Effects of Ethanol or ETBE Blending in Gasoline On Evaporative Emissions

Effects of Ethanol or ETBE Blending in Gasoline on Evaporative Emissions
Haruya Tanaka Advanced Technology and Research Institute (ATRI) Japan Petroleum Energy Center (JPEC)
Japan Petroleum Energy Center
Contents 1. Introduction 2. Test vehicles & Fuels 3. Refueling Loss emission results
Test method Comparison of vehicle type Effects of Ethanol / ETBE Blending Test method Comparison of vehicle type, PFI and DISI Effects of Ethanol / ETBE Blending
4. Running Loss emission results
5. Summary & Conclusion

1
Introduction
Biomass-derived ethanol is regarded as a carbon neutral fuel
photosynthesis conversion
Biomass Fuel (Ethanol)
atmospheric CO2
combustion
CO2 emission
CH3CH2OH Ethanol
CH2=C(CH3)2 iso-Butene
CH3CH2OC(CH3)3 ETBE (Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether)
In Japan, bio-ethanol or ETBE (Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether) which is synthesized from bio-ethanol and isobutene, has been promoted as automotive fuel, and its practical use is under discussion. Concerns for ethanol blending in gasoline Change of fuel properties, e.g. distillation property, vapor pressure, etc. Phase separation, resulting from water contamination Compatibility with vehicle fuel system materials etc.
2
RVP (Reid Vapor Pressure) increase with ethanol blending

80 70 RVP (kPa) 60 50
3vol of ethanol blend is a permissible max. limit by Gasoline Quality 30 Regulation in Japan
RVP rise by about 7kPa with 3-10vol% of ethanol blending This phenomenon is due to decline in strength of hydrogen bond and azeotrope effect. Vapor pressure rise might increase evaporative emissions from motor vehicles.
40
20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Ethanol (vol%)
The effects of ethanol blend on evaporative emission were studied and compared with ETBE blend
3
Explanation about evaporative emissions from automobiles

Refueling Loss
HC HC
Evaporated after engine turning off (for 1hour) Evaporated during long-term parking (for 24, 48, 72hours) Evaporated during engine running
4
Hot Soak Loss (HSL)
Diurnal Breathing Loss (DBL Running Loss (RL

5
Test Vehicles Specifications

Vehicle Regulation Displacement Engine Type Fuel System Tank Capacity Tank Location Tank Material Fuel Return (L) (L) A Japan 2000 1.5 L4 PFI 50.0 Under Floor Metal No B Japan 2000 2.0 L4 DISI 60.0 Under Floor Metal No
RVP level of test fuels - RVP change with ethanol / ETBE blending 80 75 RVP (kPa) 70 65 60 55 50 0 2 4 6 8 10 Ethanol (vol%)
80
E3(RVP72)
RVP (kPa)
75 70 65 60 55 50 0 2 4 6 8 10 ETBE (vol%)
BASE
BASE
ETBE8
E3(RVP65)
E10(RVP65)
RVP increases by ethanol blend

7
RVP doesnt change by ETBE blend

8
Schematic of Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determination (SHED) System & test procedure of refueling loss test
Fuel Dispenser THC Anal. Fuel Tank Fuel Temp Controller
Fuel drain & 10% fill

Air Conditioner Vehicle
Control Unit
Temp control & Vehicle soak 10-12h Refueling Test
SHED
Refueling unit
Comparison of refueling loss between Japanese typical passenger vehicles

2.5 Refueling Loss (g/L) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 30/35 35/40 30/35 35/40
Dispensed Fuel Temp (oC)/Ambient Test Temp (oC)
Refueling Volume: 10 to 90% of vehicle fuel tank Refueling Rate: 40L/min , Test fuel: Base Gasoline
Vehicle A Vehicle B
95% confidence limit
Refueling loss emissions dont vary significantly according to vehicle type between Japanese passenger vehicles, A (PFI) and B (DISI).
10
Effects of Temperature and Refueling Rate on Refueling loss

