Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
IIEEEEEEIIEII
U A H E DEZMANN AUG 83AFLRL-169DAAKD82-CDDO0
SN S ED 0/G217 N
I fII.IIIflIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIII**~f
IIEEEEEEEIIIIEE
EN
IIII1IIII
o
11111-
11111
13.6 12812.2
IIIII '
2lili'
14
II1111I ___l=_
Prepared for
U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research Laboratory
Southwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas
Under Contract to
U.S. Army Belvoir Research and Development Center
Materials, Fuels. and Lubricants Laboratory
Q. Fort Belvoir, Virginia
8
t.,J
L Contract No. DAAK70-82-C0001
L.
9 DTIC
AELECTE August 1983
B 84 09 11 055
Disclaimers
The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the
Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.
Trade names cited in this report do not constitute an official endorsement or appro-
val of the use of such commercial hardware or software.
Qualified requestors may obtain copies of this report from the Defense Technical
Information Center, Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
Disposition Instructions
Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator.
. ......
" ' " ' '- ...
.... lips
.T... .....
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)
READ INSTRUCTIONS
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM
1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESSES 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK
17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered ilnBlock 20, if different from Report,
This project was conducted for U.S. Army Belvoir Research and Development
Center under a contract issued to U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research
Laboratory, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas.
19. KEY WORDS (Co~nrtnle on, reverse side if necessap %and identfy tss'k niumhers
hIsv
Work Directive 18, "Clean Burning Diesel Engines," was issued on September 13,
1982 under Contract DAAK70-82-C-0001 to the U. S. Army Mobility Equipment
Research and Development Command (MERADCOM; currently the Belvoir Research
and Development Center). The engineering and analytical efforts of this program
were conducted by the Department of Emissions Research of Southwest Research
Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas 78284. This program was
identified within Southwest Research Institute as Project 02-6800-175.
This project was under the overall supervision of Harry E. Dietzmann, manager of
the Chemical Analysis Section. He was assisted by Dr. Lawrence R. Smith
i (chemical analysis) and Mr. Orville J. Davis (engine gaseous and particulate
emissions). Emission testing was initiated in January 1983 and was completed in
April 1983. Mr. Tim Lee of Belvoir Research and Development Center, STRBE-
GMW, was the project technical officer, Mr. James Stephens served as the overall
program manager, and Mr. M. E. LePera, Belvoir Research and Development Center,
STRBE-VF, served as project coordinator.
fc
,T trlt A._1 -
!
1'
I
Distr
t it
spec: .
v
i
Cod/-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
. INTRODUCTION .................................................... 7
A. Objective ..................................................... 7
B. Scope ........................................................ 8
V. SUMMARY ......................................................... 50
3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
I Several Views of the Deutz F3L 912W on the Test Stand 11
2 Several Views of the Perkins 4.203.2 on the Test Stand 14
4
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
5
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table Page
/t . . ......
..low
.....
I. INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Army currently uses electric forklifts in handling hazardous materials.
Although these electric forklifts have certain inherent desirable characteristics,
i.e., no pollution or noise, the logistics involved in field operations using electric
forklifts has prompted the U.S. Army to investigate possible alternatives. One
alternative is the diesel engine. The diesel engine has many advantages, i.e.,
mobility, cost, maintenance, but there is a major concern when these vehicles are
used in areas with limited ventilation.
A. Objective
The objective of this program was to obtain exhaust emission rates from two diesel
engines used in forklift trucks. This emissions characterization was accomplished on
engines provided by MERADCOM and included gaseous and particulate emissions of
potential concern when these diesel forklift trucks are operated in confined areas
such as ammunition storage igloos. The method used to evaluate these engines was
the modal steady-state procedure used in the 13-mode Federal Test Procedure.(I)*
This project is the first step in defining the limits of acceptability for using diesel
forklift trucks in areas of limited ventilation. The end use of these data will allow
comparisons between engines; allow the Army to evaluate the emission rates versus
Threshold Limit Values (TLV) from OSHA standards for the selected contaminants;
identify and rank order contaminants from the engine in terms of priority of
importance in worker health and well-being; and provide a data base from which a
procurement specification for forklift diesel engines can be established.
B. Scope
The two diesel forklift engines provided by MERADCOM for this study were a Deutz
F3L 912W and a Perkins 4.203.2. The test fuel was a MIL-F-46162A(MR) provided
7
by the U. S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research Laboratory (AFLRL) at Southwest
Research Institute. Emissions characterization was accomplished on both engines
over the test matrix presented in Table 1. Emission rates are reported in g/hp-hr,
g/hr and observed concentrations, i.e., ppm, percent, or pjg/m 3 .
Power,
% Max hp Engine Speed, rpm
at Speed Curb Idle Intermediate Peak Torque Rated hp
8
II. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES, ENGINES, PROCEDURES
A. Engine Description
This program involved emission mapping for gaseous, particulate, and unregulated
emissions from two diesel engines that are candidates for use in forklift trucks to be
used in handling hazardous materials. The two engines were made available for the
entire duration of the program and were provided in new condition.
The first engine tested in this research effort was a three-cylinder, air-cooled
Deutz F3L 912W. This engine is rated at 48 hp at 2650 rpm. A new test engine
supplied by MERADCOM was delivered to Southwest Research Institute in Decem-
ber 1982.The engine was installed on the test stand, and an engine performance
map was obtained. Results of the performance map indicated that there were
apparent problems with the engine. Concerns over testing the engine were relayed
to MERADCOM and Deutz technical and field service representatives. Deutz
representatives concurred that the engine was not in satisfactory operation condi-
tion and that it was not appropriate to test that engine. The engine was shipped to
Deutz (Atlanta) for diagnostics, and the results of the engine inspection were
reported to the MERADCOM Project Officer.
A new replacement engine was provided by Deutz and was installed on the test
stand. Results from the performance map cn the replacement Deutz F3L 912W
were satisfactory, although the engine produced 44 hp instead of the 48 hp at 2650
rpm. The 80-hour engine break-in and emission test program proceeded without
incident until program completion. The engine "break-in" schedule is presented in
Table 2. Several views of the Deutz F3L 912W on the test stand are illustrated in
Figure 1. The engine performance data for the Deutz F3L 912W are presented in
Table 3.
