20077051 2007-01-1929

Effects of Low-Purge Vehicle Applications and EthanolContaining Fuels on Evaporative Emissions Canister Performance
Reid Clontz, Moe Elum, Peter McCrae, Roger Williams
MeadWestvaco Corp.
Copyright 2007 SAE International

ABSTRACT
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) LEV II regulations require less than 500 mg of vehicle evaporative emissions which, typically requires canister emissions of less than 200 mg. PZEV regulations require less than 350 mg vehicle emissions and zero emissions (< 54 mg) from the fuel system. Activated carbon canister emissions of less than 20 mg are typically required in order to meet PZEV regulations. LEV II canister emissions levels can typically be achieved through a combination of canister design, sufficient purge volumes, use of the appropriate activated carbon or combination of carbons, and in some cases an activated carbon honeycomb.

demonstrates that properties such as total part volume/capacity, part length, and diameter affect honeycomb performance. Manipulation of these properties led to improvements as compared to current part design. Honeycomb configuration was also investigated as a method of improving performance. Multiple honeycombs tested in series also showed improvements over current part design. These performance improvements enable conformance to LEV II and PZEV emissions standards under incrementally reduced purge volume levels. Activated carbon honeycombs were also resistively heated and evaluated under severely limited purge conditions. Test results indicate that resistively heating the honeycomb enables achievement of PZEV emissions levels from the canister under these restrictive conditions. Due to increased interest in and demand for renewable fuels, the effects of ethanol content on the performance of activated carbon canisters and activated carbon honeycombs have been investigated and relationships developed. The effects of fuel vapor pressure on canister emissions were also investigated and differentiated from the effects caused by ethanol content. As expected, the data showed that a strong relationship exists between diurnal vapor generation and fuel volatility regardless of ethanol content. Furthermore, the canister emissions obtained were similar when fuels of equivalent volatility but varying ethanol content were utilized during a simulated diurnal emissions test. The results indicate that the use of a honeycomb can facilitate achievement of LEV II emissions levels from the carbon canister tested under CARB flexible fuel vehicle test conditions. In a previous paper, the impact and control of bleed emissions from evaporative emissions control devices were discussed (1). A technique was developed to

INTRODUCTION
Activated carbon honeycombs are typically required to further reduce canister emissions to levels necessary to meet PZEV emissions regulations. Recent trends in automotive technology have led to a reduction in the amount of air available for regenerating or purging the carbon canister. The new technologies include hybridelectric vehicles and gasoline direct injection engines. Hybrid vehicles have reduced gasoline engine runtime and therefore use less intake air. The gasoline direct injection technology requires less throttle air to operate the engine. Under these reduced purge volume conditions, current activated carbon canister and honeycomb configurations may not be adequate to meet PZEV or even standard LEV II requirements. A relationship between canister purge volume and emissions has been developed. The data show that emissions for both the base canister and the canister with honeycomb attached increase significantly with decreasing purge volume. Relationships between activated carbon honeycomb properties and canister emissions have also been developed. This work

study the level of bleed emissions specifically from canister vent ports. Carbon type, canister design and purge volume were shown to have a significant impact on bleed emissions. Further, the incorporation of a small auxiliary chamber in series with the primary canister was shown to decrease bleed emissions significantly (1). Activated carbon honeycombs, typically incorporated as separate auxiliary chambers, are currently being successfully used to meet LEV II and PZEV regulations in many vehicles. This technology has been shown to be an effective means to control bleed emissions, particularly in systems where large purge volumes are not available. Recent trends in vehicle technology have created questions concerning the performance of the evaporative emissions control canister system. Vehicle technologies such as hybrid powertrains, direct fuel injection, variable engine displacement, and homogeneous charge compression engine technology can have a significant impact on canister performance due to reduced volumes of air available for canister purge. In addition to new developments in power-train technology, increased interest in renewable fuels such as ethanol have also led to questions concerning the performance of activated carbon and activated carbon honeycombs. It should be noted that canister design can have a significant impact on evaporative emissions. The baseline canister used in this study was not a design optimized to control bleed emissions. Thus, the emissions results should primarily be taken on a relative basis. The purpose of this paper was not to investigate the effect of base canister design, but to optimize the use of the activated carbon honeycomb under reduced purge conditions and under conditions of exposure to fuels of different volatility and ethanol content.