2.5 Refueling Loss (g/L) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 25/30 30/35 35/40 25/35 30/40 Dispensed Fuel Temp (oC)/Ambient Test Temp (oC)
Vehicle A Refueling Volume: 10 to 90% of vehicle fuel tank

40L/min 30L/min
Refueling Rate
Despite the higher ambient temp, the amounts of refueling loss are restricted by keeping fuel temp lower.
11
Multiple Regression analysis for refueling loss

Experimental Refueling Loss (g/L) 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Estimated Refueling Loss (g/L)
X = -0.01504*A + 0.059284*B - 0.00497*C +0.021333*D - 0.87265 X: Refueling Loss (g/L) A: Ambient Test Temp (oC) B: Dispensed Fuel Temp (oC) C: Refueling Rate (L/min) D: Fuel RVP (kPa) ETBE8(RVP65) E3(RVP65) E10(RVP65) E3(RVP72)
R2=0.9648
There are no negative effects of ethanol-blended and ETBE-blended gasoline on refueling loss other than RVP increase of the ethanol blended gasoline.
12

13
Schematic of Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determination (SHED) System & test procedure of running loss (RL) test
Engine Intake Air Soak Area Purge Air Purge and load of the canister Air Conditioner THC Anal. Fuel drain & fill 40% full Preconditioning drive DBL Insert Door RL, HSL 11mode + 3repeats of 10-15mode @25 oC Fuel temperature conditioning 35 oC within 4 hours Running loss test 11mode + 3repeats of 10-15mode @35 oC
an Apparatus Room TB
14
Comparison of running loss (RL) between typical market vehicles

0.4 0.3 R L (g / km ) 0.2 0.1 0 VehicleA VehicleB
Test fuel: Base Gasoline (RVP65kPa)
Evaporative emission level of vehicles A is very low
Vehicle B (DISI) shows significant high level of RL compared to vehicle A (PFI).

15
Schematic of canister system

Engine Adsorbed HCs are Purge purged by engine vacuum during running Canister
HC adsorption
Flow Rate
Air
Canister Capacity
Fuel Inlet
valve
Vapor
Fuel Tank
Fuel
Fuel Temperature
(Evaporative emissions volume)
Fuel temperature, Canister capacity and Purge flow rate are considered to be the key factors to control evaporative emissions.
16
Characteristics of test vehicles

Vehicle Final Fuel Temp (oC) Temp Rise (oC) Canister Capacity (L) Total Purge Flow Volume (L) A 42.5 +7.5 0.9 411 B 48.0 +13.0 0.9 39
Vehicle A: Lower for final fuel temp and higher purge flow rate Vehicle B: Considerably low for purge flow rate and relatively high for final fuel temp
Vehicle B has disadvantages to control evaporative emissions

17
RL changes with ethanol blended gasoline

240 Increase of RL (%) 200 160 120 80 40 0 -40 VehicleA VehicleB
E5(RVP65)
RL results with base gasoline are regarded as 0%

E3(RVP65)
RVP of each ethanol blended-gasoline is adjusted to same level of base gasoline (about 65kPa)
Even though RVP is same level, the increase of RL emissions with ethanol-blended gasoline was significant in vehicle B.
18
Comparison of vapor pressure between base and ethanolblended gasoline at final fuel temp of each vehicle
BASE 150 Vapor Pressure (kPa) 125 100 75 50 25 20 30 40 50
O
Ethanol:3%
Vapor pressure of the ethanolBlended gasoline is more sensitive to temperature increase than base gasoline. Vapor pressure rise of the ethanol-Blended gasoline for vehicle B was higher than that of vehicle A.
RVP Vehicle A Vehicle B
60
Temperature ( C)
19
RL emissions from vehicle B increased significantly with ethanol-blended gasoline, even though the RVP level of test fuels were nearly equal.
Comparison of the ETBE blending effects on RL with ethanol effects

240 Increase of RL (% ) 200 160 120 80 40 0 -40 VehicleA VehicleB
RL emissions did not increase by ETBE blending even for vehicle B, in contrast to the case of ethanol blending.
20
RL results with base gasoline are regarded as 0%
Ethanol blend ETBE blend