9
TABLE 2. ENGINE BREAK-IN SCHEDULE USED FOR DEUTZ F3L 912W
AND PERKINS 4.203.2 (40-HOUR ENGINE SCHEDULE)
General Comments: A Gulf 2D fuel (EM-409-F, tank 6) was used for engine
break-in; Mobil Del Vac was the engine oil used. The 40-hour break-in was run
twice on both engines to give 80 hours on each engine. Engine was stopped every 8
hours for oil check, belt tension check, etc. Engine oil was changed at 40 and 80
hours. Engine data recorded included air, fuel and oil temperatures, fuel rate, beam
load, engine rpm, and time of day.
10
E-.
cu
-- 4
CuC7,
TABLE 3. DEUTZ F2L 912W ENGINE PERFORMANCE DATA
Exhaust
Engine Dyno Engine, Fuel Temperature,
RPM Load, lb hp Rate, lb/hr OF(OC)
General Comments: Engine was run using air cleaner supplied by MERADCOM.
Engine ran very good, no vibration from idle to high idle speed. No engine crankcase
blowby was observed.
The second engine was a four-cylinder, water-cooled Perkins 4.203.2 diesel engine
rated at 59 hp at 2500 rpm. The engine was run using the inlet and exhaust
restrictions provided by the Perkins representatives. The 80-hour engine break-in
on the Perkins 4.203.2 is presented in Table 2, and engine performance data are
presented in Table 4. The engine was received in satisfactory operating condition
and underwent the 80-hour engine break-in and emission test program without
incident. The test engine produced 53 hp instead of the rated 59 hp at 2500 rpm.
Figure 2 illustrates the Perkins 4.203.2 on the test stand. Both engines were tested
without alternators.
12
TABLE 4. PERKINS 4.203.2 ENGINE PERFORMANCE DATA
Exhaust
Engine Dyno Engine, Fuel Temperature,
RPM Load, lb hp Rate, lb/hr OF(OC)
B. Fuel Description
The original intent of this program provided for the emission testing to be conducted
using a I-percent sulfur MIL-F-46162B(ME) supplied by the U. S. Army Fuels and
Lubricants Research Laboratory (AFLRL) at Southwest Research Institute. At the
time testing was to begin, it was determined that AFLRL did not have any of the
MIL-F-46162B(ME) nor were there immediate plans to obtain any. However,
AFLRL did have MIL-F-46162A(MR). To have acquired the MIL-F-46162B(ME) fuel
would have required several additional weeks.
In reviewing the fuel specifications for sulfur content, it was apparent that the
1-percent sulfur level was three to four times higher than fuel sulfur in commercial
or military fuels. In order to reach the 1-percent sulfur level, it would be necessary
to add abnormally large amounts of tertiary butyl disulfide. With the interest in
trace organic sulfides and diesel odor in the exhaust, it was recommended that
13
r-4
0V
7--
4-4I
0 0- 0
rid2
144
emission tests be conducted with a currently available referee grade fuel, namely
MIL-F-46162A(MR). The MIL-F-46162A(MR) fuel specifications are similar if not
identical in most aspects to the EPA D-2 emission certification fuel specifications.
Table 5 summarizes the fuel specifications of MIL-F-46162A(MR), MIL-F-46162B
(ME), and EPA D-2 certification fuel, as well as actual fuel analysis of the fuel used
on this program.
Emission tests conducted on high-sulfur fuels (i.e., I-percent sulfur) would probably
produce proportionately higher sulfur dioxide and sulfate. The amount and nature of
trace organic sulfides could be influenced by the specific sulfur additive if large
quantities were added to increase the fuel sulfur, although no experimental data are
available for confirmation. With concurrence of the Project Officer, all emission
tests were conducted with MIL-F-46162A(MR) instead of the originally proposed
MIL-F-46162B(ME).
C. Dynamometer Description
A 250-hp Midwest wet gap eddy current dynamometer determined the load on the
Deutz F3L 912W, and an adjacent 175-hp Midwest dry gap eddy current dynamo-
meter measured the engine load on the Perkins 4.203.2. Fuel was measured using a
Flotron. An 8-inch stainless steel dilution tunnel was used to collect particulate
samples. All equipment was calibrated prior to testing using accepted applicable
procedures, i.e., Federal Register, SAE, EPA Recommended Practice, etc. Several
views of the test equipment are illustrated in Figure 3.
15
One set of gaseous, particulate, and unregulated emissions instrumentation was used
to obtain emissions data on this program. The proximity of the two test stands and
the common exhaust allowed ready changing between the Deutz F3L 912W and the
Perkins 4.203.2 engines.
*Viscosity at 37.80C(IOOOF)
16
03-
-4
000
00
17)
z
0
0
1-.<
o,-io
* In
0 r *
_]"= ' - o In
Chemical Detection
Exhaust Species Symbol Technique Instrument
18
3 !. -r
3 !3
I O I i~ •
fn j
2 .o. - -- - -- - -- - - - '--1.
44
I'>
19
Ill. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
The analytical procedures used to measure the unregulated emissions are summar-
ized in this section. Detailed descriptions of most of the procedures, along with
discussions of their development, validation, and qualification, are available in
Interim Report II, "Analytical Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Pollutant
Emissions From Motor Vehicles," developed in a related EPA project.( 2 3
) Several
views of Group I, II, and III sampling systems are shown in Figure 5.
The unregulated emissions evaluated in this project, along with the methods for
sampling and the procedures used in the analyses, are listed in Table 7. Aldehydes
and ketones, organic sulfides, and phenols represent groups of compounds. The
respective procedures separate and identify a number of individual components
within each of these groups. The analytical procedures involved in this project are
briefly described in the following subsections.