Gasoline vapor cycling was performed using automated cycle test equipment that precisely controlled and monitored all testing conditions. Gasoline vapors were generated by bubbling air at a rate of 200 cc/min through 2 liters of certified test fuel heated to 36C. For example, a 62.1 RVP-certified test gasoline typically resulted in a vapor generation rate of approximately 40 g/hr with a hydrocarbon concentration of approximately 50% by volume. The generated vapors were sent to the canister until a breakthrough concentration of 5000 ppm was detected using a flame ionization detector (FID). If breakthrough was not detected after 90 minutes of vapor loading, the liquid gasoline was replaced with a fresh 2liter aliquot. After breakthrough was detected, the canister was purged for a specified volume, typically 400 bed volumes, using dry air at a rate of 22.7 liters per minute. The dwell time between load and purge events was no more than 5 minutes. The ambient temperature of the equipment, including the canister storage compartment, was maintained at 20C during all stages of the testing.

DIURNAL TESTS The diurnal test procedure, referred to as the simulated real-time diurnal test, was used to subject a fuel tank and canister to the CARB diurnal temperature profile within a temperature-controlled environmental chamber. This test procedure was published previously (1). The test was designed to simulate the diurnal portion of the CARB vehicle emissions test procedure in order to generate quantitative emissions data isolated to only the evaporative emissions canister. Pre-conditioning for the simulated real-time diurnal test included multiple gasoline vapor load and purge cycles as described above. Following the gasoline cycles, the canister was loaded with 50% butane vapor at a load rate of 40 g/hr to a 5000 ppm breakthrough as measured by an in-line flame ionization detector in preparation for a two-day diurnal test. After the butane load, the canister was allowed to soak for 60 minutes before purging with a specified volume of air. Following the purge, the canister was soaked at 20C for 24 hours before starting the diurnal test. After the 24-hour soak, the canister was attached to a commercial 60-liter steel fuel tank containing 24 liters (40% fill) of the certified test fuel specified. The fuel temperature was equilibrated to 18.3 C overnight before beginning the test. A Tedlar bag was attached to the atmosphere port of the canister as shown in Figure 1 to collect the hydrocarbon emissions. During the 11-hour temperature ramp from 18.3 C to 40.6 C, the canister weight and emissions were measured several times. During the portion of the diurnal when the temperature decreased, the Tedlar bag was removed in order to allow the system to back purge. During each emissions measurement, the Tedlar bag was removed and filled to a known volume with nitrogen.

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
Bleed emissions were evaluated using a laboratory test method involving an initial canister gasoline preconditioning, butane load, purge followed by a timecontrolled soak, and emissions measurement during a final canister vapor load simulating a diurnal loading event. The canisters used for testing purposes were all the same design and contained 2.1 liters of BAX 1500 carbon. The canisters were used multiple times for repeat testing. To ensure fuel blending was not a concern, each canister was cycled with the appropriate fuel unitl equilibrium was reached. GASOLINE VAPOR AND BUTANE CYCLING

The hydrocarbon concentration was determined by evacuation of the bag contents into a flame ionization detector. Once the concentration and volume were determined, the mass of hydrocarbon was calculated and recorded. The total test procedure incorporating gasoline aging and diurnal testing takes approximately one and a half weeks per canister test. Due to time considerations, only a limited number of repeat tests were performed. Where possible repeats were performed and the nominal test value was reported. The entire two-day CARB diurnal temperature profile was used for canister purge volumes of 75 bed volumes or greater. Figure 2 represents the CARB temperature profile used for the environmental chamber containing the test canister. It should be noted that canister design can have a significant impact on evaporative emissions. The purpose of this paper was not to investigate the effect of base canister design, but to optimize the use of the activated carbon honeycomb under reduced purge conditions. All of the testing was performed with a commercial 2.1-liter carbon canister filled with BAX 1500 automotive grade carbon.

Table 1. List of fuels used to perform diurnal testing.

Environmental Chamber

Canister Tedlar Bag

60-Liter Fuel Tank

Figure 1. Diagram of simulated evaporative emissions test.