RVP of each ethanol & ETBE blended gasoline is adjusted to same level with each base gasoline (about 65kPa)
E5(RVP65) ETBE8(RVP65)
E3(RVP65)
ETBE8(RVP65)
Comparison of vapor pressure change with temperature between base and ETBE blended gasoline
BASE 150 ETBE:8vol%
Vapor Pressure (kPa)
125 100 75 50 25 30 40 50 60
Vapor pressure of ETBE-blended gasoline is almost same with that of base gasoline at each fuel temperature.
RL emission level of ETBE-blended gasoline is considered to be same as that of base gasoline.
Temperature (oC)
21

22
Summary(1)
As for refueling loss emissions, There are no remarkable differences in refueling loss level between conventional gasoline passenger vehicles available in Japanese market, regardless to PFI or DISI . Both ethanol-blended and ETBE-blended gasoline do not significantly increase refueling loss emissions as long as the RVP is controlled to the same level as conventional gasoline.
23
Summary (2)
As for running loss (RL) emissions, The level of RL emissions differs by vehicle type; in the case of vehicles with higher final fuel temperatures and low purge flows (DISI), the RL emissions level increases. For vehicles with higher final fuel temperature, the RL emissions level with ethanol-blended gasoline tends to increase compared to base gasoline. This is because vapor pressure of ethanol-blended gasoline is more sensitive to temperature than that of base gasoline. With ETBE-blended gasoline, the RL emissions level does not increase in contrast to ethanol case.
24
Conclusions
In order to control evaporative emissions, from the view point of fuel technology, it is imperative to control fuel RVP, especially in the case of ethanol-blended gasoline. From the view point of vehicle technology, to reduce RL emissions of ethanol blended gasoline, fuel temperature control and higher canister purge flow rates are very important. ETBE seems to be a more favorable fuel blendstock than ethanol for the control of RL emissions. To put commercial use of biomass-fuel as gasoline blend stock, further study is required from both viewpoints: vehicle emission control system and fuel properties.
25
End of Presentation Thank You for Your Attention
Image of Refueling Loss

Air Vent Pipe Vapor (Refueling Loss)
Fuel Inlet
Fuel Tank
Dispensed Fuel
Refueling Nozzle
The effect of gasoline vapor being absorbed into the dispensed fuel is considered to occur when there is large difference between ambient temp and dispensed fuel temp. This effect seems to be strengthened in case of higher refueling rate.
27
Comparison of fuel temperature profile

50 Vehicle A Vehicle B Speed
Fuel Temperature (oC)
45
A
40
35
30 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400
80 60 40 20 0
Time (sec)
28
Speed (km/h)
Speed
Comparison of purge flow rate

Purge Flow Rate (L/min)
40 30 20 10 Vehicle A Vehicle B Speed
Speed
300
600
900
1200 1500 1800 2100 2400
Time (sec)
Due to lean burn direct injection engine system, the intake manifold vacuum of vehicle B is very low and thus purge flow rate is the smallest.
29
Speed (km/h)
80 60 40 20 0
Effect of ethanol- / ETBE-blended gasoline on Refueling loss

Vehicle A Dispensed Fuel Temp / Ambient Test Temp: 35oC / 40oC Refueling Volume: 10 to 90% of vehicle fuel tank Refueling Rate: 40L/min
2.5 Refueling Loss (g/L) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
BASE (RVP65)
E3 (RVP72)
E3 (RVP65)
E10 (RVP65)
ETBE8 (RVP65)
Both ethanol- and ETBE-blended gasoline do not significantly increase refueling loss emissions as long as the RVP is controlled to the same level.
30
Relationship between RL emission and vapor pressure at final fuel temperature

2.5 2.0 RL (g/km) 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 80 85 90 95 100 105 Vapor pressure @ final fuel temp (kPa)
Vehicle B
Normal Gasoline Ethanol blend
RL emissions depend greatly on the vapor pressure at the final fuel temperature in vehicle B
31
Comparison of vapor pressure at final fuel temp between vehicle A and C