20
-4
Cl,
z 4
0 0
tz a
ciin
0 -
-4 L
cc *
44
214
TABLE 7. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
2. Sulfur Dioxide
The collection of carbonyl sulfide (COS) and the organic sulfides, methyl sulfide
[dimethylsulfide (CH 3 )2 S], ethyl sulfide [diethylsulfide (C 2 H5 ) 2 S ] and methyl
disulfide [dimethyl disulfide (CH 3 ) 2 S2 ], is accomplished by passing exhaust through
Tenax GC traps at -76oc. At this temperature, the traps remove the organic
sulfides from the exhaust. The organic sulfides are thermally desorbed from the
22
traps into a gas chromatograph sampling system and injected into a gas chromato-
graph equipped with a flame photometric detector for analysis. External organic
sulfide standards generated from permeation tubes are used to quantify the results.
4. Sulfate
The exhaust is vented into a dilution tunnel where it is mixed with a stream of
filtered room air. In the tunnel, the SO3 reacts rapidly with water in the exhaust to
form sulfuric acid aerosols. The aerosols grow to a filterable size range within the
tunnel and are collected on a fluorocarbon membrane filter. Particulate sulfate
salts are also collected on the filter.
5. Particulate
23
6. Phenols
The DOAS separates and measures the quantity of the odorous components present
in a collected diesel exhaust sample eluted from an exhaust sampling trap charged
with Chromosorb 102. The separation is achieved by liquid-column chromatography
on a silica-type adsorbent, and the detection unit is a UV detector sensitive to
254-mm radiation.
24
For compounds collected by bag samples, the MDV was determined from the
instrument detection limits only, and is independent of the sampling rate and
duration. For compounds which are concentrated in impingers or traps, the MDV is
dependent on the instrument detection limit, chemical workup, sampling rate, and
sampling duration. The MDV's listed in Table 8 were derived using the listed
sampling rate and a 10-minute sampling period.
25
IV. RESULTS
This section presents the results of emission tests conducted on both engines for
Group I (CO, C0 2 , NO x , HC, smoke), Group II (particulates, sulfur dioxide, sulfate),
and Group Ill (organic sulfides, DOAS odor, phenols, and aldehydes).
A. Group I--Emissions
Gaseous and smoke emissions were obtained at each engine load and speed in the
test matrix shown in Table I. The specific steady-state speed and load combina-
tions were selected to represent the range of possible forklift operation and would
serve to identify emission trends on both engines. Group I emission results for the
Deutz F3L 912W are presented in Table 9, with brake specific emission rates being
expressed in g/hp-hr and mass emissions (g/hr) as well as observed concentrations.
Table 10 provides similar Group I emissions data from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
The test matrix of this program included the steady-state test conditions of an EPA
13-mode emissions test. These data were processed to provide 13-mode emissions
results for both engines, which provides a comparison of engines using a reference
test procedure. The computer printout of the 13-mode emissions data is presented
in the appendix. These data are summarized for both engines in Table 11. In
reviewing the 13-mode results, the brake specific hydrocarbons (BSHC) for the
Deutz F3L 912W was 0.454 g/hp-hr, BSCO was 1.627 g/hp-hr, and BSNOx emissions
were 4.445 g/hp-hr. The Perkins 4.203.2 engine produced a BSHC of 3.215 g/hp-hr.
The 13-mode EPA heavy-duty diesel engine emission standard is 1.5 g/hp-hr BSHC,
25 g/hp-hr BSCO, and 10 g/hp-hr BSNOx + BSHC. Other options involving
trade-offs between BSHC and BSNOx are also available. Comparison of the Deutz
F3L 912W and Perkins 4.203.2 engine emissions to the EPA standard is not suggested
since these engines were not necessarily designed to meet the heavy-duty diesel
engine standard.
26
E
0N W
a -(a
w z0
EE
0-.0N'~m C 0 *Q
"O CAo*-
4-% tO r4%M ~ C4 "N*
N m
**0'
MC47 .0N. 9 -:~
0!N0 9 -N* e -4t~N
OU
rbM; 0
0DNO.- 0 0 * lI% N %D%Df~% m .0
t .010- "t t*EJ. e
w E
U0 a o%
4r ,r
4a
1
oo(
p0 %
: nr 0
N * m mC
no0
4C 0 -e
n%
4 -t
0
0.
0 - u
I! m - --- N NNN AM
27
%D~ cci~0@ % @'WN
P0 soeI r% ~ Q0*
~O -t
,a go 4 rE
EWN*.
00f% (4 UrE
N M .9
0000Q
0 4, N
00 W%00
- - - - - -. -N~
N-N * ~ %* ~ N 0t. ~0
to0
-00m N * " ON N 0-U4'a.a M O% 0%E~.-.p f%0 47
UJ
x
O k
4 0 W%-0%%m .. ~ 0.W %f%
4t
J~O
m 0.DU0
%N%
N%00 t-%Nf 0a0 - 000
z
C1 .2 LO t 14%0 r4 00 00%0 WO O00 ;k 4 %
-0 .t--NC4 % 0.
*0~ - - -. - - -
0
0
-r 0 w0-f O%%0
N~~0
m%%0U
W"0-'U%1
D m U (1
0, u
I4 0NN 00(Ii Nl 000 NN W%0 % % 4 f-I N% " 0 0 m U%.D 0 t0 0 C
I 7 %V & 0 N N ~ N 0 0.
r4 6NNN -- - NNNI U
1 0
4 0 N 0 E
%D-' Pl '0 M m%-
g~
9
00C00 -~ ,rN00 a ^ e0%N *00 -r- -
C28
TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF 13-MODE GASEOUS EMISSIONS
DATA, g/hp-hr
The 13-mode data presented represents engine operation under steady-state opera-
tion and may not reflect the emissions due to heavy repeated accel/decel modes of
operation characteristic of typical forklift operation. Previous experience indicated
that steady-state tests do not typically predict transient emission rates. This is
confirmed by EPA developing a transient cycle for heavy-duty engine certification
to replace the 13-mode.