CARB

diurnal

45 . Temperature (o C) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 3 6 9 12 Time (hr) 15 18 21 24

RESISTIVELY HEATED ACTIVATED CARBON HONEYCOMB An activated carbon honeycomb was prepared for resistive heating by attaching electrodes to the honeycomb using conductive epoxy. Electrical current was passed through the part using a constant 12-volt power supply. Electrical current was applied only while the canister was being purged. ETHANOL FUEL BLENDS In order to determine the effect of ethanol content and fuel vapor pressure on canister emissions, fuels with a range of ethanol content and volatility were evaluated and are listed in Table 1. RVP (kPa) @ 37.8oC 34.5 48.3 48.3 Ethanol Volumetric Concentratio n (%) 85 85 0

Figure 2. Diagram of CARB Diurnal Temperature Profile.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Previously published results showed that canister evaporative emissions can be controlled by utilizing high-capacity/low-heel wood-based carbons, optimizing canister geometry, using an auxiliary chamber, and increasing purge volume available to the canister (1). This paper concerns the further optimization of bleed control under conditions of reduced purge and also describes results obtained with ethanol containing fuels. EFFECT OF PURGE VOLUME ON CANISTER EMISSIONS The two-day simulated real time diurnal test was used to evaluate the effect of purge volume on canister hydrocarbon emissions. Each test involved preconditioning of a 2.1-liter canister as described above in preparation for the simulated diurnal test. In addition to evaluating base canister performance, canisters were evaluated with activated carbon honeycombs attached to the vent port of the canister. The activated carbon honeycombs are high-carbon content monoliths

Test Fuel - # 1 2 3

Fuel Product Code Haltermann HF032 Haltermann HF087 Haltermann HF004 Haltermann HF087 and 40 CFR 86.1313-04 (FFV) 40 CFR 86.131304 Haltermann HF115

55.2

10

5 6

62.1 62.1

0 10

specifically designed to reduce canister emissions. Two commercially available activated carbon honeycomb parts were evaluated. Dimensions for these two cylindrical parts are 29 mm diameter x 100 mm length and 41 mm diameter x 150 mm length. Both parts had a nominal cell density of 200 cpsi. In order to evaluate the effect of purge volume, the final purge volume before the 24-hour soak and subsequent diurnal test was varied from 200 bed volumes to 75 bed volumes. The purge time was kept constant at 21 minutes, while the purge rate was changed in order to achieve the desired purge volume. The test results are shown in Figure 3.

developmental honeycomb results were compared to results obtained with the 41 mm diameter x 150 mm length commercial part. The developmental 200 cpsi honeycomb parts evaluated are listed in Table 2.
Diameter (mm) Length (mm) 29 41 41 41 41 50 100 50 100 150 200 150 Part No. 1 2 3 4 5 6

500 . 450 Day 2 Emissions (mg) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 75 100 150 200 Bed Volumes of Purge Base Canister 29x100-200 41x150-200

Table 2. Honeycomb sizes evaluated. The honeycombs were evaluated using the configurations shown in Table 3.

Test Configuration Part No. A B C D 4 2 5 6

Number 1 each 3 each 1 each 1 each

Orientation single series single single

Figure 3. Effect of Purge volume with base canister and commercially available honeycombs. The data in Figure 3 demonstrates the strong relationship between purge volume and canister emissions. The activated carbon honeycombs significantly reduced canister emissions with purge volumes of 100 bed volumes and greater. In addition, the larger 41 mm x 150 mm honeycomb exhibited lower emissions levels than the 29 mm x 100 mm honeycomb at purge volumes of less than 200 bed volumes. Due to the strong relationship between purge volume and emissions, as purge volume is decreased, emissions increase. As a result, there is a point for each of the commercially available carbon honeycombs at which purge volume will be insufficient to meet either PZEV or LEV II emissions targets.

Table 3. Honeycomb test configurations.

Results from the simulated two-day diurnal emissions test are presented in Figure 4.

180 . 160 D ay 2 Em is s ions (m g) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

OPTIMIZATION OF CARBON HONEYCOMB PROPERTIES FOR LOW PURGE VOLUME APPLICATIONS Alternative Honeycomb Geometry The commercially available activated carbon honeycombs evaluated with low levels of purge (<= 75 bed volumes) showed significantly-increased emissions during the two-day simulated diurnal testing. Additional 200 cpsi developmental honeycomb configurations were evaluated using 75 bed volumes of purge to regenerate the canister and honeycomb before the diurnal test. The

41x150-200 Config. A

41x(3)50-200 Config. B

41x200-200 Config. C

50x150-200 Config. D

Figure 4. Summary of emissions results obtained with alternate honeycomb configurations with 75 bed volumes of purge. The emissions data show that the developmental honeycomb Configurations (B-D) reduced emissions as compared to the baseline Configuration A (41x150). These improvements ranged from 32% to 60% depending on honeycomb geometry and size.

