Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

2020-01-2147 Published 15 Sep 2020

Fuel Effects on Regulated and Unregulated

Emissions from Three Light-Duty Euro 5 and Euro 6
Diesel Passenger Cars
Rod Williams Shell Global Solutions (UK), Concawe

Roland Dauphin Concawe

Jon Andersson Ricardo UK Ltd, Automotive and Industria

Pauline Ziman PHS Consulting Ltd

John Rogerson INCIBI LTD

Heather Hamje Concawe

Citation: Williams, R., Dauphin, R., Andersson, J., Ziman, P. et al., “Fuel Effects on Regulated and Unregulated Emissions from Three
Light-Duty Euro 5 and Euro 6 Diesel Passenger Cars,” SAE Technical Paper 2020-01-2147, 2020, doi:10.4271/2020-01-2147.

Abstract
HC (hydrocarbons), other greenhouse gases and NOx (oxides

S
ubstantial advances in European road vehicle emissions of nitrogen), whereas no further benefits were measured in
have been achieved over the past 3 decades driven by NH3 (ammonia) or in PN (particle number) at the low baseline
strengthening revisions in emissions legislation and levels produced by the vehicles. Compared to B5, B30 gave a
enabled by advances in fuel, vehicle engine and emissions significant increase in NOx at the tailpipe from the Euro 5 car
control technologies. As both vehicle technology and emis- and engine-out from the Euro 6d-TEMP car but no tailpipe
sions legislation in Europe continue to evolve, Concawe has detriments in NOx were measurable in either of the Euro 6
conducted a study to examine the opportunities that fuels can cars, due to the good performance of their NOx aftertreatment
provide to further reduce emissions from light-duty diesel devices. The latter results show that some fuel qualities previ-
passenger cars. Three European diesel cars spanning Euro 5, ously important to control emissions such as PN or NOx have
Euro 6b and Euro 6d-TEMP emissions certification levels have become less impactful with the latest engine technologies. The
been tested over the cold-start WLTC (Worldwide harmonized addition of cetane number improver to the B30 did not reduce
Light-duty Test Cycle) with 6 fuels: an EN590-compliant B5 NOx. The findings suggest that high H/C ratio diesel fuels
(petroleum diesel containing 5% biodiesel by volume), a bio- could offer benefits to both emissions affecting local air quality
derived paraffinic diesel, a 50:50 blend of the aforementioned and to greenhouse gas emissions on a tank-to-wheels basis.
fuels, a low density petroleum-derived B5, a B30 and the same The addition of higher FAME (Fatty Acid Methyl Ester) levels
B30 additized with a high dose of cetane number improver. to fuels can be used to increase renewable fuel contribution
Results have shown that low density fuels with high hydrogen resulting in no penalty in NOx emissions from newer tech-
to carbon (H/C) ratio are capable of delivering benefits in nology vehicles. Compatibility of these fuels with the existing
tank-to-wheels CO2 (carbon dioxide), CO (carbon monoxide), vehicle fleet would require further specific consideration.

Introduction
Reduction catalysts (SCR) to achieve low emissions perfor-

T
he EN590 specification [1] is used to control automo- mance of the incumbent vehicles. Going forward, fuels used
tive diesel fuel quality in Europe to ensure the reliable in diesel engines are likely to develop further and diversify
operation of road vehicles. The current specification to help meet future targets for CO2 (carbon dioxide) and
is the culmination of 3 decades of development driven by other emissions associated with road vehicle use.
and enabling the introduction of sophisticated emissions The current EN590 specification allows up to 7% v/v
aftertreatment devices such as DPFs (Diesel Particulate FAME (Fatty Acid Methyl Ester by volume) meeting the
Filters (DPF) Lean NOx Traps (LNT) and Selective Catalytic EN14214 specification to be blended into conventional

© 2020 Concawe. Published by SAE International. This Open Access article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the
original author(s) and the source are credited.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

2 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

petroleum diesel fuel. In addition EN16709 provides a some blends and fuel additives were certified for use in
standard for B20 and B30 (petroleum diesel containing 20% California for NOx mitigation in high FAME content fuels [11].
and 30% biodiesel) fuels for use in captive fleets. It is antici- There are a number of EN590 specification properties
pated that higher renewables levels will be needed in order to defined to be environmental parameters according to the
meet the future renewable energy targets mandated by the European Fuel Quality Directive [12] and previous regula-
recast Renewable Energy Directive, (RED2) though the use tions. The aforementioned Concawe study [10] considered
of biofuels made from food and feed crops will be limited [2]. other fuel properties as well as FAME: density, PAH
In this study, two fuels containing 30% v/v FAME (B30, (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons), cetane number. It
one including cetane number improver, (CNI)) were tested and showed that in diesel cars certified to Euro 4, 5 and 6 stan-
their results compared to a fuel containing 5% v/v FAME (B5). dards increasing density above the current EN590 specifica-
This was in order to determine the impact of using FAME at tion limit increased tailpipe CO2 emissions in all cases, with
levels much higher than currently permissible in EN590 with varied effects observed for other regulated emissions.
those typical of current European diesel fuels. The addition of Emissions effects of cetane number were inconsistent except
FAME into diesel fuel is well-known to decrease the engine-out for HC and CO benefits in NEDC (New European Driving
PM (Particulate Matter) emissions of diesel engines [3, 4, 5]. Cycle), and not WLTC (Worldwide harmonized Light-duty
This effect is largely attributed to the presence of oxygenated Test Cycle) for all vehicles indicating CN (Cetane Number)
compounds in the fuel which increases the local oxygen effects are vehicle and test cycle dependent. Effects of higher
concentration in the rich area of the diesel flame [6] and by PAH levels on tailpipe emissions were largely insignificant
diluting aromatic hydrocarbons and especially polycyclic and a PM increase observed in the non-DPF car was not
aromatic hydrocarbons in the diesel fuel with an aromatics-free observed in the Euro 5 or Euro 6 vehicles. Overall the effect
blending component where the FAME is splash-blended. of vehicle calibration and test cycle clearly dominated fuel
Previous Concawe work confirmed that the addition of FAME effects on emissions and efficiency.
in diesel fuel decreases the engine-out PM emissions and noted Paraffinic diesel fuels (PDFs) can be derived from natural
a reduction in fuel consumption penalty associated with gas (Gas-To-Liquids, GTL), biological sources (such as
reducing the frequency of DPF regenerations [7]. Another study so-called Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO), Biomass-To-
showed that the vehicles’ volumetric consumption increased Liquids, (BTL)) and Power-To-Liquids, (PTL). As some PDFs
due to the reduced energy content of FAME/diesel blends, have become more abundant in the market (GTL, HVO) a
which could not be compensated for through better engine European specification describing the quality for PDFs for use
efficiency on the oxygenated fuels [8]. In general, previous in automotive applications, EN15940, has been developed in
studies have showed that increasing FAME reduces HC recent years, [13]. PDFs have been proven to have beneficial
(Hydrocarbon) and CO (Carbon Monoxide) and increases NOx effects on vehicle tailpipe emissions, including PM, NOx, CO
(Oxides of Nitrogen) emissions to a lesser degree. However, it and HC, [14, 15] although some studies have shown that PN
should be remembered that these results are from a collection can be increased, [16]. As well as the tailpipe or ‘tank-to-
of published studies that predominantly focused on heavy-duty wheels’ benefits, these fuels can provide overall lifecycle CO2
engines (and primarily on US market engines) that were not benefits when derived from renewable sources [17].
equipped with NOx exhaust aftertreatment and tested only over As both vehicle technology and emissions legislation in
hot start test cycles. It may not be reasonable to assume that Europe continue to evolve, Concawe has conducted a study
these results will be representative of modern European light- (in 2019) to examine the opportunities that fuels can provide
duty vehicles that are equipped with a variety of aftertreatment to further reduce emissions from light-duty diesel passenger
technologies and are certified over a cold start test cycle. There cars. Three European specification diesel cars spanning Euro
are considerably fewer publications related to modern light- 5, Euro 6b and Euro 6d-TEMP emissions certification levels
duty diesel vehicles and the results that have been reported are have been tested over the cold-start WLTC with 6 fuels:
generally less consistent than those from the heavy-duty tests. EN590-compliant B5, bio-derived paraffinic diesel (HVO), a
One study on light duty engines [9] demonstrated that vehicle 50:50 blend of the aforementioned fuels, low density petro-
effects became stronger than fuel effects when emissions start leum-derived B5, B30 and B30 including a high dose of cetane
to become very low. A latter Concawe study examined the number improver.
consumption and emissions effects of 10% FAME vs FAME-
free fuel on emissions and consumption in Euro 4, 5 and 6
vehicles. This showed that increasing FAME content had the Scope and Objectives
expected effect of increasing volumetric fuel consumption
whereas it had no consistent negative or positive effects on The objective of the study was to provide understanding of
emissions and that NOx penalties and PM benefits were only the benefits that diesel fuels operable in current automotive
observed in the Euro 4 (non-DPF) vehicle, [10]. technology applications could offer to both emissions affecting
Studies sponsored by CARB (California Air Resources local air quality and to greenhouse gas emissions, with the
Board) showed that use of more paraffinic fuels as blending focus on Tank-To-Wheels (TTW) effects. The fuels tested do
components and addition of cetane number improvers could not necessarily comply with the current EN590 specification
mitigate the NOx penalties experienced when using high and therefore it is recognized that compatibility of these fuels
FAME content fuels in US Heavy-Duty (HD) engines and with the existing vehicle fleet would require further specific
trucks manufactured between 1998 and 2010 and subsequently consideration which is outside the scope of the study.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 3

