Sep 21, 2007 ... 30%, of the vehicles out of the entire 233 vehicle data set had ... ASM 5015,
ASM2525, and two-speed idle tests using the BAR90 ...... 8/30/2004. P. 88. 0.3.
665. 53. 0.3. 607. 2000. Chrysler. Sebring ... Mustang Convertible.
The Valley CAN Tune In &Tune Up 2006 Program Bakersfield, California
Sponsored by Valley CAN With Assistance from The Advanced Transportation Technology and Energy Initiative Center Bakersfield College and California Bureau of Automotive Repair Breathe Easier Program
Douglas R. Lawson September 21, 2007
-1INTRODUCTION The Valley CAN Tune In & Tune Up 2006 (TI&TU) Program was conducted in Bakersfield, California on Saturday, March 25, 2006. The objectives of the Program were to use remote sensing to quickly identify high-emitting vehicles in need of repairs and to determine the cost-effectiveness of the 2006 Bakersfield TI&TU Program. Relationships established between Valley CAN and the Advanced Transportation Technology and Energy Initiative (ATTEi) Center at Bakersfield College and the State Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) contributed to the program’s success. With the assistance of publicity on the radio and other means, approximately 500 vehicle owners participated in the program. Motorists were asked to drive past two remote sensing devices (RSD) in series, which were operated by staff from the BAR. Approximately 500 vehicles were driven past the remote sensors. RSD readings were made for carbon monoxide (CO), exhaust hydrocarbons (HC), and nitric oxide (NO), the pollutants of interest in this program. Remote sensing measurements were performed by BAR staff between 8:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. The remote sensing high emitter cutpoints for CO, HC, and NOx were 5%, 1000 ppm, and 1000 ppm, respectively. A small, but not quantified number, of motorists received repair vouchers even though their RSD emission readings were not proven to exceed the BAR high emitter cutpoints. In these cases, it was judged likely that these cars were high emitters, based in part on paperwork showing that they had previously failed the Smog Check inspection. TI&TU Program staff provided repair vouchers worth up to $500 in repair costs to 380 motorists of vehicles that participated in the Program. Some vouchers were given to motorists who requested them based on other evidence that their car was a high emitter, even though their vehicles did not have RSD readings that exceeded the high emitter cutpoints. Two hundred thirty-three of the 380 vouchers were redeemed for Smog Check-related repairs at One Stop Smog and Auto Care Centers in Bakersfield. In addition to the RSD testing, motorists were directed to an on-site diagnostic testing station, where ATTEi students from Bakersfield College provided written information regarding possible causes of their vehicles’ emission problems. At that station, underhood inspections were conducted to provide vehicle owners with more information regarding the condition of their vehicle. The following sections describe data collected during the 2006 Bakersfield TI&TU Program and emission reductions resulting from repairs to the high-emitting vehicles. REMOTE SENSING DATA Figure 1 is a scatter plot of valid CO remote sensing data for the 370 vehicles with valid readings as reported by the BAR. The data show excellent correlation between the two remote sensors, with a small number of vehicles having a high reading on one RSD and a low value on the other. Figure 2 shows the exhaust HC data for the 370 vehicles from both RSDs. The graph on the right is an expanded scale for lower value readings displayed in the left graph of Figure 2. Figure 2 shows a bias but very good correlation for recorded HC values between the two RSDs, likely due to differences in calibration between the two sensors. Even though there is a bias between the two sensors, this is not a problem in identifying the highest-emitting vehicles, in that the highest readings are the ones of most interest, regardless of calibration. ARB staff demonstrated in studies in 1989 and 1991 that the remote sensors are accurate to within ±5% and ±15% for CO and HC, respectively, when calibrated
-2properly (Lawson et al. 1990 and Ashbaugh et al. 1992). Figure 3 displays the valid NO emissions readings from the two RSDs, with the graph on the right depicting an expanded scale for the lower NO readings. As with CO, there is good agreement between the two RSD sets of readings for NO under the conditions experienced in the Bakersfield program. Because RSD data acquisition was so rapid during the Bakersfield program, BAR staff decided to use the data from only the first remote sensor of the two to identify vehicles as high emitters in need of repair.
14
Second RSD, %CO
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
First RSD, % CO
Figure 1. CO emissions readings from the two remote sensors, 370 vehicles.
20000
50000
Second RSD, ppm HC
Second RSD, ppm HC
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
15000
10000
5000
0
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
First RSD, ppm HC
50000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
First RSD, ppm HC
Figure 2. HC emissions readings from the two remote sensors, 370 vehicles. The graph on the right displays readings the lower-emitting (
