector transmissions is substantially lowrer, and
pler and therefore are weighted accord- was better than with the carburetor by the deceleration cut-off device had less
ing to the actual exhaust flow through- four to 15 percent. chance to work.
out the cycle. The original injector Oxides of nitrogen measurements
reduced the carbon monoxide emissions Road Tests indicate that the injection system caused
by an average of 76 percent, the modi- The data in Table III show the re- a considerable increase in NOX emissions
fied distributor timing yielded a total sults of road tests using a proportional over those from the carbureted engine.
average reduction of 81 percent, and the sampler. Emission measurements ob- The available data do not allow an
additional five percent enleanment with tained show that the average carbon accurate quantitative value for the in-
optimized spark advance gave a total monoxide reduction obtained by the crease.
average reduction of 92 percent. The optimized injection system as compared The carburetor used in the compari-
average hydrocarbon reductions were to the stock carburetor was for manual son studies for the manual transmission
19, 46, and 59 percent respectively. transmission 65 percent; hydrocarbon vehicle was at the rich end of the pro-

January 1966 / Volume 16, No. 1 17


§0.09
72
-Injection System at Variable Load
-Carburetor at Variable Load
(1975 Engine RPM-50mph)
2 4 6 8
Monifold Vacuum
10
Fig. 6. Manifold vacuum.
duction tolerance. This tended to exag-
gerate the improvements attributable to
the fuel injection system. The car-
buretor for the automatic transmission
equipped vehicle was nearer to the
mean of production tolerance so that the
improvements shown are more realistic.
It is estimated that a mean production
limit carburetor on the manual trans-
mission vehicle might have had a 10 to
15 percent lower hydrocarbon emission
than the one tested.
Distribution
During the dynamometer evaluation
of performance and economy of the test
vehicles, geometric mixture distribution
among the engine cylinders was meas-
ured by means of thermocouple spark
plugs. This technique is described in
the Ford and General Motors test
manuals.
A useful quantitative measure of
maldistribution is the variance of aver-
age fuel-air ratio among cylinders. The
term variance is used in the statistical
sense, that is, the sum of the squares of
differences of fuel-air ratios (F/A) for
individual cylinders, each with respect
to the average over-all fuel-air ratio for
the whole engine. The following ex-
pression was used:
(2F/A)2
2 (F/A)2 -
n- 1
where n represents the number of cyl-
inders, in this case eight.
Figure 6 presents plots of the individ-
ual fuel-air ratios of each cylinder
against engine manifold vacuum for
both the carbureted and fuel-injected
engines and also a plot of the variance of
fuel-air ratio among cylinders. One
obvious advantage of this fuel injection
18
system from the standpoint of emissions This study has shown that emissions
and economy is the lack of excessive of CO on the road can be reduced by 50
power enrichment. The plots for the to 60 percent and of hydrocarbons by
carburetor show the power enrichment 25 to 50 percent, depending on trans-
valve coming in at eight inches of mani- mission by the use of fuel injection and
fold vacuum, raising values for the spark retard. The brief optimization
individual cylinders by approximately program conducted in this study served
two fuel-air ratios, which raises most only to establish the right direction of
values well above the "best power" adjustments for ignition timing and
value of 0.08. The spread in fuel-air enleanment. More can be gained by a
ratios among cylinders is considerably better tailoring of the distributor curve
greater for the carburetor than for the and air-fuel ratios for the steady-state
fuel injection system, which is confirmed condition, and in particular, for tran-
by the much larger variance calculated sient conditions.
3-8 y
for the carbureted vehicle. In all fairness, it must be stated that a
Conclusions sizeable reduction in emissions from the
<5\°
carburetor-equipped vehicle can be
The performance improvements docu- made by retiming the distributor and
mented in this work are primarily re- leaning. the air-fuel mixture at idle.
ol lated to the improved fuel distribution This is the general approach of the
demonstrated in Fig. 6. However, Chrysler Cleaner Air Package and, to
12 other advantages are known to exist for varying degrees, applies to all passenger
a fuel injection system. The fuel injec- car engines. However, the main thing
tion nozzles employed in this system learned from this study is that an in-
break the fuel into very fine particles, jector-equipped car will operate
which vaporize readily during the turbu- smoothly at lean fuel-air ratios where a
lent induction process and the squish carburetor-equipped car, because of its
action that accompanies the compres-
inherent limitations in distribution and
sion stroke. This process improves vaporization, begins to surge at the
homogeneity of charge and allows leaner
same over-all air-fuel ratio.
operation during idle and other low-load
conditions where considerable residual
gas remains in the cylinders. The in-
REFERENCES
crease of maximum power may be ex-
plained in terms of better air consump- 1. State of California Motor Vehicle Pollu-
tion due to lack of manifold heating and tion Control Board, "California Test
Procedure and Criteria for Motor
reduced displacement of intake air by Vehicle Exhaust Emission Control,"
fuel vapor. The increase of fuel econ- (January 1964).
omy appears because power output with 2. 11. Smith, A. H. Rose, Jr., and R. Kruse,
the fuel-metering system drops off less "An Auto Exhaust Proportional Sam-
pler," APCA Annual Meeting, Detroit,
rapidly as the mixture is made leaner. Michigan (June 1963).
APCA ENROLLS 3000th MEMBER
WELCOME! Miss Victoria Valli, a chemical engineer with the Institute of Sanitary Engineers in Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil, became APCA's 3000th member during a recent visit to headquarters. She is
in the United States for an extended period of study and was recommended as a member of APCA
by Mr. A. D. Muldoon, of Allegheny County's Bureau of Air Pollution Control. It is quite significant that
just six years ago APCA's membership total was 1500, and the enrollment of Miss Valli is an historic
occasion for the Association. At right is Mr. Arnold Arch, executive secretary of APCA.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association