Tests over the WLTC rather than the RDE (Real specification: 845g/L and cetane number was close to the
Driving Emissions) protocol were appropriate to obtain EN590 minimum at 52.
the experimental repeatability required to analyse fuel
effects, given that in a previous Concawe study fuel differ-
ences spanning EN590 in terms of density were undetect-
Fuel 2 - Low Density B5 (LD
able over RDE [18]. B5)
Testing was limited to one example each of Euro 5, 6b The Low Density B5 (LD B5) was selected to represent a lower
and 6d-TEMP European passenger cars due to resource than EN590 specification density fuel derived from refinery
constraints. streams normally used for jet and diesel fuel to enable the
impact of reduced density and higher hydrogen-to-carbon
(H/C) ratio on emissions to be evaluated while still using
conventional refinery streams. The LD B5 fuel also acted as a
Test Fuels reference fuel for some other fuels in the set and the biodiesel
component was UCOME complying with EN14214.
The test fuel set comprised commercially available fuels and
fuel components already used in vehicles in demonstration
fleets or commercial applications without modifications. Fuel 3 - Paraffinic Diesel Fuel
The rationale for selecting such fuels was to consider fuel (PDF)
options that could be applied to and achieve benefits in the
existing as well as future fleets. The fuels were selected for The PDF was chosen to represent paraffinic fuels derived from
their potential to provide benefits to both emissions natural gas (GTL), biological sources (such as HVO, BTL) and
affecting local air quality and to greenhouse gas emissions, PTL fuels. In this case, Fuel 3 was HVO targeted at the lower
with the focus on TTW effects. The fuels, F1 - F6 (Fuel 1 - 6) end of the EN15940, class A specification in terms of density
are described in the following sub-sections, key fuel proper- and as such enabled the impact of low density, high H/C ratio,
ties are listed in Table 1 and full properties are given in low aromatics and high cetane number on emissions to
the appendix. be evaluated.

Fuel 4 - 50:50 Blend of Fuels

Fuel 1 - EN590 B5 1 and 3 (PDF50)
The EN590 B5 fuel was selected to represent a current The 50:50 blend of PDF and EN590 B5 (PDF50) enabled the
European diesel road fuel complying with EN590 and provided impact of a paraffinic blend component on emissions to
a reference fuel for some of the other fuels in the set. This fuel be evaluated. This fuel was included to represent scenarios in
comprised crude-derived petroleum diesel (95%v/v) and which availability of paraffinic fuels are limited, to cater for
FAME type biodiesel derived from used cooking oil (UCOME, scenarios where vehicles are not compatible with pure PDF
5%v/v) which complied with EN14214. Density for this fuel fuel, and to determine in these cases whether or not emissions
was at the top of the density range permitted in the EN590 benefits can be expected to be proportional to the paraffinic

TABLE 1 Key properties of test fuels, (see full data in Appendix for measurement methods)

Units F1 - EN590 B5 F2 - LD B5 F3 - PDF F4 - PDF50 F5 - B30 F6 - B30 + CNI

Density kg/l 0.845 0.805 0.764 0.805 0.825 0.826
Cetane number - 52.0 51.4 79.6 67.0 52.4 65.8
Viscosity at 40°C mm2/s 2.57 1.66 1.95 2.18 2.09 2.10
FAME content %v/v 4.6 5.1 <0.1 2.4 30.5 30.3
PAH content %m/m 3.6 0.8 <0.1 1.9 0.7 0.4
Total aromatics %m/m 34.0 7.0 0.1 17.9 5.1 4.5
Carbon content %m/m 86.45 85.33 84.62 85.66 83.59 83.60
Hydrogen content %m/m 13.05 14.12 15.38 14.08 13.12 13.12
Oxygen content %m/m 0.50 0.55 0.00 0.26 3.29 3.27
Net heating value (m) MJ/kg 42.69 43.23 44.17 43.38 41.69 41.69
Net heating value (v) MJ/l 36.07 34.80 33.75 34.92 34.39 34.44
IBP °C 162.1 171.2 192.5 176.8 173.7 169.3
T50 °C 277.4 209.4 238.3 251.9 230.7 233.4
© Concawe.

T95 °C 355.8 351.4 288.8 338.1 347.8 350.3

FBP °C 366.7 362.7 301.5 354.1 354.5 354.9
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

4 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

fuel content. It was also postulated that paraffinic fuel blends TABLE 2 Key test vehicle details
could offer the opportunity to provide emissions benefits
Car A Car B Car C
while remaining nearer to the existing EN590 specification.
Emissions class M1 M1 M1
Size category C - SUV C C
Fuel 5 - B30 based on LD B5 Emissions certification Euro 5b Euro 6b Euro
(B30) Year of registration 2013 2016
6d-TEMP
2017
The B30 fuel was configured from an altered ratio of the Swept volume (l) 1.6 1.5 1.5
components in Fuel 2, low density petroleum-based diesel Exhaust after-treatment HP EGR, HP EGR, HP EGR,
(70%v/v) and UCOME (30%v/v). This fuel was designed to DOC, LNT, DPF, PNA, urea-
enable the impact of high FAME content levels, so far only DPF passive SCR SCR, SCRF
used in captive fleets, on emissions. It was postulated that the Transmission DCT6 M6 M6
increased NOx emissions historically associated with the use SOT mileage (km) 91,000 10,000 6,000

© Concawe.
of high FAME fuels could be mitigated by the sophisticated Mass in running order 1365 1420 1355
exhaust aftertreatment used in the latest vehicles. (kg)

Fuel 6 - B30 + Cetane FIGURE 1 Schematics of exhaust aftertreatment systems of

Number Improver (B30+CNI) the test vehicles.