2. Emission Trends
29
F3L 912W are illustrated in Figure 6. BSHC emissions were less than 0.4 g/hp-hr at
25 percent or greater load at 1600 rpm, but increased dramatically to 5.3 g/hp-hr at
2 percent load. The BSHC emission rates at 2650 rpm were somewhat higher (1.27
g/hp at 25 percent load), increasing to 20 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. Mass emission
rates for hydrocarbons ranged from 11-17 g/hr over the entire range of loads at
2650 rpm. The HC g/hr emission rate at 1600 rpm varied from 3-5 g/hr over the
range of loads. At 2650 rpm, HC raw exhaust concentrations ranged from 106 ppmC
to 172 ppmC, while HC exhaust concentrations ranged from 45-72 ppmC at 1600
rpm.
The effect of engine load on BSCO emissions is shown in Figure 6. The BSCO
emissions at 2650 rpm were less than 5 g/hp-hr at 25 percent or greater load, but
increased significantly to 86 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. BSCO emissions at 1600 rpm
for the Deutz F3L 912W followed similar trends, i.e., the BSCO at 25 percent or
greater load was less than 2 g/hp-hr but increased to 20 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load.
Mass CO emission rates ranged from 34-71 g/hr at 2650 rpm as compared to 7-19
g/hr at 1600 rpm. The CO concentrations for the Deutz F3L 912W ranged from
177-371 ppm at 2650 rpm. At 1600 rpm, the CO concentrations varied from 54-151
ppm.
Figure 6 also illustrates the effect of engine load on BSNOX emission rates from the
Deutz F3L 912W. The general emission trends observed with CO and HC were also
observed with NOx, i.e., relatively low BSNOx at 25 percent or greater load (7
g/hp-hr), escalating to 46 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load at 2650 rpm. At 1600 rpm, this
increase was not quite so dramatic where the BSNOx went from 8 g/hp-hr at 25
percent or greater loads to 28 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. Mass NO x emission rates
ranged from 31-140 g/hr at 2650 rpm to 22-114 g/hr at 1600 rpm. NOx
concentrations ranged from 129-470 ppm NO x at 2650 ppm as compared to 114-585
ppm NO x at 1600 rpm.
A summary of the range of emissions reported for the Deutz F3L 912W over the
entire test matrix is presented in Table 12. This table includes the three primary
methods of expressing emissions, g/hp-hr, g/hr, and ppm. Smoke opacity ranges are
also included for reference.
30
8.0
1600 KRe
265O RPM
- 6.0 g is.o
i1.
4.0
_ 10.0
2.0 .
5.0-
S~
2040 q/hp-hr 2%
650 RPM
2 600 RPM
15 -
S20
10
10 K
SS
50 0lo-- l. Wad
40
0 40
1600 RP 2S RiM
20 20 0 -
0
0\
0 -
0 q-
31
TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF EMISSION RATES AND CONCENTRATION MINIMUM
AND MAXIMUM VALUES FOR THE DEUTZ F3L 912W AND
PERKINS 4.203.2 OVER COMPLETE TEST MATRIX
The effect of engine load on BSHC, BSCO, and BSNOx emissions for the Perkins
4.203.2 is illustrated in Figure 7. The BSHC emissions increased from 7-8 g/hp-hr
at 25 percent load to 69 and 73 g/hp-hr at 1500 rpm and 2500 rpm, respectively.
Mass HC emissions ranged from 48-115 g/hr at 3500 rpm and from 41-70 g/hr at
1500 rpm. Observed HC concentrations varied from 464-1104 ppm at 2500 rpm to
540-960 ppm at 1500 rpm.
Figure 7 also illustrates the effect of engine load on BSCO emission rates from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine. The BSCO emission rate was less than 14 g/hr at 25 percent
or greater load but increased substantially to 213 gfhp-hr at 2 percent load at 2500
rpm. At 1500 rpm, the BSCO emissions were less than 8 g/hp-hr at 25 percent and
greater engine loads and increased to 118 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. The CO mass
emission rates ranged from 103-266 g/hr at 2500 rpm as compared to 39-89 g/hr at
1500 rpm. Raw CO exhaust concentrations varied from 494-1348 ppm at 2500 rpm
and 274-624 ppm at 1500 rpm.
BSNOx emission trends from the Perkins 4.203.2 are also presented in Figure 7. At
2500 BSNOx, emission rates were less than 7 g/hp-hr at 25 percent or greater loads
and increased to 43 g/hp-hr at 2 percent load. The NOx mass emission rates ranged
32
20 69 g/h-hr 62% load 173 9/hp-hr 6 2 load
10
O10 *
0
9 lO
5
S
25 50 7° o 25 so .. 75 100
Enqjnq Load. Enqine Load,
so -80
.0 60 - 60 1
20 0
• -.
A a 00 2 S so 5 00
Enqne Load, Enqne Load,
E
40
so
25WO
1500 RIp
60 )D
,CS 40 i 20
20
400
20 10
0 0
33
from 54-146 g/hr at 2500 rpm and 42-186 g/hr at 1500 rpm. Raw NO x exhaust
concentrations for the Perkins 4.203.2 ranged from 167-482 ppm NO x at 2500 rpm
and from 195-859 ppm NO x at 1500 rpm. Table 12 summarizes the minimum and
maximum emission rates (g/hp-hr and g/hr), ppm concentrations, and smoke opacity
for the Perkins 4.203.2 engine for all modes tested.
B. Group II Emissions
Specific analyses included in the Group 1I analyses were particulates, sulfur dioxide,
and sulfate. These emissions were collected at four engine speeds (idle, intermedi-
ate, peak torque, and rated) at 2- and 25-percent load and three engine speeds
(intermediate, peak torque, and rated) at 50- and 100-percent load. Emission rates
and concentrations from tests with the Deutz F3L 912W engine are presented in
Table 13, while results from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine are found in Table 14.
1. Particulate
The effect of engine load on particulate emission rates is presented in Figure 8 for
the Deutz F3L 912W engine for intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speeds.
