Exhaust Emissions Light Duty-PMP-2017/2018 Sub23nm Round Robin Tero Lähde

Current status All European laboratories (except 3rd JRC measurement) have conducted their measurements Equipment finally returned to JRC US, Japanese and Chinese laboratories have expressed their interest to participate in the RR Lets talk about this at the end of the presentation

PMP 23nm (In-Lab systems, evaporation tube) PN23 from all European labs of the campaign COLD start, between lab. Var 22 % Labs 3, 7 deviate over 22 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 16 % Labs 3, 7 deviate over 16 % from mean In general, PMP23 data can be considered consistent Background PCRF NB! Work with outliers Still in progress

Lab 5 with background problem One of the labs had a backgroung problem Some uncontrolled maintenance BG was not constant over the campaign/cycles Blue graph calculated: Red graph – min(Red graph) After reduction qualitatively inline with CS-instruments However, Excluded from comparisons

Lab 2 with PCRF problem in PMP Problem seen most clearly in PMP10 Suspected that PMP-system was not adjusted for extra flow of PMP10 CPCs PMP10 excluded from comparisons PMP23 to be decided

Two d50=10 nm CPCs at PMP sampling The CPCs were comparabe The TSI10 had some issues Maintenance due flow problems TSI10 used after CS2 to verify results CS2 had internal leakage (maintenance) AM10 used here as PMP10 CPC COLD and HOT start WLTC-phases R=0.999

PMP 23nm (In-Lab systems, evaporation tube) Lab 5, with BG problem here excluded PMP23/ WLTC HOT COLD CoVr 0.09 0.08 CoVL 0.16 0.22 COVR 0.18 0.23 Variability within labs (repeatability), CoVr In-lab CoVr, HOT ≈ COLD start Variability between labs, CoVL CoVL, higher for COLD than HOT START Reproducibility coefficient of variation in labs, CoVR CoVR, higher for COLD than HOT START PCRF BG

CS1,23nm (catalytic stripper) BG COLD start, Coefficient of Var 14 % Labs 3, 4, 6 deviate over 14 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 7 % Only Lab 5 deviates over 7 % from mean Better Reproducibility (COVR) than PMP Lower (between lab) CoVL than PMP In-Lab variabilities, CoVr, CS1≈PMP CS123/ WLTC PMP23/ WLTC HOT COLD CoVr 0.10 0.06 0.09 0.08 CoVL 0.07 0.14 0.16 0.22 COVR 0.12 0.18 0.23

CS2, 23nm (catalytic stripper) COLD start, between lab. Var 27 % Labs 4, 6 deviate over 27 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 18 % Labs 4, 6,7 deviate over 18 % from mean CoVL and CoVR, highest for CS2 BG CS1,23 PMP23 CS2,23 HOT COLD CoVr 0.10 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.07 CoVL 0.14 0.16 0.22 0.18 0.27 COVR 0.12 0.23 0.28

PN23 combined When normalized to overall average (100) 23 nm Averages for COLD start were PN23(PMP)=103, PN23(CS1)=101 PN23(CS2)=96 for HOT start PN23(PMP)=108, PN23(CS1)=97 PN23(CS2)=95 Lab 5, excluded PCRF-issues PMP Internal leakage CS2 Background

PMP 10nm (AM10) COLD start, between lab. Var 14 % Excluded Lab 5, with BG problem Lab 2, PMP, PCRF problem COLD start, between lab. Var 14 % Lab 6 deviates over 14 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 14 % In general, PMP10 data seem consistent. PMP10/ WLTC HOT COLD CoVr 0.08 0.15 CoVL 0.14 COVR 0.16 0.20

CS1, 10nm (internal) COLD start, Coefficient of Var 15 % Excluded Lab 5, with BG problem COLD start, Coefficient of Var 15 % Labs 1, 3 and 6 deviate over 15 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 9 % Only Lab6 deviates over 9 % from mean Better Reproducibility (COVR) than PMP Lower between lab CoVL at HOT than PMP Higher between lab CoVL at COLD than PMP In-Lab variabilities, CoVr, a bit lower for CS1 than PMP CS110/ WLTC PMP10/ WLTC HOT COLD CoVr 0.08 0.12 0.15 CoVL 0.09 0.14 COVR 0.19 0.16 0.20

