1. Task 3 results and Conclusions 15/10/2014
Organization and implementation of a trial on energy and environmental performance of E20 capable cars
Task 3 results and Conclusions
15/10/2014
IFPEN : Maira Alves Fortunato, Laurie Starck, Nicolas Jeuland
SNPAA : Nicolas Kurtsoglou
Tereos : Paul Jacquelin
ePURE : Emmanuel Desplechin

2. Agenda Objectives Fuel Matrix formulation
Fuels physical-chemical characterization
Emissions evaluation:
Vehicles
Driving cycles : NEDC and WLTC
Regulated pollutants
Non-regulated pollutants
Conclusions

3. Objective
In the context of the Task 3 of the ePURE/ CEN call for tender
Measurement of the pollutant emissions (regulated and non regulated) and fuel consumption on dedicated vehicles when running with different ethanolated fuels (towards E10+ blends)

4. Agenda Fuel Matrix formulation Objectives
Fuels physical-chemical characterization
Emissions evaluation:
Vehicles
Driving cycles : NEDC and WLTC
Regulated pollutants
Non-regulated pollutants
Conclusions

5. Fuel matrix: proposal  real (1/3)
4 fuels studied
Reference fuel : EN228 E10 gasoline with a targeted vapor pressure of 60 kPa and a targeted RON of 95  Fuel for standard test
E20sb : E10 (Fuel 1) + 10% volume of ethanol formulated by splash blending
E25sb : E10 (Fuel 1) + 15% volume of ethanol formulated by splash blending
E20-95 : 20% volume of ethanol with a targeted RON of 95
Target RON
RON obtained

6. Fuel matrix (2/3) Same gasoline base (E10) for E20sb and E25sb
MTBE and ETBE=0,000%mass
* Summer grade for French case

7. Key point about the fuel matrix formulation (3/3)
With a simple arithmetic rule, the addition of 20% vol of ethanol in a E0-RON91 base gives a RON of around 95 for the final blend
But real measurement on CFR engine gives 98.9 for E0-RON % vol of ethanol
Boost effect on RON of the addition of ethanol
Not a linear rule
Dependent on the chemistry of the gasoline base

8. Agenda Fuels physical-chemical characterization Emissions evaluation:
Objectives
Fuel Matrix formulation
Fuels physical-chemical characterization
Emissions evaluation:
Vehicles
Driving cycles : NEDC and WLTC
Regulated pollutants
Non-regulated pollutants
Conclusions

9. Fuel matrix – distillation (1/9)
No significant difference is observed for <40% and >80%vol distillated
Step in the distillation curve due to the addition of ethanol as expected since boiling point of ethanol is 78°C: E25sb>E20sb=E20RON95 >E10
All fuels respect the EN228 limits summer grade for French case

10. Fuel matrix – E70 (2/9)
Not the same gasoline base
All the blends are into EN228 limits summer grade for French case

11. Fuel matrix – Vapor Pressure (3/9)
Slight decrease of vapor pressure from E5 (58.2 kPa) to E25 (54.9 kPa)  Classical evolution
All fuels respect the EN228 limits summer grade for French case

12. Fuel matrix – RON and MON vs ethanol (4/9)
E20RON95
All RON values are 1 point higher than the desired target
RON values increase linearly by increasing ethanol quantity
RON is 2,5 points higher for E20 than for E10
RON increases from 98 up to 99 from E20 to E25
MON values are quite constant from E10 to E25
All fuels respect EN228 limit summer grade for French case

13. Fuel matrix – Energy content in volume variation (5/9)
Energy content volume variation is about 5,1% taking E10 as reference
The decrease of energy content is linear when increasing ethanol content

14. Fuel matrix – Energy content in mass variation (6/9)
-6,45%
-5,98%
Energy content volume variation is about 6,45% taking E10 as reference and 5,98% taking E5 as reference
The variation is higher comparing to NHV in volume
The decrease of energy content is linear when increasing ethanol content

15. Fuel matrix – Density (7/9)
Slightly Linear increase from E10 to E25 as expected since ethanol density is higher than pure gasoline
All fuels respect EN228 limits summer grade for French case

16. Chemical Composition (8/9)
By increasing ethanol content, the quantity of olefins, aromatics and saturates decrease due to the dilution factor

17. Benzene (9/9)
The amount of benzene decreases slightly by increasing ethanol quantity, probably due to the dilution factor

18. Fuels formulation : conclusion
Fuels E10, E20sb and E25sb have the same gasoline base
E10 and E20RON95 have the same RON
Fuel E20RON95 was formulated to have a RON of 95, it does not present a significant difference in terms of vapor pressure, density and energy content than the E20sb
Fuel E20RON95 presents lower aromatics and higher saturate content than E20sb
There is an interesting difference between RON values of E20sb and E20RON95, it can have an impact on vehicles tests results
All fuels formulated in this study (E10  E25 by sb) are in the limit of EN228 specification summer grade for French case

19. Agenda Emissions evaluation: Conclusions Objectives
Fuel Matrix formulation
Fuels physical-chemical characterization
Emissions evaluation:
Vehicles
Driving cycles : NEDC and WLTC
Regulated pollutants
Non-regulated pollutants
Conclusions