Figure 9 illustrates the effect of engine load on particulate emission rates from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine. In reviewing these data, several trends were observed,
namely:
34
000We* 000 a 000 ,
-~00
I' 0000) -4C 000 ( *000
(n e4WN- m m- -f-t) W ,
F4 0
VI)r
00JT0
- C%40
\O0-
Oq 04I%0C ~
a%~Q
0 m NU.-0O tNO M C4 t 4r
- E
.jt'I If.0U' 0
0 ~ ~ 00 ON 00 0 It m ON I It aII
35D
U
E E
a, C ar-.. 0000 w rr
CN CN --- M-, P
0
c-J 0 0 0 0 00 0
~CL
< ~~00oG%0 0NN eq4 n00 %D 0 -t t.
m r,00 0- 2 - -- - ----
2 +1 M N N
as - 00 v(0 NI N0
-t -k NNN
0000 U-t 000 \
000 0004 l0 00 C 00
-0 -1 CN - N W- -N N - 0 CN
00
I a 0 0 0 I a 0 0 0 0 I CI 0
36
20 a
-t o
0 2
0
10
0525 50 75 10O 25 50 76
Engi.ne Load, •Engne Load,
16 - 0.0 "
44
T .5
- 5 5.0
25
01
, O~2. 5
-. o
025 so 75 100 05 t s 75 0
Engine L.oad,
Enqine Load,,
0 250 RPM
2650 Rpm
, 12 N
0 25 0 75 100 0 25 so 75 100
Enqgne Oad. I Enqine ed. %
37
20 20
15S 15
C Cj
- 10 C 1
- 10
55
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 S Ic-
Enqie Oad, S Enqne Load.
20 8
. 0
0
* 0
S052
251 50 ? ,00 S 5 0
,0 £ 0I
O 0
-
.
o
0
0 25 s0
Egiqne Load, S
75 100
C1
5
0 25 50
EnQisne "oa,
100
40 " 20
0
~30 - is5
- 20 10
lo 5
0 0
0 25 so 75 100
togine Load. %ngine Load.
38
2-percent load, the brake specific particulate e-nission rate ranged from
6.55-16.37 g/hp-hr.
o The Deutz F3L 912W brake specific particulate emission rates ranged
from 0.24-1.03 g/hp-hr for the loaded conditions (25-100 percent load)
at the three engine speeds, i.e., intermediate, peak torque, and rated.
At the 2-percent load, the brake specific particulate emission rates
ranged from 5.17-11.28 g/hp-hr.
2. Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide emission rates and concentrations from the Deutz F3L 912W and the
Perkins 4.203.2 engines are presented in Tables 13 and 14, respectively. The mass
and brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates are presented as a function of
engine load at several engine speeds in Figures 10 and 11 for the Deutz F3L 912W
and the Perkins 4.203.2 respectively. Several trends are apparent from these
results, namely:
" Brake specific sulfur dioxide emission rates ranged from 0.87-1.72
g/hP-hr at the 25-100 percent loads for intermediate, peak torque, and
rated engine speeds for the Perkins 4.203.2.
39
0
40 -S
1100 RPM - 10 R
30 - 6
20 4
20 50 "1l02 07 O
0
0 2.; 5 's 100 0 25 50 75 100
Engm Load % nqlne load.,
40 20
. 0
1600 RPM 1600 RPM
I is
20 10
1 5
?1 5
10 S
g0
25 SO 75 100 u A 1O00
025 so 7 1001 so050 10 0
gngq e Loald, Enqlne Woad, I&
gagiCRR Load. EnCqin* Wad.
2650 RPMFRPM
2650
DU
DUZ
FL92ATTRPMEGNESED 265
L92ATHRPMEGNESED 265
20
40
40 10.0
30 0
N -N
20 5.0
P" 2.5
So 0
25 50 75 100
Enqne Load, Enqine Load,
40 *16
1500 RPM 1500 RPM
30 " 12
b- 4
5 075 10 25 SO 75 10
Engine Woad, %Engine Woad,
40 16
2500 RP'M a ; 2500 RPFM
10 4
00
30 12
404 1 6
25 s0 76 100 25 so 75 100
Enqine Load, 8 Enqine Load.8
al ..
FIGURE 11. EFFECT
.7
OF ENGINE 0|LOAD ON SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSION
3. Sulfate
Sulfate emission rates were obtained at various engine speeds and loads for both
engines. Sulfate emission rates for the Deutz F3L 912W and the Perkins 4.203.2 are
presented in Tables 13 and 14, respectively. The effect of engine load on sulfate
emission rates at three engine speeds is illustrated in Figures 12 and 13 for the
Deutz F3L 912W and the Perkins 4.203.2 engines. The sulfate emission trends from
both engines were quite similar and are summarized below:
* Sulfate mass emission rates (g/hr) increased as the engine load (and fuel
consumption) increased at all three speeds for both engines.
Exhaust emissions included in the Group III analyses include aldehydes and ketones,
organic sulfides, phenols, and DOAS odor. This section presents the results of these
analyses for both engines. The Group III analyses were performed at 2-percent load
(idle, intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speed), 50- and 100-percent load
(intermediate, peak torque, and rated engine speeds).
The aldehyde and ketone emission rates, expressed in mg/hp-hr, are presented in
Table 15 for the Deutz F3L 912W engine. Observed concentrations for each
aldehyde and ketone for these same tests are presented in Table 16, and absolute
emission rates expressed in mg/hr are found in Table 17. The aldehyde and ketone
emission rates from the Perkins 4.203.2 are found in Tables 18 (mg/hp-hr), 19
(mg/hr), and 20 (ppm). Summaries of the total aldehyde and ketone emission rates
from both engines are presented in Table 21. In general, these results are
summarized below:
42
* Formaldehyde was the predominate aldehyde detected, generally accoun-
ting for 30-50 percent of the total detected.
* Formaldehyde concentrations were less than 0.5 ppm for all test
conditions for the Deutz F3L 912W engine and less than 3.2 ppm for all
test conditions with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
" Aldehyde and ketone emission rates for the Perkins 4.203.2 engine were
higher than the Deutz F3L 912W engine on all modes tested.