CS2, 10nm (internal) COLD start, Coefficient of Var 26 % Excluded:Lab 5, with BG problem, Lab 3, CS2 leakage CS2, 10nm (internal) COLD start, Coefficient of Var 26 % Lab 4 deviates over 26 % from mean HOT start, between lab. Var 23 % Only Lab6 deviates over 23 % from mean Lower between lab CoVL and Reproducibility (COVR) than CS1, or PMP CS1,10 PMP10 CS2,10 HOT COLD CoVr 0.08 0.12 0.15 0.10 0.07 CoVL 0.09 0.14 0.26 0.28 COVR 0.19 0.16 0.20 0.27 0.29

PN10 combined PMP 102 CS1 103 CS2 94 PMP 97 CS1 103 CS2 100

Summary, In-Lab variation In-Lab variation, CoVr PN23 CoVr was between 0.09-0.13 (COLD) and 0.06 -0.08 (HOT) for all the instruments The In-Lab repeatability was good PN10 CoVr was between 0.07-0.15 (COLD) and 0.08-0.10 (HOT) for all the instruments The highest Coefficient of variation (COLD) was found for PMP-instrument the PMP PN10 instrument was external and transported from –lab-to-lab

Summary, Variation between Labs Inter-Lab Coefficient of variation, CoVL PN23 CoVL was between 0.07-0.18 (COLD) and 0.12-0.27 (HOT) for all the instruments Inter-lab variation was higher for HOT start than for COLD start WLTCs The lowest CoVL was for CS1 (0.07,0.12) while for PMP and CS2 CoVL was higher. The PMP PN23 instrument was expected to vary between the laboratories while CS2 was relatively high due to issues PN10 CoVL was between 0.14-0.28 (COLD) and 0.09-0.26 (HOT) for all the instruments The highest CoVL (both COLD, HOT start) was found for CS2-instrument The Inter-Lab variation, CoVL, was practically on the same level for PN10 and PN23

Summary, Reproducibility Reproducibility, CoVR PN23 CoVR was between 0.12-0.22 (COLD) and 0.14-0.28 (HOT) for all the instruments The lowest CoVL was for CS1 (0.12,0.14) , the highest for CS2 (0.22-0.28). PN10 CoVR was between 0.19-0.29 (COLD) and 0.12-0.27 (HOT) for all the instruments The lowest CoVR was for CS1 (0.19,0.12) , the highest for CS2 (0.27-0.29).

Conclusions The results showed that the reproducibility of the PMP 10 nm measurements remains the same as with the 23 nm levels (20-23%) The same conclusion was drawn from both Golden instruments The reproducibility with the best performing instrument was 16-19% for both 23nm and 10 nm measurements (the worst 28-29%) The results did not show at this point the necessity of the catalytic stripper for this vehicle 23nm, COLD PMP CS1 CS2 r 8% 6% 7% L 22% 14% 27% R 23% 16% 28% 10nm, COLD PMP CS1 CS2 r 15% 12% 7% L 14% 28% R 20% 19% 29% 23nm, HOT PMP CS1 CS2 r 9% 10% 13% L 16% 7% 18% R 12% 22% 10nm, HOT PMP CS1 CS2 r 8% 10% L 14% 9% 26% R 16% 12% 27%

Problems Some instrument transportation was delayed because of customs problems. Solved, but took some months of extra time. The car was requested for maintenance and the oil was changed. JRC will check if there is comparability issues after the oil change. Now the car is being aged and will be measured afterwards All European measurements (except 3rd JRC) already conducted Continuation of the RR outside Europe? Comparability issues between Europe and others if continued with current vehicle GPF RR?

Any questions? Tero Lähde, Barouch Gieckhaskiel, Giorgio Martini Tero.LAHDE@ec.europa.eu, +39 0 332 785 449 Barouch.GIECHASKIEL@ec.europa.eu, +39 0 332 785 312, Giorgio.MARTINI@ec.europa.eu, +39 0 332 789 293