Fuel 6 comprised Fuel 5 with a high dose of 2-Ethyl Hexyl

Nitrate (2-EHN) CNI of 0.52%v/v, (B30+CNI). The rationale
was that the addition of CNI was found to be effective at miti-
gating NOx penalties associated with the use of high biodiesel
blends used in HD trucks in California, [11] and could also
yield some other emission benefits.

Key Fuel Properties

Key properties of the test fuels are summarized in Table 1 and
full properties are listed in the Appendix. It is notable that

© Concawe.
there is an anomalous measured difference in PAH and total
aromatics between F5 and F6, which is in fact within the
reproducibility of the measurement method.

Experimental Programme
Test Vehicles
The test vehicles were chosen based on representation of: Vehicle Preparation
•• vehicle types currently common in the Ahead of testing, the serviceability of each vehicle and OBD
European market; were checked for existing faults and identified faults were
rectified. The vehicles were within their recommended service
•• engine and emission control technologies currently intervals for the duration of the test programme, therefore
common in the European market; avoiding the need for servicing mid-programme and they
•• vehicles certified to Euro 5, Euro 6b and Euro were each filled with the OEM recommended lubricant. An
6d-TEMP standards; oil analysis prior to the start of testing did not indicate signifi-
cant historical fuel ingress to the lubricant. Road load models
•• different parent OEMs (Original were derived from track-based coastdowns. Access to key
Equipment Manufacturers); OBD data channels was checked and data was accessible from
•• common passenger car segments and engine sizes. the three vehicles using a DiagRA tool. However EGR activity
which was deemed to be a critical parameter was not readable
The two Euro 6 vehicles had been used on previous from the Euro 5 car via OBD and the car’s EGR valve position
Concawe test programmes and had low mileage. The Euro 5 was instrumented to enable EGR valve activity data to
car was purchased second hand from the UK market for this be monitored during testing and ensure consistency between
study and had a representative mileage for a 2013 car of tests. Static DPF regenerations were carried out on the
91,000km at start of test. vehicles via the relevant main-dealer networks to ensure a
Key test vehicle details are given Table 2 and schematics consistent starting point in terms of DPF fill, given that data
of their exhaust aftertreatment systems are shown in Figure 1. pertaining to the fill state of the DPFs was not obtainable.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 5

Engine lubricant levels were monitored throughout the test A full WLTC was run as a pre-conditioning ahead of the
programme and top-ups were not required. measured test run. Vehicles were stored at the ambient test
temperature of 23°C for a minimum of 6 hours, typically 8
hours, prior to the measured cold start WLTC. OBD measure-
Test Facility and ments of engine oil and coolant temperature were used to
Measurements check that they did not differ substantially from the target test
temperature of 23°C at start of test.
Tests were carried out over the WLTC in a temperature Following each test, the test data were examined and the
controlled chassis dynamometer facility. Gaseous emissions test was repeated if it was deemed that the test had been
were measured using Horiba OBS-ONE analysers, recording affected by a DPF regeneration or abnormal application of the
both bagged and continuous emissions from a CVS (Constant start-stop system.
Volume Sampling) system with emissions from the WLTC
low sub-cycle being captured in bag 1, from the medium sub-
cycle - bag 2, high sub-cycle - bag 3, extra-high sub-cycle - Test Execution
bag 4.
In addition to the tailpipe emissions measurement, The test order was designed so that the repeats on each fuel
engine-out (post turbocharger, pre-exhaust aftertreatment) were positioned approximately symmetrically about the mid-
measurements of CO2, NOx, HC and CO were carried out on point of the test sequence. This ensures that the fuel means
the Euro 6d-TEMP vehicle only, to determine if any fuel effects would have experienced minimal adjustment had (linear) drift
on emissions were suppressed or amplified in the exhaust been present in the data and a correction applied. Each fuel
aftertreatment system, and also provide further understanding was followed by a test on a different fuel and repeated pairings
of the potential effects of the fuel properties investigated in of the same fuels were also avoided so that, in the very unlikely
vehicles with less sophisticated exhaust aftertreatment event that the effects of a fuel carried over into the following
systems, through interrogation of the engine-out emissions. test, any impact would be distributed across multiple fuels.
Measurements are summarized in Table 3. As Fuel 1 and Fuel 2 were used as references for the other fuels,
more tests were carried out on these fuels to increase the statis-
tical power of the fuel comparisons. Tests identified as invalid
Test Protocol at the time of running were repeated in-sequence whereas
those identified later as non-conforming were repeated in a
Ahead of each WLTC the fuel was changed to the next fuel: position in the sequence subject to the constraint of avoiding
•• the vehicle fuel tank was completely drained using an successive tests on the same fuel. The detailed formulation of
external pump; the fuels was not disclosed to the test facility until after the
test programme was complete, (details required for the correct
•• 5 litres of the new fuel was added and the vehicle run at calculation of fuel and energy consumption were disclosed).
idle for 10 minutes to flush the old fuel from the This ensured that all testing was blind and that the decision
fuel system;
to omit any test as invalid on operational grounds and repeat
•• the tank was drained again and the tank was filled with it was made without any knowledge of expected performance.
20 litres of the new test fuel ready for test. Part way through the test programme it was noticed that
the results from the Euro 6d-TEMP car (C) were less repeat-
able than the other vehicles despite the same rigorous approach
TABLE 3 Measurements and measuring systems to preparation and testing. This was attributed to a malfunc-
tioning battery causing poor start / stop repeatability and
Measuring system Metrics possibly varying levels of battery charging/discharging
Chassis dynamometer control Speed, load, test cell air between tests. The series of tests was restarted on this vehicle
computer temperature, EGR valve after a new battery was fitted, and the repeatability observed
voltage (Euro 5 car only) substantially improved. The actual test order deviated from
Horiba OBS-ONE (dilute gas Dilute bagged and continuous the planned test order due to operational requirements and
systems) tailpipe NOx, NO, CO2, CO, HC,
the actual order for valid tests for each vehicle is shown in
gravimetric PM
Table 4.
DiagRA OBD (On-Board Diagnostics)
parameters
Quantum Cascade Laser (QCL) NH3, N2O (Nitrous Oxide)

Cambustion Differential
(tailpipe)
Particle size distribution
Data Analysis
Mobility Particle Sizer DMS500 (tailpipe)
SPCS (Solid Particle Counting PN > 23nm d50 (median Data Quality
System) PMP method particle size) (tailpipe)
Particle number down to ten PN > 4nm d50, PN > 10nm PN measurements were seen to increase by an order of magni-
(DTT) system d50, PN >23nm d50 (tailpipe) tude in tests where a DPF regeneration had occurred, not in
© Concawe.