2. Organic Sulfides
Organic sulfides were collected on Tenax-GC traps for analysis by gas chromato-
graphy using a flame photometric detector. Samples were collected on the same ten
modes as for other Group III analyses on both engines. No organic sulfides were
detected in exhaust of the Deutz F3L 912W engine for any of the ten modes
sampled. Organic sulfide emission rates from the Perkins 4.203.2 engine are
presented in Table 22, and minimum organic sulfide detection limits are shown in
Table 8. Based on the limited data available, the following generalizations are
made:
* With the Perkins 4.203.2 engine at constant speed, the carbonyl sulfide
mass emission rates decreased with an increase in load.
43
0. 0.4
0.4 0.3
O 0.4 g 0.2
0 0 .1
0 * I III 0 L
25 50 75 100 0 25 so 75 100
EngLne Load, S Engine Load,
0.8- 0.4
0.6 0.10
o 0.4 0.
0. 2
0 1 0 45 1- 0
Engino oad, Enoqne LOad.
1.6 0.3-
1.2 . 0.6
0 0. 0
o., * L
• 0
o.W
S0.4 b 0.2'
25 50 5 100 I10 0
44
m..
.. ill
0.8 0.8-
_._0.6 f o.6_
S0.4 0 0.4-
0.
,-
150 :" I s Rr .,
25 50 75 100 a s
Enqne Load, Engine Load,
E '
0 25 50 75 0..
1oo 50 ' 1o
Laqo. Load. Roqne Load, I
4 45
F 0
TABLE 15. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM A
DEUTZ F3L 912W DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HP-HR)
Engine
Test Speed, Load, Aldehyde Emission Rate. me/hp-hr
No. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonladehyde isobutyraldehydeMEK Benzaldehde Hexanaldehyde
Engine
Test Speed, Load, Aldehyde and Ketone Raw Exhaust Concentration, ppm
No. r __% Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehycle Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-1 600 2 5 ND 2 ND ND NO I 35 NO NO
3-2 1100 2 7 2 ND 2 ND 4 4 14 3 NO
3-3 1600 2 14 2 3 3 ND 7 4 21 12 NO
3-4 2650 2 93 28 50 26 ND 33 27 233 61 NO
3-5 1100 50 15 ND 4 NO ND 5 4 13 NO NO
3-6 1600 50 32 ND 13 NO 9 5 4 21 NO 5
3-7 2650 30 83 4 22 ND 21 16 NO 27 7 NO
46
TABLE 18. ALDEHYDE EMISSION RATES FROM A
PERKINS 4.203.2 DIESEL ENGINE (MG/HP-HR)
Engine
Test Speed, Load, Emission Rate, me/hp-hr
No. rpm % ForMnldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-3 1000 50 0.6 4.8 1.2 2.4 ND 1.2 1.9 1.8 2.2 1.4
3-6 1500 50 2.5 0.7 NO ND NO ND 0.2 2.1 1.2 1.4
3-9 2500 50 14.1 21.2 NO 9.6 NO 1.1 6.2 1.1 2.2 3.5
Engine
Test Speed, Load, Aldehyde Emission Rate. m~ihr
No. rpm % Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acrolein Propionaldehyde Acetone Crotonaldehyde Isobutyraldehyde MEK Benzaldehyde Hexanaldehyde
3-3 1000 50 8 63 13 31 NO 1 25 24 28 I8
3-6 1500 50 49 13 ND NO NO ND 4 40 23 27
3-9 2500 50 352 531 NO 240 NO 28 155 28 55 88
3-3 1000 50 0.08 0.43 0.08 0.16 NO 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.05
3-6 1500 50 0.30 0.06 NO ND NO NO 0.01 0.10 0.04 0.05
3-9 2500 30 1. l 1.33 NO 0.53 No 0.05 0.28 0.05 0.07 0.11
3-4 1000 100 1.46 0.17 ND 0.08 ND NO Nf) 0.10 0.04 0.27
3-7 1500 100 2.61 0.39 NO 0.16 ND NO ND ND 0.07 0.29
3-10 200 100 2.28 0.14 0.13 0.05 NO 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.20 0.05
47
TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDE AND KETONE EMISSION RATES
FROM A DEUTZ F3L 912W AND PERKINS 4.203.2 ENGINES
OPERATED ON MIL-F-46162A(MR) FUEL, AL-722-5
*Total aldehydes are defined as the numerical sum of the individual emission
rates for formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, propionaldehyde, acetone,
crotonaldehyde, isobutyraldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone, benzaldehyde, and
hexanaldehyde.
3. Phenols
During this program, exhaust samples were collected for phenols analysis using
procedures developed by Southwest Research Institute for the Environmental
Protection Agency. Analysis of these samples by gas chromatography indicated
either no phenols or only trace phenols with both engines. The detection limits of
the phenols as measured by this method are presented in Table 23.
DOAS odor results from both engines are presented in Table 23. The DOAS from the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine was generally higher (TIA 2.2 -_0.3) than the Deutz F3L 912W
(TIA 1.7 ± 0.3). No general trends were apparent as a function of engine speed or
load for either engine.
48
The higher Total Aroma of Intensity (TIA) values observed with Perkins 4.203.2 were
not surprising, considering that the Perkins also had higher unburned hydrocarbons,
aldehydes and ketones, and organic sulfides than the Deutz F3L 912W engine. These
species are all thought to contribute to or be an indicator of diesel exhaust odor.
aSample contaminated
49
V. SUMMARY
This section summarizes emission results from the Deutz F3L 912W and Perkins
4.203.2 engines for Groups 1, II, and II emissions. The data for the Group I emissions
produced several general trends and observations:
* The Perkins 4.203.2 engine had higher HC, CO, and NO x brake specific
(g/hp-hr) and mass (g/hr) emission rates than the Deutz F3L 912W.
Results of Group II emissions for particulate, sulfur dioxide, and sulfate also
produced some general trends, and are summarized below:
* Less than 5 percent of fuel sulfur was converted to sulfate for both
engines.
" At constant intermediate, peak torque, and rated speeds, sulfate in-
creased with increasing load.