Honeycomb Configuration B (three 41x50 parts in series and rotated 45) showed a 32% improvement over the baseline Configuration A. This performance improvement is assumed to be the result of flow redistribution and/or increased tortuosity of the flow path. Honeycomb Configurations C (41x200) and D (50x150) showed approximately 45% and 60% improvement as compared to the baseline Configuration A. Both of these honeycomb configurations have more total working capacity due to their larger size as compared to the baseline honeycomb. In addition, Configuration C has a longer flow path for vapors diffusing out of the main canister. Results obtained with Configurations C and D confirm earlier data indicating that increased diffusional flow path length and/or total part capacity have an impact on bleed emissions (2). This earlier work was performed with 27 mm diameter honeycombs of varying length at higher purge volumes of 150 bed volumes. The results from the earlier work are presented in Figure 5.

Resistive Heating of the Honeycomb to Reduce Canister Emissions Resistive heating of activated carbon honeycombs has been shown to improve performance over baseline activated carbon honeycomb performance. This is particularly effective at low purge volume levels because an un-heated honeycomb may fail to achieve desired performance. In order to demonstrate this concept, the two-day simulated diurnal testing procedure described earlier was repeated by resistively heating an activated carbon honeycomb during the preconditioning purge. This is possible with MeadWestvaco activated carbon honeycombs due to their electrical properties. The electrical conditions and temperatures achieved during the purge cycles are summarized in Table 4 followed by a summary of the results in Figure 6.

200 . 180 Day 2 Emis s ions (mg) 160 140 120 100 80 60 20 0 No HCA 50 mm 75 mm Honeycomb Length 100 mm 150 mm
Day 2 Emissions (mg) .

Heated HCA Configuration HCA Size 41x150-200 o Purge Air Temp ( C) 70 - 90 Max HCA Temp (oC) 200 Current (amps) @ 12v 1.8 -2.2

Table 4. cycle.

Heated honeycomb conditions during purge

40

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 50 75 100 150 200 Heated 41x150-200 Baseline 41x150-200

Figure 5. Results obtained with 27 mm diameter honeycombs evaluated with 150 bed volumes of purge.

The results obtained with the developmental honeycomb configurations show that the following changes to the baseline part improve emissions performance. 1. Increased honeycomb working capacity 2. Increased diffusional flow path length 3. Flow redistribution 4. Increased tortuosity Further work is planned in order to better understand the reasons for these performance improvements and to develop a honeycomb with more robust performance at low purge volumes.

Bed Volumes of Purge

Figure 6. Summary of emissions results obtained with heated honeycomb configuration. Figure 6 shows that emissions measured with the heated activated carbon honeycomb were lower as compared to the non-heated honeycomb. The improvement in performance was most dramatic at lower purge volumes. Resistively heating the honeycomb allowed emissions of less than 20 mg for all levels of purge evaluated. These emissions levels are significant because they correlate well with performance required for PZEV compliance on vehicles. The results obtained with the resistively-heated activated carbon honeycomb are due to a more complete removal of hydrocarbon heel from both the activated carbon honeycomb and the

portion of the canister carbon bed closest to the atmosphere port.

Loading g/g Carbon

1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 Concentration (ppm) Adsorption Desorption

EFFECT OF CARBON HONEYCOMB ON CANISTER WORKING CAPACITY As a result of testing for canister bleed emissions performance, it was discovered that activated carbon honeycombs have a significant positive impact on diurnal canister working capacity. The effect of the activated carbon honeycomb on canister gasoline working capacity is summarized in Figure 7.

Figure 8. BAX 1500 Butane Equilibrium Isotherm.

180 . 160 140 C anis ter G W C (g)
Loading g/g Carbon

+11% +4%

+13%

+19%
1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Adsorption Desorption

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 No HCA 29x100-200 41x150-200 50x150-200 Heated 41x150

0.00 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 Concentration (ppm)

Figure 7. Effect of activated carbon honeycomb on canister working capacity. The baseline gasoline working capacity of 138 g presented in Figure 6 was obtained with a 2.1-liter canister filled with BAX 1500 without an activated carbon honeycomb attached. An increase in overall canister working capacity of 4% to 19% was demonstrated with the addition of an activated carbon honeycomb. The increased capacity was proportional to the honeycomb size and therefore the capacity of the honeycomb to adsorb hydrocarbon vapors. EFFECT OF ETHANOL FUEL BLENDS ON CARBON BED PERFORMANCE Adsorption of Ethanol The adsorption and desorption isotherms for Ethanol and Butane on BAX 1500 at 25C, is shown in Figures 8 and 9.

