Test Results Matching your Search
Click here to start another test report search.
There is 1 document that matches your query. This 1 document contains a total of 25 individual tests. The document is listed below. You can click the title of the report to bring up a PDF version of the report in a new browser window. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the documents.
Executive Summary for Document Search
This search included results from:
- 1 location
- 1 industry
- 1 type of fuel
- 2 different engine manufacturers
- 6 different engine types
- 5 different test procedures
The aggregate results for the tests in this search criteria show:
- 5 Carbon Mass Balance tests were performed with an average improvement of 11.634%
- 5 Smoke Spot tests were performed with an average improvement of 19.140%
- 5 CO tests were performed with an average improvement of 2.260%
- 5 HC tests were performed with an average improvement of 26.806%
- 5 CO2 tests were performed with an average improvement of 11.852%
Result 1 of 1
| Test Id: | 79 |
|---|---|
| Title: | BEC-allwaste |
| File Size: | 22.693 MB |
| Industries: | Trucking |
| Report Type: | Field Test |
| Benefits: | Emissions, Fuel economy |
| Fuels: | 2D Diesel (Regular Diesel) |
| Report Date: | 15-Sep-1996 |
| Test Date: | 10-Jul-1996 |
| Test Location: | Alabama, USA |
| Summary: | Fuel Economy Results: 6.3% improvement on a Caterpillar 3114 engine via Carbon Mass Balance testing 10.3% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406 engine via Carbon Mass Balance testing 14.8% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406-B engine via Carbon Mass Balance testing 12.2% improvement on a Cummins 400 Turbo engine via Carbon Mass Balance testing 14.5% improvement on a Cummins 5.9 engine via Carbon Mass Balance testing Engine Emissions Results: -0.8% improvement on a Caterpillar 3114 engine via CO testing 0.2% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406 engine via CO testing -3.4% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406-B engine via CO testing 17.1% improvement on a Cummins 400 engine via CO testing -1.7% improvement on a Cummins 5.9 engine via CO testing 13.2% improvement on a Caterpillar 3114 engine via CO2 testing 14.4% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406 engine via CO2 testing 11.8% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406-B engine via CO2 testing 10.5% improvement on a Cummins 400 engine via CO2 testing 9.5% improvement on a Cummins 5.9 engine via CO2 testing 14.1% improvement on a Caterpillar 3114 engine via HC testing 42.4% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406 engine via HC testing 29.3% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406-B engine via HC testing 19.1% improvement on a Cummins 400 engine via HC testing 29.1% improvement on a Cummins 5.9 engine via HC testing 36.4% improvement on a Caterpillar 3114 engine via Smoke Spot testing 25.0% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406 engine via Smoke Spot testing 14.3% improvement on a Caterpillar 3406-B engine via Smoke Spot testing 0.0% improvement on a Cummins 400 Turbo engine via Smoke Spot testing 20.0% improvement on a Cummins 5.9 engine via Smoke Spot testing |