" In most cases, particulate brake specific emission rates were higher on
the Perkins 4.203.2 engine. Sulfur dioxide mass emission rates were
generally proportional to fuel consumed.
50
Aldehydes, organic sulfides, DOAS odor, and phenols (Group III) were measured on
selected modes. These results are summarized below:
* Formaldehyde concentrations were less than 0.5 ppm for all test
conditions for the Deutz F3L 912W engine and less than 3.2 ppm for all
test conditions with the Perkins 4.203.2 engine.
" No phenols were found above the minimum detection limit for the two
engines tested.
" Carbonyl sulfide was the predominate organic sulfide measured with the
Perkins 4.203.2 engine; no organic sulfides were detected with the Deutz
F3L 912W engine.
* With the Perkins 4.302.2 engine, at constant speed, the carbonyl sulfide
mass emission rates decreased with an increase in load.
* The Diesel Odor Analysis System (DOAS) results from the Perkins
4.203.2 engine were generally higher (TIA = 2.2 ± 0.3) than the Deutz
F3L 912W (TIA = 1.70 ± 0.3). No general trends for DOAS odor were
apparent as a function of engine speed or load for either engine.
51
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of this program, several items have been identified as potential areas of
additional work. These are summarized below:
The availability of this transient cycle would allow determining emission rates based
on a cy,:le developed from data collected during field operations. It is also
consistent with EPA's philosophy, that is, requiring all heavy-duty diesel engines to
be certified using the EPA heavy-duty engine transient cycle. Virtually all forklift
engine manufacturers also produce heavy-duty engines and are quite familiar with
the transient cycle.
52
to increase the fuel sulfur level. Also, the question of the influence of natural
versus added sulfur has not been investigated, at least to our knowledge.
Although these devices may allow a nonconforming engine to meet the emissions
specification during an acceptance test, it should be demonstrated to MERADCOM
that these devices have demonstrated durability during typical forklift operations
and that on-site catalytic trap regeneration is possible. Other areas of possible
concern would be the use of after-treatment devices with the MIL-F-46162B(ME)
high-sulfur fuel and its influence on sulfate formation. In addition, limited work
may be warranted to investigate the formation of selected unregulated emissions
(i.e., sulfate, aldehydes, odor) during engine malfunctions, such as plugged air
cleaner, high exhaust back-pressure, engine overfueling, and injection pump nis-
timing.
4. After MERADCOM has established the emission limits and test proce-
dures for diesel forklift purchase specifications, it should be of concern to
MERADCOM to develop a level confidence that ensures that engines purchased will
meet the emission standards. There are essentially two variables that affect
emission rates. The first variable is test-to-test variability and is influenced
primarily by the analytical instrumentation, engine reproducibility, etc. It is likely
that EPA has some data to provide some indication of this variability on large
heavy-duty diesel engines. We are not aware of any data available for test-to-test
variability on forklift-size diesel engines. If this is not available, MERADCOM may
wish to conduct replicate 13-mode (or transient forklift if the cycle is available) to
determine standard deviation on one or more candidate diesel engines to establish
confidence limits on this size engine.
.3
The second, and probably most critical, is the engine-to-engine variability of
production engines. Again, EPA may have data available on the engine-to-engine
variability during certification of heavy-duty engines, but extrapolation to small
engines may not be appropriate. MERADCOM may wish to include in the purchase
specifications that a certain percentage of production engines (i.e., four out of five
engines) pass the emission tests, or alternatively, randomly select production
engines for an emissions audit (test).
_54
VII. REFERENCES
1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 86, Subpart D, "Emission Regula-
tions for New Gasoline-Fueled and Diesel Heavy-Duty Engines; Gaseous
Exhaust Test Procedures," pp. 428-460, 3uly 1, 1982.
2. Smith, L. R., Parness, M. A., Fanick, E. R., and Dietzmann, H. E., "Analytical
Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions From Vehicles Using
Middle-Distillate Fuels," EPA/600-2-80-068, April 1980.
55
APPENDIX
57
0X 11 0 0N ~ 0 66
I I .i . . . .. .
6wm No fa I QI
1.- . . 1. 1 ow Z I
X~ I xIII I tC Z I z 1
60 00 C; C4~~0
I CD0
L) I . . . . *. . .*
. 3 11 L.0 Ma- :00111;0: %ON 10* aD
x I6 -0 I ONon n W I "1n0 1* 6~-t qlr In I W AcC6-* I
Io I
S0. 0 1* **
. . .*
6 I*' 0 6
N I CL Iq'C
00Z 6aW0 0 N 0 ~ V 0
I Ii0IL - - - -- -
-I w I I
r- I 6 - I I6
1 66i U 06 -0 cy'0%- n 0 N0%
6 1~ w66- m 0 .6 1(
- 6 I 06)VN . I
Z 0 u II .06
6. .N)C%0 ..... 66 lIZ
W 1 1IrN
m6i10 , I +~
0 .. I -
N66 c I 66 6 6 16 .
W Q-~w II n* - L
6660%Dr
0 =0x I I 6 6 I I 4L)((" c06Wn
6620
x .UI6 m 26I'.~w0-
O0VlO r- C r01*nNntN -t I -o Il m Cn-)
I L)6V)a.I.-6 0 ... ... 6u-)16-t00W0I-0-D
f r C0- N"00~ I-I lW
2I
W6 ..
a-x 0N0ON0
.. :2 .. .. 0
NN0
6
I K n
i
*N*0
% ~ 0 IiIn
I I - u0 W660r 6* 0 N W MDii~
r-) ' 6
I Co , I IaIi~ * . ~
6W 0 0 v -e W n0 N N TN w
In 039 UI N N 6.UN UN I I I I . -
120. 6L
I6 II 0tr- 6ru% - -
6In0
Lf0% 0 0 6 uq 0
6 0 I I I ~~
0 I N U'I1'-V
I I XII , I ........ I
I _j( iI NOD
I CZ *** ._N
1 Ix.JZI
I I L. 0. 1
XI00N0A C 0% o 0 W000
00. InI
I~~~_
1(h V 3
WN ~ 0-N OaO- I
I
w
A O I I ZI
aOD I zN': N z Lrz
4 l ~ OIn i r-,- Iz 0PnVs 'r-aI
Iaa
. .P' .:2 . ! .1 Cy ax
0 0 r - ,O
v X X :
WI CL
z~I I I I Io
I
I
~~ I
I
I
I
I c
I CL
) L
I............. - -
Is~ za V. V 0% 00% .