Figure 9. BAX 1500 Ethanol Equilibrium Isotherm. Comparisons of these figures clearly show that, at equal concentrations, ethanol is more readily adsorbed than butane, the standard used to evaluate automotive carbons (3, 4). More importantly, due to the mesoporous nature of MeadWestvaco automotive carbons, the desorption curves show that ethanol and butane are readily removed from the carbon pores. Ethanol Fuel Blends There are two potential ways for ethanol to be present in fuels: 1. Splash Blending. This is the straight addition of alcohol to a non-alcohol-based gasoline. This has been shown to significantly affect the vapor pressure of the resultant mix as shown in Figure 10 (5).

Reid Vapor Pressure @ 37.8o C (kPa) .

80 70

. 40 Average Daily Vapor Load (g) 35 30 25 20 15 10 20 25 30 35 40 45 RVP (kPa) 50 55 60 65 70 Fuel - 1 Fuel - 3 Fuel - 2 Fuel - 4

Fuel - 5

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Ethanol Concentration (%)

Figure 10: Effect on Vapor Pressure by ethanol addition to 9.0 RVP Fuel Figure 10 shows that splash blending of ethanol up to approximately 40% will cause an increase in the vapor pressure of the resultant blend. 2. Blending to a fixed Vapor Pressure. This is the addition of an ethanol to gasoline fuel that has been altered so that the resultant solution has the same vapor pressure as the unblended gasoline. For example, in the case of Fuel - 6, the volatility of the non-ethanol components of the fuel is reduced to compensate for this effect of adding ethanol. Regardless of the approach used, the most important property of the fuel blend with respect to activated carbon canister performance is the vapor pressure. The vapor pressure, rather than ethanol content, determines the resultant diurnal vapor generation from the fuel tank and therefore the required working capacity of the carbon canister. Diurnal Vapor Generation A range of fuels was tested for vapor generation rates by following the diurnal test procedure of subjecting a fuel tank and canister to the entire two-day CARB diurnal temperature profile as described earlier. The RVP of the fuels tested ranged from 34.5 to 62.1 kPa, with an ethanol content of 0 to 85%. The diurnal vapor generation results are shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Diurnal vapor generation of fuels tested As would be expected, this figure shows a strong relationship between RVP and vapor generation. More importantly, it shows that fuels of equivalent RVP will generate similar total amounts of diurnal vapors regardless of the ethanol content. For example, on the average Fuel -2 generated 27.5 grams of vapor compared to an average of 29.7 grams for Fuel - 3 with an equivalent RVP. While similar total vapor generation amounts have been observed for fuels with similar RVP, it is understood that the fuels may have different volatilities at the various temperatures experienced during the CARB diurnal temperature profile. Based on these results, if a canister is properly sized for use with a 62.1 RVP fuel, it should be adequately sized for ethanol blends of an equal or lower RVP. EFFECT OF ETHANOL FUEL BLENDS ON HONEYCOMB PERFORMANCE Initially, simulated diurnal testing was conducted using standard Fuel - 5 and Fuel - 3 as specified by CARB procedures for non-Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) to establish baseline performance. Results obtained using the 2.1-liter canister filled with BAX 1500 both with and without a standard 41x150 honeycomb (Configuration A) attached under these conditions were compared to those obtained by cycling with the same Fuel - 5 followed by a two day diurnal using Fuel - 2. The results are compared in Figure 12.
BAX 1500 w / 41x150 HCA 180 160 140 Day 2 Emis sions (mg) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Cyc Fuel - 5 / DBL Fuel - 3 Cyc Fuel - 5 / DBL Fuel - 2 . BAX 1500