Horiba OBS-ONE (raw gas Euro 6d-TEMP car only: Engine the test itself but in the pre-conditioning stage, this is thought
systems) out HC, CO, CO2, NOx to be due to the filtration efficiency being lowest immediately
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

6 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

TABLE 4 Fuels test order applied to the three test vehicles

Statistical Analysis
Test No. Car A Car B Car C
The statistical analysis was carried out separately for each car
Test 1 F1 F1 F1
and is based on a simple one-way Analysis of Variance
Test 2 F4 F2 F4 (ANOVA) with Fuel as the factor. Standard statistical methods
Test 3 F2 F5 F2 such as ANOVA assume that the variation in the data is
Test 4 F5 F1 F6 constant regardless of the level of the mean but many emis-
Test 5 F1 F3 F1 sions measurements exhibit proportional variation where the
Test 6 F3 F6 F5 variability of the measurements increases with its mean level.
Test 7 F2 F2 F2 This is not a concern for CO2 emissions, fuel consumption
Test 8 F6 F6 F3 and the related GHG CO2 equivalent and energy consumption
measurements as these are predominantly determined by the
Test 9 F1 F1 F1
vehicle and fuel effects are small in relative terms. However,
Test 10 F5 F5 F3
for other emissions where large proportional differences can
Test 11 F2 F2 F5 arise between fuels, a weighted analysis has been applied
Test 12 F4 F4 F2 where the weights correspond to 1/(Mean2). This weighting
Test 13 F3 F3 F4 has no effect on the fuel means but gives more weight to

© Concawe.
Test 14 F1 F1 F6 smaller measurements, which are more precise, and smaller
Test 15 F6 F4 F1 fuel means will therefore have smaller confidence intervals
than larger fuel means.
The study was designed to evaluate the impact of fuel
after a regeneration until a soot cake has reformed. As no other properties, namely density, paraffinic fuel content, B30 and
measurements were affected, the test was not rejected or B30 with CNI via a small fuel matrix using a pre-defined set
repeated. However, these inflated PN measurements were of fuel comparisons. With more than one reference fuel
omitted from the analysis of the Euro 5 car (Test 5 - F1 and involved, fuel differences have been assessed for significance
Test 13 - F3) and Euro 6d-TEMP car (Test 4 - F6 and Test 9 - using the Holm-Bonferroni method which protects the family-
F1). The Euro 6b car had unusually variable PN measurements, wise error to provide protection against the risk of false posi-
which appeared to follow a cycle between the DPF regenera- tives but offers greater statistical power than other, more
tions and, as all tests appeared to be affected in one way or severe, multiple comparison tests.
another, it was not possible to identify individual tests for
omission and all PN data have been included for this car.
In the Euro 6d-TEMP car, the test immediately following
the first DPF regeneration (Test 4 - F6) showed abnormally Results
high NO2 (Nitrogen dioxide) and, to a lesser extent, high NO
& NOx. Although not technically a statistical outlier, engi- Key results from the WLTC are described in this section and
neering advice was that it was a direct consequence of the DPF the full results are tabulated in the Appendix. Where shown
regeneration and this test should be omitted from the analysis on charts, error bars denote the 95% confidence intervals
of all NOx-related variables i.e. NOx, NO and NO2. about the mean. Differences between fuel means that are
The statistical analysis was carried out on all remaining statistically significant at the 95% confidence level from the
data declared valid by the test facility. Although statistical comparator fuel are marked with patterned bars. Fuel compar-
outlier testing was applied, no significant outliers were identi- isons follow logic based on blend similarity, as follows: -
fied for further omission. Visual analysis of the data identified •• EN590 B5 vs LD B5, PDF and PDF50
a few isolated occurrences of linear drift but this was not
consistent across the majority of measured responses in any •• LD B5 vs B30 and B30 + CNI
car and hence no adjustments for drift have been made. There
was evidence of a (statistically significant) step change in
WLTC CO2 levels following the first DPF regeneration in the
Euro 6b car. This step change was credited to the effect of the
Carbon Dioxide
regeneration and additionally significant in the related CO2 emissions differences between the EN590 B5 reference
measurements of fuel consumption, GHG (Greenhouse Gas) fuel, the LD B5, PDF and PDF50 are shown in Figure 2. These
emissions and energy consumption. Since only three fuels (F1, fuels with lower density and higher H/C ratio tend to give
F2 & F5) had been run before the regeneration, the means for lower CO2 emissions than the EN590 B5.
these fuels would be unfairly inflated relative to Fuels F3, F4 CO2 differences between the Low Density B5 fuel, the B30
& F6 and would have yielded misleading results. Hence, in and B30 with CNI are shown in Figure 3. Results are incon-
these instances, for the Euro 6b car, the test sequence was sistent between vehicles with CO2 being significantly higher
divided into blocks between DPF regenerations and a block with B30 in the Euro 5 car and with B30 + CNI in the Euro
effect has been fitted in the analysis. This adjusts the fuel 6b car, whereas in the other four cases differences were insig-
means to place them all on an equivalent footing for compar- nificant. It is possible that the high cetane number resulting
ison as well as removing the abnormal step change from the from the addition of the CNI could over-advance start of
estimate of random variation. combustion leading to lower thermal efficiency for vehicles
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 7

FIGURE 2 CO2 from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5, FIGURE 4 Volumetric fuel consumption from the EN590
Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend with B5, Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF
error bars denoting the 95% confidence interval about the 50:50 blend.
mean. Results which are significantly different from the EN590
B5 fuel are shown with patterned bars.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.

FIGURE 5 Volumetric fuel consumption from the Low

FIGURE 3 CO2 between the Low Density B5, B30 and B30 Density B5, B30 and B30 with CNI.
with CNI with error bars denoting the 95% confidence interval
about the mean. Results which are significantly different from
the EN590 B5 fuel are shown with patterned bars.
© Concawe.
© Concawe.

Volumetric fuel consumption for the B30 fuel was not

significantly different from the LD B5 fuel in any of the cars.
The B30 treated with CNI gave significantly higher fuel
calibrated to have optimal combustion phasing with fuels of consumption in the Euro 6b car only, Figure 5.
cetane numbers typical in the European market, (around
51-55). This is dependent on the calibration of the individual
vehicle type and could explain why CO2 (Figure 3) and volu- Energy Consumption
metric fuel consumption (Figure 5) is higher with B30+CNI
Energy consumption (MJ/100km) was calculated by multi-
in only one of the three test vehicles. Higher CO2 with B30 in
plying the fuel net heating value (MJ/kg) by the volumetric
the Euro 5 car could be due to de-optimization of fuel metering
fuel consumption (l/100km) and the fuel density (kg/l).
with the high oxygen-content fuel which would require higher
There was only one significant fuel effect on energy
injected fuel volumes compared to B5 fuel.
consumption for the low density fuels compared to the EN590
B5, which was in the Euro 6d-TEMP car with PDF which was
Volumetric Fuel Consumption significantly higher, Figure 6. It is postulated that this may
be due to the vehicle responding to the longer injection
Volumetric fuel consumption calculated from the carbon duration required with low density fuel which has resulted in
balance of emissions, the fuel H/C, O/C (Oxygen/Carbon) a different, less energy efficient operating region on the engine
ratios, energy content and density, was dominated by fuel volu- map being applied.
metric energy density and was therefore higher for the low Energy consumption for the B30 fuel was not significantly
density fuels than the comparator EN590 B5 fuel, see Figure 4. different from the LD B5 fuel in any of the cars. The B30
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