-J lea L
OI t4N%N N N.O 0 a00N IU. U 10000000000000 00
)I -s ODI I . . . . . . . I
I I XI I t- v -VF -4 Lxxxxi
am mz-o
o I I C - DO
a0 A C AI awDzz-CO
I- . 0%0.1 OD 3 I to COCD
V- l' I z U LAI
0 U. 5 ID 00 w0 N N0000000 i A0 I -1 11 0:W
.J N j O Q CU v~ %I
I ODI~ nC ;o 0 or s
W ix I j I N.0 . . . ~ N gui Do _
U7 If m ~ V in In
IV 1.0 AI n In6N0000ti I I OD
I% 0
8W SOZ II O- IL x
I I I I 56 - N3O) 0Ix z0 0N~V
L6 IX W at ta It6 nn IL z I 0a
-I- I 9C CI hi.0%'O 0%~ COIn- N
Il S0 I V
N-
W a- I- ..
J I I W L Z 6 ** .. .
C I I SI k%0 % 6 OD.InN 5
I CL I 2 Z 20 C
W, C
In_ O 00 Oi C l
* o I----------1- N
CNN NI
I Z CL ICC
1 I . t- I. I0.- j I. I .- .- w N.-
SW z- 0aNNC C ma t-PN
10100
0. NVr- IN0~~ -AO NO
eN~U3
N on Q I
00 - IN-- NI N If% N -- I
I C I I I NI I
IN
*i.
II VC- 00 N
WNn II W
. IO
60
DISTRIBUTION LIST
CDR CDR
U.S. ARMY BELVOIR RESEARCH AND TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT
DEVELOPMENT CENTER ATTN: SDSTO-TP-S 1
ATTN: STRBE-VF 10 TOBYHANNA PA 18466
STRBE-WC 2
STRBE-G 3 CDR
FORT BELVOIR VA 22060 US ARMY DEPOT SYSTEMS CMD
ATTN: DRSDS
CDR CHAMBERSBURG PA 17201
US ARMY MATERIEL DEVEL &
READINESS COMMAND CDR
ATTN: DRCLD I US ARMY WATERVLIET ARSENAL
DRCDMR (MR GREINER) 1 ATTN: SARWY-RDD
DRCMD-ST (DR HALEY) I WATERVLIET NY 12189
DRCQA-E I
DRCDE-SG I CDR
DRCSM-WCS (MR SCHEUBLE) I US ARMY LEA
5001 EISENHOWER AVE ATTN: DALO-LEP
ALEXANDRIA VA 22333 NEW CUMBERLAND ARMY DEPOT
NEW CUMBERLAND PA 17070
8/84
AFLRL No. 169
Page 1 of 4
CDR CDR
US ARMY FOREIGN SCIENCE & TECH US ARMY RES & STDZN GROUP
CENTER (EUROPE)
ATTN: DRXST-MT1 1 ATTN: DRXSN-UK-RA
FEDERAL BLDG BOX 65
CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22901 FPO NEW YORK 09510
CDR CDR
DARCOM MATERIEL READINESS US ARMY FORCES COMMAND
SUPPORT ACTIVITY (MRSA) ATTN: AFLG-REG
ATTN: DRXMD-MD 1 AFLG-POP 1
LEXINGTON KY 40511 FORT MCPHERSON GA 30330
CDR CDR
US ARMY COLD REGION TEST CENTER US ARMY EUROPE & SEVENTH ARMY
ATTN: STECR-TA ATTN: AEAGG-FMD
APO SEATTLE 98733 AEAGD-TE
APO NY 09403
HQ, DEPT. OF ARMY
ATTN: DAEN-DRM
WASHINGTON DC 20310
8/84
AFLRL No. 169
Page 2 of 4
PROJ MGR, PATRIOT PROJ OFC CDR
US ARMY DARCOM US ARMY INFANTRY SCHOOL
ATTN: DRCPM-MD-T-G ATTN: ATSH-CD-MS-M
REDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35809 FORT BENNING GA 31905
8/84
,.e
AFLRL No. 169
Page 3 of 4
CDR, NAVAL MATERIEL COMMAND NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
ATTN: MAT-08E (MR ZIEM) 1 SPACE ADMINISTRATION
CP6, RM 606 LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER
WASHINGTON DC 20360 MAIL STOP 5420
(ATTN: MR. GROBMAN)
CDR CLEVELAND OH 44135
MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS SUPPORT
BASE ATLANTIC NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
ATTN: CODE P841 1 SPACE ADMINISTRATION
ALBANY GA 31704 VEHICLE SYSTEMS AND ALTERNATE
FUELS PROJECT OFFICE
ATTN: MR CLARK
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER
CLEVELAfM OH 44135
HQ, USAF
ATTN: LEYSF (COL CUSTER) 1 US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
WASHINGTON DC 20330 CE-131.2, GB-096
ATTN: MR ECKLUND
HQ AIR FORCE SYSTEMS CMD FORRESTAL BLDG.
ATTN: AFSC/DLF 1 1000 INDEPENDENCE AVE, SW
ANDREWS AFB MD 20334 WASHINGTON DC 20585
CDR
WARNER ROBINS AIR LOGISTIC
CTR
ATTN WR-ALC/MMIRAB-1 (MR GRAHAM) I
ROBINS AFB GA 31098
DIRECTOR
NATL MAINTENANCE TECH SUPPORT
CTR 2
US POSTAL SERVICE
NORMAN OK 73069
8/84
AFLRL No. 169
Page 4 of 4
k
AT
L ME