BASE 150 Vapor Pressure (kPa)
Driving(RL)
Ethanol:3%
125
Refueling
100 75 50 25 20 30 40 50
O
60
Temperature ( C)
32
33
Effect of Ethanol on Compatibility with Metal Materials
SAE2005-01-3710
34
Effects of Ethanol on Elastomer Swelling 40 deg.C, 48Hr

50
Volume change , %
40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40
2FKM 3FKM NBR HNBR
Ethanol concentration ,vol%

2001.11.5.
35
General Properties
Gasoline Formula MW O content (mass%) Density Boiling Point () RVP (kPa) Water Solubility (mass%) Net Calorific Value (kJ/kg) Octane Number (RON)
Regular Premium
Ethanol
Small
Mixture
36
Compositions of evaporative emissions refueling loss

Vehicle A Dispensed Fuel Temp / Ambient Test Temp: 35oC / 40oC Refueling Volume: 10 to 90% of vehicle fuel tank Refueling Rate: 40L/min
C3 C9 Composition (mass%) 100 80 60 40 20 0
(RVP65)
C4+C5 C10
C6 Ethanol
C7 ETBE
C8
BASE
(RVP65)
ETBE8
(RVP65) 37
E3
(RVP65)
E10
(RVP72)
E3

Effects of Ethanol or ETBE Blending in Gasoline On Evaporative Emissions

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Effects of Ethanol or ETBE Blending in Gasoline On Evaporative Emissions

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Effects of Ethanol or ETBE Blending in Gasoline on Evaporative Emissions

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

4. Running Loss emission results

5. Summary & Conclusion

Biomass Fuel (Ethanol)

CH3CH2OC(CH3)3 ETBE (Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether)

RVP (Reid Vapor Pressure) increase with ethanol blending

Explanation about evaporative emissions from automobiles

Hot Soak Loss (HSL)

Diurnal Breathing Loss (DBL Running Loss (RL

4. Running Loss emission results

5. Summary & Conclusion

Test Vehicles Specifications

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

RVP increases by ethanol blend

RVP doesnt change by ETBE blend

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

4. Running Loss emission results

5. Summary & Conclusion

Fuel drain & 10% fill

Temp control & Vehicle soak 10-12h Refueling Test

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

Comparison of refueling loss between Japanese typical passenger vehicles

Effects of Temperature and Refueling Rate on Refueling loss

Vehicle A Refueling Volume: 10 to 90% of vehicle fuel tank

Multiple Regression analysis for refueling loss

4. Running Loss emission results

5. Summary & Conclusion

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

Comparison of running loss (RL) between typical market vehicles

Test fuel: Base Gasoline (RVP65kPa)

Evaporative emission level of vehicles A is very low

Vehicle B (DISI) shows significant high level of RL compared to vehicle A (PFI).

Schematic of canister system

(Evaporative emissions volume)

Characteristics of test vehicles

Vehicle B has disadvantages to control evaporative emissions

RL changes with ethanol blended gasoline

RL results with base gasoline are regarded as 0%

RVP Vehicle A Vehicle B

Comparison of the ETBE blending effects on RL with ethanol effects

RL results with base gasoline are regarded as 0%

Ethanol blend ETBE blend

Vapor Pressure (kPa)

RL emission level of ETBE-blended gasoline is considered to be same as that of base gasoline.

4. Running Loss emission results

5. Summary & Conclusion

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

End of Presentation Thank You for Your Attention

Image of Refueling Loss

Comparison of fuel temperature profile

Fuel Temperature (oC)

30 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

Comparison of purge flow rate

1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

Effect of ethanol- / ETBE-blended gasoline on Refueling loss

2.5 Refueling Loss (g/L) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0

Relationship between RL emission and vapor pressure at final fuel temperature

Comparison of vapor pressure at final fuel temp between vehicle A and C

Japan Petroleum Energy Center

Effect of Ethanol on Compatibility with Metal Materials