Figure 12. Diurnal emissions for equivalent RVP E0 and E85 fuel blends with 150 bed volumes of purge. Figure 12 shows that within the accuracy of the testing (+/- 7.5 mg), use of an E85 fuel blend rather than the standard CARB Fuel - 3 during the simulated diurnal test does not have a significant impact on emissions. Based on this data, bleed emissions appear to be independent of ethanol content for both the main canister and the honeycomb. In addition, the results show that the use of a standard, commercially-available activated carbon honeycomb (Configuration A) makes it possible to reduce canister emissions to PZEV levels. The simulated diurnal testing was repeated by performing preconditioning cycling with the CARB Fuel 2 mileage accumulation fuel followed by a diurnal with the fuel type specified for evaporative emissions testing of flexible fuel vehicles, Fuel - 4. These results were compared to those obtained when a standard Fuel - 5 was used for the two-day diurnal test following preconditioning cycles with Fuel -2 mileage accumulation fuel. The results are shown in Figure 13.
BAX 1500 w / 41x150 HCA 300 . 250 D ay 2 Em is s ions (m g) 200 150 100 50 0 Cyc Fuel - 2 / DBL Fuel - 4 Cyc Fuel - 2 / DBL Fuel - 5 BAX 1500

achievement of target emissions levels under the reduced purge conditions: Higher capacity honeycombs Longer diffusional path length Flow redistribution Resistively-heated honeycombs

Further work is planned in order to gain a better understanding about the relative importance of diffusional flow path length and honeycomb capacity. With regards to trends in renewable fuels and in particular ethanol blends, the following was shown MeadWestvaco mesoporous automotive carbons readily adsorb and desorb ethanol Based on the range of fuels tested, ethanol content does not adversely affect the carbon canister performance Canister emissions are driven primarily by the fuel volatility rather than ethanol content MeadWestvaco commercially available honeycombs can enable FFVs to attain LEV II compliance.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their sincere appreciation to Joe W. Snead, who aided in the design, operation and maintenance of the equipment used in the study. Dr. James R. Miller, who provided support and encouragement.

Figure 13. Diurnal emissions for Fuel - 4 and Fuel 5 with 150 bed volumes of purge. The results provide further evidence that emissions are independent of ethanol content for either the main canister or the main canister in combination with the honeycomb. More importantly, the results show that the use of a standard, commercially available activated carbon honeycomb (Configuration A) makes it possible to reduce canister emissions to LEV II levels for FFVs.

REFERENCES
1. R. S. Williams and C. Reid Clontz, Impact and Control of Canister Bleed Emissions, SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-0733, March 2001. 2. R. S. Williams, MeadWestvaco, Evaporative Emissions Seminar, 2002. 3. Annual Book of ASTM Standards 2006, Volume 15.01, ASTM International, ISBN 0-8031-4224-2, West Conshohocken, PA. 4. H. R. Johnson and R. S. Williams, Performance of Activated Carbon Canisters in Evaporative Loss Control Systems, SAE Technical Paper 902119, October 1990. 5. Robert L. Furey, Volatility Characteristics of Gasoline-Alcohol and Gasoline-Ether Fuel Blends, SAE Technical Paper 852116.

CONCLUSION
Recent trends in automotive technology have led to a reduction in the amount of air available for regenerating or purging the carbon canister. Under these reduced purge volume conditions, current activated carbon canister and honeycomb configurations may not be adequate to meet PZEV or even standard LEV II requirements. Improvements over the current honeycomb technology such as the following facilitate

CONTACT

MeadWestvaco Specialty Chemicals Division P.O. Box 140, Washington Street Covington, VA 24426 800-336-2211

DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS

BAX 1500: 2mm pelletized MWV automotive carbon with an ASTM BWC of 14.8 g/dl minimum Bed Volumes: Volume of air used to purge the canister divided by volume of carbon in main canister volume excluding volume of honeycomb CARB: California Air Resources Board CPSI: Nominal cells per square inch Cyc: Abbreviation for cycled for simulated driving cycles used to precondition evaporative emission canister DBL: Diurnal Bleed Loss E-10S: Splash Blended Fuel using 62.1 RVP (E0) and pure ethanol to 10% Ethanol Concentration, uncontrolled vapor pressure E85: 85% ethanol blend FFV 10%: Flex Fuel Vehicle 10%, Fuel blended to 10% ethanol concentration using 48.3 RVP E-85 and 62.1 RVP (E0) GWC: Gasoline Working Capacity HCA: Hydrocarbon Adsorber or Honeycomb LEV: Low Emission Vehicle PZEV: Partial Zero Emission Vehicle RVP: Reid Vapor Pressure at 37.8C (kPa) SHED: Sealed Housing Evaporative Determination Tedlar : DuPonts registered Polyvinyl Fluoride products that are chemically inert