20. 1.4 TSI 140 ACT BlueMotion Technology Port injector (indirect)
Brand
Peugeot
Volkswagen
Category
208
Golf 7
Serie
1.2 VTi 82ch BVM5
1.4 TSI 140 ACT BlueMotion Technology
Empty weight (kg)
1050
1296
ENGINE
Max power kW (ch)
60 (82)
103 (140)
Ratio power to weight W/kg 57 79
Engine size (cm3)
1199
1395
Cylinder 3 4
Max torque Nm (m.kg)
118
250
Injection type
Port injector (indirect)
GDI
Supercharger -
yes
Polluting level
Euro 5
CO2 emissions 80/1268/CE
CO2 (g/km)
104
109
Urban (en l/100 km)
5.5
5.8
Extra Urban (en l/100 km)
3.9
4.2
Combined (en l/100 km)
4.5
4.7
POLLUTANTS EMISSIONS
CO (mg/km)
691
646
HC (mg/km) 66 41
NOx (mg/km) 27 32
Vehicle
E20 COMPATIBLE VEHICLE
Peugeot VTi 82ch BVM5
Volkswagen Golf Nouvelle 1.4 TSI 140 ACT BlueMotion Technology
References - - -

21. Driving cycles NEDC cycle: current official European cycle
WLTC cycle: future official "world" cycle (version 5)
Vehicle preparation for the tests according to current legislation
Measurement of regulated and unregulated pollutant emissions: CO, HC, NOx, particulate (mass and number), fuel consumption, benzene, CO2
Repeatability calculated on 2 cycles (CO2 base). If the deviation was too large (>1%), a 3rd cycle was done.

22. Driving cycles Source: Delphi booklet 2013-2014 Emissions Unit
Euro 5 legislation
Euro 6 legislation HC
mg/km 68
NOx 60 CO
1000 PM
4,5
PN#
nb/km -
6,0E+11*
*IDE vehicles are authorized until 6E+12 particles number/km

23. RESULTS

24. CO emissions
Addition of ethanol does not present a significant effect over low CO emissions (Peugeot and Golf NEDC cycles and Golf WLTC)
For high CO emission, Peugeot WLTC cycle, the impact of ethanol addition is important (~20%of CO emission reduction from E5 to E20sb)
Peugeot at WLTC cycles have higher CO emissions than EURO 5 and EURO6 limits for E5 and E10sb fuels
All fuels and cars at NEDC cycle and Golf WLTC respect EURO 5 and EURO 6 standards

25. HC emissions Impact of cycles over HC emissions: WLTC > NEDC
Not significant impact of engine technology
Impact of ethanol content is observed only for Golf both cycles
All fuels, vehicles and cycles respect EURO 5 and EURO 6 standards (0.068g/km)

26. NOx emissions No significant difference for both cars and cycles
NOx emissions increases from E5 to E25 for all cycles and both cars
All fuels, vehicles and cycles respect EURO 5 and EURO 6 standards (0.06g/km)

27. Particles number and mass
The tendency for NEDC and WLTC is the same
Particle number /Km is considerably reduced for Golf during both cycles from E5 to E25
Particle number and mass decreases from E5 to E25 for both vehicles and cycles
All fuels, vehicles and cycles respect EURO5 and EURO 6 standards (0.0045g/km and 6E+11nb/km*)
*IDE vehicles are authorized until 6E+12 particles number/km

28. CO2 emissions For Golf, CO2 emissions is constant during both cycles
For Peugeot, CO2 emissions decreases, especially for NEDC cycle
Except for E25, CO2 emissions decreases around 3%-5% for both cars and cycles

29. Fuel Consumption
Increase of Fuel consumption when adding ethanol for both Peugeot and Golf cars and both cycles

30. Benzene at exhaust gases
Positive impact of ethanol on benzene with reduction of emissions from E5 to E25sb for both vehicles and cycles

31. Agenda Conclusions Objectives Fuel Matrix formulation
Fuels physical-chemical characterization
Emissions evaluation:
Vehicles
Driving cycles : NEDC and WLTC
Regulated pollutants
Non-regulated pollutants
Conclusions

32. Conclusion : Fuels formulation
All fuels formulated in this study (E10  E25 by sb) are in the limit of EN228 specification summer grade for French case

33. Conclusion: Euro 5 and Euro 6 limits

34. Conclusion : Emissions CO, HC, NOx and particles
Test conditions:
4 fuels tested: E10 E25
2 cycles WLTC and NEDC
2 vehicles : 2 technologies  Direct or Indirect injection
NEDC cycle: vehicles and fuels are in the limit of Euro 5 & Euro 6
WLTC cycle : both cars respect Euro 5 and Euro 6 for fuels >E20
CO : positive impact of ethanol for high CO emissions
HC : impact of cycle NEDC > WLTC, no significant impact of ethanol
NOx : slightly increase of emissions with ethanol content increase
Particle number and mass: positive impact of ethanol for both vehicles and cycles;
Particle mass: all cycles and vehicles respect Euro 6 standards

35. Conclusion : CO2 and Fuel consumption
Test conditions:
4 fuels tested: E10 E25
2 cycles WLTC and NEDC
2 vehicles : 2 technologies  Direct or Indirect injection
CO2 : positive impact specially for Peugeot (up to 7 gCO2/km); for Golf7, positive impact from E5 to E10 (3 gCO2/km)
impact of engine technology: Golf presents higher CO2 emission for both cycles
Fuel consumption: Impact of ethanol with linear increase of consumption for both cycles and vehicles

36. Conclusion: Benzene Test conditions:
4 fuels tested: E10 E25
2 cycles WLTC and NEDC
2 vehicles : 2 technologies  Direct or Indirect injection
Impact of ethanol content with decrease of benzene concentration into exhaust gases

37. www.ifpenergiesnouvelles.com 37
Renewable energies | Eco-friendly production | Innovative transport | Eco-efficient processes | Sustainable resources 37

38. Experimental set-up
Roller bench technical characteristics

39. Experimental set-up

40. Benzene
Impact of benzene content (left) and aromatics content (right) of fuels over benzene exhaust emissions