8 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

FIGURE 6 Energy consumption from the EN590 B5, Low FIGURE 8 NOx from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5,
Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend.
50:50 blend.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.
FIGURE 7 Energy consumption from the Low Density B5, exhaust aftertreatment. NOx differences were not significant
B30 and B30 with CNI. between the LD B5 and B30 fuels in the Euro 6 cars. The
addition of CNI to B30 did not reduce the NO x values in
any car, Figure 9. Traditionally, the addition of CNI may
have been expected to reduce the NOx increase sometimes
observed with the use of high FAME fuel concentrations.
The explanation why this is not observed here may
be twofold. Firstly there is the direct nitrogen contribution
of the CNI which could contribute to NOx and secondly,
modern diesel vehicles systematically employ multiple
injection strategies to control the auto-ignition delay with
pilot injections and may be less sensitive to CN for the
control of the premixed flame; hence less sensitive to CNI
for NOx emissions reduction. This could explain the trend
© Concawe.

seen in tailpipe NOx for the Euro 5 car (Figure 9) and the
trend in engine-out NOx for the Euro 6d-TEMP car
(Figure 29).
There were no significant differences in the fraction of
treated with CNI gave significantly lower energy consumption NO2 contained in the NOx emissions between any of the fuels,
in the Euro 6d-TEMP car only, Figure 7. see Appendix for data.

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)

NOx over the WLTC was substantially higher than the Euro FIGURE 9 NOx from the Low Density B5, B30 and B30
5 limit (180mg/km) from the Euro 5 car, (which was certified with CNI.
over the NEDC), whereas WLTC NOx from the Euro 6b car
(also certified over the NEDC) was close to the Euro 6 limit
(80mg/km). NOx from the Euro 6d-TEMP car over the WLTC
was under the Euro 6 limit in all cases. NOx was directionally
lower for all low-density fuels in all cars compared to the
EN590 B5, however none of the individual results were statisti-
cally significant at the 95% confidence limit, although LD B5
and PDF were significantly lower than the EN590 B5 at the
90% confidence level, Figure 8. Furthermore, PDF gave a
statistically significant benefit for NOx on a fleet average basis,
(i.e. when the fuel effects on NOx are pooled across the
three vehicles).
NO x was significantly higher with B30 fuel and with
© Concawe.

B30 + CNI than with LD B5 in the Euro 5 car which emitted

high absolute NOx levels and is not fitted with catalytic NOx
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 9

Particulate Mass and Particle FIGURE 11 Particle number in the >10nm range using the
DTT method from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5, Paraffinic
Number Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend fuels.
Mean particulate mass measured gravimetrically was less than
0.4mg/km for all fuels and there were no significant differ-
ences between fuels, see Appendix for data.
Particle number measurements were carried out in the
>23nm size range using the official PMP measurement method
and using the revised methodology and equipment developed
in ‘Down To Ten’ (DTT) [19] for >23nm, >10nm and >4nm
size ranges. Within the DTT measurements, approximately
5% fewer particles were reported in the >4nm range than in
the >10nm range indicating a lack of particles in the 4nm
-10nm range with the difference possibly due to particle

© Concawe.
counter dissimilarities. Around 22% more particles were
counted in the >10nm range than in the >23nm range using
the DTT method. This is consistent with the data generated
by the DTT project for the diesel vehicles equipped with a
DPF [20]. The DTT measurements in the > 23nm range are The B30 + CNI fuel produced higher PN than the compar-
also globally consistent with PMP measurements, with an ator LD B5 fuel in the Euro 6d-TEMP car in all size ranges
absolute count which differs between 30% and 40% on average and both measurement methodologies, however this was
(with the exception of one bigger relative difference, obtained based on a single valid test with the B30 + CNI fuel,
with the lowest absolute count measured). The difference Figures 12-13. The difference between LD B5 and B30 + CNI
between the 23nm PMP measurement and the 23nm DTT was smaller in the >10nm range than in the >23nm range,
measurement is due to the difference in data correction: PMP therefore the extended PN measuring size range would not
data are corrected for both dilution and losses, while DTT lead to a worsening effect on PN of this fuel. PN data is listed
data are only corrected for dilution. Except at the lowest emis- in the Appendix.
sions levels (less than ~109#/km) where the DTT system is
sensitive but levels are at the limit of detection for the PMP
equipment, the DTT and PMP systems are highly correlated. Carbon Monoxide
This indicates that losses in the DTT system at 23nm are CO over the WLTC was much higher than the Euro 5/6 limit
proportional to those in the PMP system. in the Euro 5 car in all cases and it is postulated that this is
Particle number means for all fuels, cars, measurement due to low catalyst volume, or precious metal loading to deal
methods and particle size classes were below the 6 x 1011 Euro with the CO instead of a difference due to the use of the WLTC
6 PN limit. In most cases means fell one or two orders of instead of the NEDC over which the car would have been
magnitude below the Euro 6 limit showing the effectiveness certified. CO was around an order of magnitude below the
of modern DPFs. Euro 5/6 limit from the Euro 6b and Euro 6d-TEMP cars. CO
Where there were valid repeat measurements, there were was significantly lower for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 than for
no significant differences in mean particulate number between EN590 B5 in both Euro 6 cars, whereas there were no signifi-
fuels, Figures 10-11. cant fuel differences in the Euro 5 car, Figure 14.

FIGURE 10 Particle number in the >23nm range using the FIGURE 12 Particle number in the >23nm range using the
PMP method from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5, Paraffinic PMP method from the LD B5 B30 and B30 + CNI.
Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend fuels.
© Concawe.
© Concawe.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

10 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

FIGURE 13 Particle number in the >10nm range using the FIGURE 15 CO from the Low Density B5, B30 and B30
DTT method from the LD B5 B30 and B30 + CNI. + CNI.

© Concawe.
FIGURE 14 CO from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5,
Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend.

© Concawe.
FIGURE 16 HC from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5,
Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend.
© Concawe.

© Concawe.

CO was lower for the B30 and B30 + CNI fuels in the Euro
5 and Euro 6d-TEMP cars, but the difference was only statisti-
cally significant in the Euro 6d-TEMP car with B30 + CNI, There was no impact on HC with B30 or B30 + CNI
Figure 15. compared to LD B5 that was consistent between vehicles or
statistically significant, Figure 17.
Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbon emissions were very low for all fuels and cars. Greenhouse Gases
HC was directionally lower for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 than
for EN590 B5 in most cases and the differences were signifi- Methane Methane emissions were generally very low,
cant in all cases in the Euro 6d-TEMP car and in the Euro 6b though were substantially higher from the Euro 6b car than
car with PDF fuel, Figure 16. the others. This is thought to be due to the aftertreatment
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 11

FIGURE 17 HC from the Low Density B5, B30 and B30 FIGURE 19 Methane from the Low Density B5, B30 and
+ CNI. B30 with CNI with error bars denoting the 95%
confidence interval.
© Concawe.

© Concawe.
system of the vehicle which includes a lean NOx trap that relies
on periodic rich spikes for regeneration and some of the N2O is generally lower for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 than
exhaust methane could be from this source. Comparing the for EN590 B5, differences are significant in the Euro 5 car for
data in Figures 16 and 18 shows that most of the HC emissions PDF and PDF50 and in the Euro 6d-TEMP car for LD B5 and
from the Euro 6b car are attributable to methane, whereas the PDF50, Figure 20.
proportion of methane in the HC emissions from the other There were no differences in nitrous oxide between LD
cars is much lower. B5, B30 and B30 + CNI that were consistent between vehicles,
The effect of LD B5, PDF and PDF50 on methane was Figure 21.
directionally similar to that on total hydrocarbons, with
reductions in most cases, albeit with the magnitude and statis- Total Greenhouse Gas The emissions of CO2, methane
tical significance of the effects tending to be lower, Figure 18. and nitrous oxide were added to determine a total GHG emis-
Similarly to HC, there was no statistically significant sions figure for each fuel and car combination in terms of
impact on methane with B30 or B30 + CNI compared to LD global warming potential (GWP) 100 year figures for CO2e
B5, except in the Euro 5 car where methane for B30 + CNI (CO2 equivalent) using the GREET model [21].
was significantly lower than for LD B5, Figure 19. The GWP of the methane emissions measured in terms
of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) lie between 0.06 - 0.6g/km and the
Nitrous Oxide Nitrous oxide emissions were below 10mg/ GWP of the nitrous oxide emissions measured in terms of
km in all cases from all three cars. Higher N2O emissions CO2e lie between 1.6 - 2.3g/km.
would have been expected from vehicles with catalytic de-NOx The results showed significantly lower GHG for LD B5,
systems. It is speculated that N2O from the air (at ~350ppb) PDF and PDF50 except for PDF50 in the Euro 6b car which
might survive combustion and contribute to exhaust N2O was significant at the 90% confidence limit. In 8 out of the 9
levels. In this case it could be the dominant source in the cases total GHG differences were larger than CO2 differences
exhaust. N2O was measured raw, so no background correction
for N2O was applied.
FIGURE 20 Nitrous oxide from the EN590 B5, Low Density
FIGURE 18 Methane from the EN590 B5, Low Density B5, B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend with
Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend. error bars denoting the 95% confidence interval.
© Concawe.
© Concawe.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

12 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

FIGURE 21 Nitrous oxide from the Low Density B5, B30 FIGURE 23 Total GHG emissions (CO2, CH4 and N2O) from
and B30 + CNI. the Low Density B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.
FIGURE 22 Total GHG emissions (CO2, CH4 and N2O) from FIGURE 24 Ammonia emissions from the EN590 B5, Low
the EN590 B5, Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF
EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend. 50:50 blend.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.

(and in the ninth case equal), due to benefits in both nitrous emissions were suppressed or amplified in the exhaust after-
oxide and methane (CH4), Figure 22. treatment system. This also provides further understanding
GHG emissions on a CO2e basis showed little difference of the potential effects of the fuel properties in vehicles with
from the CO2 results for the B30 and B30 + CNI fuels compared less sophisticated exhaust aftertreatment systems, though it
to the LD B5 fuel, Figure 23. is accepted that other differences exist between modern and
older technology vehicles, such as differences in engine
management and hardware, calibration and fuel injection
Ammonia system sophistication, which could lead to different fuel effects
on emissions.
Ammonia emissions were very low in the Euro 5 and Euro 6b
cars (<1 mg/km) which were not equipped with urea-SCR and
considerably higher in the Euro 6d-TEMP car (with urea- Carbon Dioxide Raw, time-resolved (modal) engine-out
SCR), despite the presence of an ASC. No fuel related differ- emissions, were measured versus bagged emissions via a CVS,
ences were detected in either the low density or B30 fuel set, together with the tailpipe sampling with the latter method
Figures 24 and 25. being of accepted higher accuracy. This difference in accuracy
is postulated as being the reason for the consistently lower
tailpipe CO2 levels versus engine-out. The expectation would
Comparison of Engine-out be that CO2 would be very similar, or slightly higher in the
and Tailpipe Emissions tailpipe sample due to the oxidation of carbon-containing
species (CO, HC, PM) in the exhaust oxidizing catalysts.
Engine-out (post turbocharger, pre-exhaust aftertreatment) Trends in engine-out CO2 were similar to those of tailpipe
measurements of CO2, NOx, HC and CO were carried out on CO 2 , though engine-out results are more variable,
the Euro 6d-TEMP vehicle to determine if any fuel effects on Figures 26-27.
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 13

FIGURE 25 Ammonia emissions from the Low Density B5, FIGURE 28 Engine-out and tailpipe NOx from the EN590
B30 and B30 + CNI. B5 and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/
PDF 50:50 blend.
© Concawe.

© Concawe.
FIGURE 26 Engine-out and tailpipe CO2 from the EN590
B5 and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/
PDF 50:50 blend. FIGURE 29 Engine-out and tailpipe NOx from the Low
Density B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.
© Concawe.

© Concawe.

FIGURE 27 Engine-out and tailpipe CO2 from the Low

Density B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.
for the NOx benefit in the PDF50 fuel relative to the EN590 B5.
Engine-out emissions from the low sub-cycle of the WLTC
including the cold start are similar to those from the whole
WLTC, though tailpipe emissions are substantially higher due
to aftertreatment efficiency related to temperature. Fuel effects
are similar between the low sub-cycle and whole WLTC, see
Appendix for data.
Engine-out NOx from B30 and B30 + CNI is significantly
higher than from LD B5, however these differences are not
significant in the tailpipe emissions, meaning that these fuels
may require more conversion from the aftertreatment system,
which is actually achieved, Figure 29.
© Concawe.

Carbon Monoxide Tailpipe CO levels are much lower

than engine-out levels due to the oxidizing activity of the
exhaust aftertreatment system. Reduction of engine-out CO
NOx Engine-out NOx is substantially reduced across the is evident for the PDF and PDF50 fuels relative to the EN590
exhaust aftertreatment system and there are statistically signifi- B5, however this is only significant in the PDF50 results due
cant benefits in engine-out NOx for LD B5 and PDF50 versus to the relatively high variability in the engine-out data.
EN590 B5, requiring less conversion efforts from the aftertreat- Furthermore, there is no benefit in engine-out CO evident
ment system, Figure 28. It is somewhat surprising that larger for the LD B5 vs EN590 B5 despite there being a significant
engine out NOx benefits are not observed for the PDF, difference in the tailpipe data. This appears to indicate that
presuming that the lack of aromatics in the fuel is the reason a fuel benefit manifests within the aftertreatment system to
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

14 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

FIGURE 30 Engine-out and tailpipe CO from the EN590 B5 FIGURE 32 Engine-out and tailpipe CO from the Low
and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF Density B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.
50:50 blend.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.
FIGURE 33 WLTC low sub-cycle engine-out and tailpipe
CO from the Low Density B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.
FIGURE 31 WLTC low sub-cycle engine-out and tailpipe CO
from the EN590 B5 and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel
and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend.

© Concawe.
© Concawe.

FIGURE 34 Engine-out and tailpipe HC from the EN590 B5

and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF
50:50. (Tailpipe results for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 are all
enhance the oxidation of CO, however this could be an significantly lower than for EN590 B5).
artefact of the variability of the engine-out measurement,
Figure 30.
Engine out CO was much higher from the low sub-cycle,
which includes the cold start emissions, than the whole
WLTC. Tailpipe emissions were also much higher due to part
of this period being before the oxidation catalyst light-off
temperature being reached. Fuel effects were larger in both
engine-out and tailpipe CO emissions for this sub-cycle, being
significantly lower for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 than for EN590
B5, Figure 31.
Statistically significant reduction of engine-out CO is
evident for the B30 and B30 + CNI fuels relative to the LD B5,
© Concawe.

however this is only significant for the B30 + CNI fuel in the
tailpipe data, Figure 32. In the WLTC low sub-cycle data only
the B30 + CNI gives a significant reduction in CO versus LD
B5 which is in both the engine-out and tailpipe data, Figure 33. B5, PDF and PDF50 fuels relative to the EN590 B5, differences
which are all statistically significant (as is the case for the
Hydrocarbons Tailpipe HC levels are much lower than tailpipe data), Figure 34.
engine-out levels due to the oxidation activity of the exhaust Engine out HC was much higher from the low sub-cycle,
catalysts. Reduction of engine-out HC is evident for the LD which includes the cold start emissions, than from the whole
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 15

FIGURE 35 WLTC low sub-cycle engine-out and tailpipe FIGURE 37 WLTC low sub-cycle engine-out and tailpipe
HC from the EN590 B5 and Low Density B5, Paraffinic Diesel HC from the LD B5, B30 and B30 + CNI.
Fuel and EN590 B5/PDF 50:50 blend. (Tailpipe results for LD
B5, PDF and PDF50 are all significantly lower than for
EN590 B5).

© Concawe.
© Concawe.

the fuels tested have potential to provide renewability benefits

as well as the TTW effects studied, but in many cases addi-
tional OEM certification would be required to deploy such
fuels for general automotive use in the European market. The
FIGURE 36 Engine-out and tailpipe HC from the LD B5,
scope of the study was limited to one example each of Euro 5,
B30 and B30 + CNI. 6b and 6d-TEMP European passenger cars due to resource
constraints and this limitation should be taken into account
when considering the applicability of the findings.
Results showed that low-density hydrocarbon fuels can
offer TTW CO2 benefits, but with an accompanying increase
in volumetric fuel consumption. When combining CO2, CH4
and N2O emissions, these fuels also offer total TTW GHG
benefits. In terms of emissions that could affect local air
quality, the low-density hydrocarbon fuels provided benefits
in CO, HC, and some directional benefits in NOx. The engine-
out versus tailpipe data available for the Euro 6d-TEMP
vehicle tested are a clear example of the major positive impact
that advanced aftertreatment systems have on emissions
© Concawe.

control. The effectiveness of the aftertreatment system greatly

reduced emissions, in turn leading to the reduction of emis-
sions benefits engine-out to much lower margins for NOx,
THC and CO. These effects were particularly evident in the
WLTC. Tailpipe emissions were also much higher due to part cold start phase for HC and CO. More than 50% of the benefits
of this period being before the oxidation catalyst light-off observed from using the PDF (in some cases of CO2, HC, CO,
temperature being reached. Fuel effects were larger in both NO x) arose from using a 50% blend of paraffinic diesel
engine-out and tailpipe HC emissions for this sub-cycle, being (combined with an EN590 B5) as well as having less than 50%
significantly lower for LD B5, PDF and PDF50 than for EN590 of the volumetric fuel consumption penalty of using neat PDF.
B5, Figure 35. Another positive effect on fuel-related emissions was evident
Over the whole WLTC, B30 and B30 + CNI both produced in the B30 fuel set, where large statistically significant NOx penal-
significantly lower engine-out HC than LD B5, whereas these ties observed in the engine-out emissions of the Euro 6d-TEMP
differences were not significant in the much lower tailpipe vehicle from B30 were greatly reduced to insignificant levels in
data, Figure 36. In the WLTC low sub-cycle data only the B30 the tailpipe data. This trend of NOx aftertreatment suppressing
+ CNI gives a significant reduction in HC versus LD B5 which NOx penalties associated with high FAME fuels was echoed in
is only observed in the engine-out data, Figure 37. the data produced from the Euro 5 vehicle, which having no NOx
aftertreatment, presented a penalty in NOx for the B30 fuel both
with and without CNI. On the other hand, comparing the
engine-out and tailpipe B30 fuel set data from the Euro 6d-TEMP
Summary vehicle shows that the benefits in HC (and CO in the case of B30
+ CNI) present in the engine-out data are deleted in the tailpipe
The emissions and fuel consumption performance of six diesel data where absolute emission levels are greatly reduced.
fuels have been tested over the WLTC in three European The B30 + CNI fuel was included primarily to determine
passenger cars to determine their potential benefits. Most of if the addition of CNI could mitigate any NOx penalties arising
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

16 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

from the high FAME level in B30 (as is practiced for HD some additional benefits may be achieved from
vehicles in California, [11]). In these LD vehicles, where there application of specific fuel qualities (CH4, N2O).
was a significant difference between NOx produced with B30 •• Some traditional benefits of fuel quality on emissions are
and B30 + CNI, this was to the disadvantage of the CNI-treated reduced or even deleted in the tailpipe emissions of cars
fuel (in the Euro 6d-TEMP engine-out data and in the case of using advanced aftertreatment.
the Euro 5 car which does not have NOx aftertreatment). This
could possibly be contributed to by the direct nitrogen-addition •• Most of the fuels tested have potential to provide
of the additive, nevertheless a benefit was certainly not present. renewability benefits as well as the TTW effects studied,
Furthermore, the only significant fuel effect on PN in the but in many cases additional OEM certification would
programme was a detriment for B30 + CNI versus the compar- be required to deploy such fuels for general automotive
ator LD B5, although this was based on a single valid test use in the European market.
measurement on the B30 + CNI fuel. In this case the difference
in PN between the B30 + CNI and LD B5 comparator fuel was
smaller in the >10nm range than in the >23nm range indicating
References
that future legislation extending the PN size range would not
result in additional disadvantages in PN for this fuel formula- 1. EN 590 - Diesel - Requirements and test methods (includes
tion. The only positive effect of the CNI appeared to be in HC amendment: 2017).
and CO (observed in the engine out and tailpipe CO and engine 2. Renewable Energy Directive 2018/2001/EU.
out HC of the Euro 6d-TEMP car only, and in particular in the 3. Williams, A., McCormick, R.L., Hayes, R.R., Ireland, J. et al.,
cold start phase). These effects could be attributable to reduced “Effect of Biodiesel Blends on Diesel Particulate Filter
premixing associated with higher CN fuels, [10]. Performance,” SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-3280, 2006,
There are a number of new motor vehicle pollutants on https://doi.org/10.4271/2006-01-3280.
the horizon for future regulation, some of which were 4. Czerwinski, J., Bürki, S., Bonsack, P., Mayer, A. et al., “DPF’s
measured in this programme. Within these, primary observa- Regeneration Procedures and Emissions with RME Blend
tions are that the greenhouse gases N2O and CH4 can be posi- Fuels,” SAE Technical Paper 2012-01-0844, 2012, https://doi.
tively influenced by low density hydrocarbon fuels, whereas org/10.4271/2012-01-0844.
there were no additional fuel effects on PN in the sub-23nm 5. Bhardwaj, O., Kremer, K., Pischinger, S., Lüers, B. et al.,
range, nor in NH3 emissions, with measurement of the latter “Impact of Biomass-Derived Fuels on Soot Oxidation and
illustrating that NH3 emissions are almost unmeasurable DPF Regeneration Behavior,” SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-
unless a urea-activated SCR catalyst is employed. 1551, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-1551.
6. Lamharess, N., Starck, L., Millet, C.N., and Da Costa, P.,
“Effect of Biofuels on Catalyzed Diesel Particulate Filter
Conclusions Regeneration,” Topics in Catalysis 56:462-466, 2013.
7. Rose, K.D., Hamje, H., Jansen, L., Fittavolini, C. et al.,
The emissions and fuel consumption performance of six “Impact of FAME Content on the Regeneration Frequency of
‘drop-in’ diesel fuels has been tested over short duration Diesel Particulate Filters,” SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-
WLTCs in single examples of European passenger cars repre- 1605, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-1605.
senting Euro 5, Euro 6b and Euro 6d-TEMP certification 8. Concawe Report 6/14: Impact of FAME on the performance
levels. Bearing in mind the limitations of the study in terms of three Euro 4 light duty vehicles: Part 1 fuel consumption
of vehicles and test scenarios, it can be concluded that: - and regulated emissions, Brussels, May 2014.
9. Nikanjam, M., Rutherford, J., and Morgan, P., “Performance
•• Low-density hydrocarbon fuels can offer benefits in
and Emissions of Diesel and Alternative Diesel Fuels in
TTW CO2, other GHG emissions and emissions
Modern Light-Duty Diesel Vehicles,” SAE Technical Paper
impacting local air quality. Using paraffinic diesel as a
2011-24-0198, 2011, https://doi.org/10.4271/2011-24-0198.
blend component can give disproportionally large
benefits in these emissions which bodes well for cases 10. Williams, R., Hamje, H., Rickeard, D., Bartsch, T. et al.,
where PDFs are in short supply and in the future when “Effect of Diesel Properties on Emissions and Fuel
HVO, BTL and PTL fuels become more widely available. Consumption from Euro 4, 5 and 6 European Passenger
Cars,” SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-2246, 2016, https://doi.
•• Advanced exhaust aftertreatment suppresses the negative org/10.4271/2016-01-2246.
NOx effects associated with the use of high FAME
11. Durbin, T.D., Miller, J.W. et al, “ CARB Assessment of the
content fuels, opening the door to the use of such fuels in
Emissions from the Use of Biodiesel as a Motor Vehicle Fuel
markets dominated by advanced vehicles, therefore
in California,” Biodiesel Characterization and NOx
enabling increased use of such renewables without local
Mitigation Study, On-line report: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/
air quality drawbacks.
fuels/diesel/altdiesel/20111013_carb%20final%20
•• In the European passenger cars tested, the use of high biodiesel%20report.pdf.
levels of CNI did not mitigate the NOx penalty traditionally 12. Fuel Quality Directive, European Commission Directive
associated with the use of high FAME content fuels. 98/70/EC and amendments.
•• Deleterious fuel effects were not evident in the emissions 13. Shukla, P., Shamun, S., Gren, L., Malmborg, V. et al.,
slated for future regulation (<23nm PN, NH3) however, “Investigation of Particle Number Emission Characteristics
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 17

in a Heavy-Duty Compression Ignition Engine Fueled with DCT - Dual Clutch Transmission
Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO),” SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. DiagRA - OBD data reader
11(4):495-505, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0909.
DMS - Differential Mobility particle Sizer
14. Omari, A., Pischinger, S., Bhardwaj, O., Holderbaum, B.
et al., “Improving Engine Efficiency and Emission Reduction DOC - Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
Potential of HVO by Fuel-Specific Engine Calibration in DPF - Diesel Particulate Filter
Modern Passenger Car Diesel Applications,” SAE Int. J. Fuels DTT - Down To Ten (10 nanometer particle counting)
Lubr. 10(3), 2017, https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-2295.
2-EHN - 2-Ethyl Hexyl Nitrate
15. Napolitano, P., Beatrice, C., Guido, C., Del Giacomo, N.
et al., “Hydrocracked Fossil Oil and Hydrotreated Vegetable EPA - Environmental Protection Agency (US)
Oil (HVO) Effects on Combustion and Emissions FBP - Final Boiling Point
Performance of “Torque-Controlled” Diesel Engines,” SAE FAME - Fatty Acid Methyl Ester
Technical Paper 2015-24-2497, 2015, https://doi.
org/10.4271/2015-24-2497. GHG - Greenhouse Gas(es)
16. UNE EN 15940:2016+A1:2019+AC:2019, Automotive fuels - GTL - Gas-To-Liquids
Paraffinic diesel fuel from synthesis or hydrotreatment - GWP - Global Warming Potential
Requirements and test methods. HC - Hydrocarbons
17. Yugo, M., and Soler, A., “A look into the role of e-fuels in the
H/C ratio - Hydrogen to Carbon ratio
transport system in Europe (2030-2050),” Concawe Review
28(1), October 2019. HD - Heavy Duty
18. Williams, R., Hamje, H., Andersson, J., Ziman, P., Rickeard, HP EGR - High Pressure Exhaust Gas Recirculation
D., Pellegrini, L., and Fittavolini, C., “Effect of fuel quality on HVO - Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil
emissions over RDE and a comparison of RDE and CD test
IBP - Initial Boiling Point
emissions from Euro 6 diesel cars,” in IMechE Powertrains
Conference, Birmingham, UK, 2017. LD - Light Duty
19. http://www.downtoten.com/. LD B5 - Low Density B5
20. “Measuring automotive exhaust particles down to 10 LNT - Lean NOx Trap
nanometres -DownToTen, SUREAL23 Final Event, 10 M6 - 6-speed manual transmission
December 2019, Lyon” http://sureal-23.cperi.certh.gr/wp-
NEDC - New European Drive Cycle
content/documents/COMMON/Dissemination_Material/
Final%20Event/Presentations/191210_S23FinalWorskshop_ NH3 - Ammonia
DownToTen.pdf. NO2 - Nitrogen dioxide
21. AR5/GWP figures for the 100-year potential, GREET model: NOx - Oxides of Nitrogen
https://greet.es.anl.gov/greet.models.
OBD - On-board Diagnostics
O/C - Oxygen to carbon ratio
Contact Information OEM - Original Equipment Manufacturer
Roland Dauphin PAH - Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
roland.dauphin@concawe.eu
PDF(50) - Paraffinic Diesel Fuel (50% by volume)
PM - Particulate Matter/Mass
Acknowledgments PMP - Particle Measurement Programme
Ricardo UK, Automotive and Industrial PN - Particle Number
Coryton Specialty Fuels, UK
PNA - Passive NOx Adsorber
PTL - Power-To-Liquids
Definitions/Abbreviations QCL - Quantum Cascade Laser
ASC - Ammonia Slip Catalyst RDE - Real Driving Emissions
B5, B30 - Diesel containing 5% or 30% Biodiesel by volume RME - Rapeseed Methyl Ester
BTL - Biomass-To-Liquid SCR(F) - Selective Catalytic Reduction (on Filter)
CARB - California Air Resources Board SOT - Start of Test
CH4 - Methane SPCS - Solid Particle Counting System
CNI - Cetane Number Improver SUV - Sports Utility Vehicle
CO - Carbon monoxide T50 - Temperature for 50%v evaporations
CO2(e) - Carbon dioxide (equivalent) TTW - Tank To Wheels
CVS - Constant Volume Sampling UCOME - Used Cooking Oil Methyl Ester
d50 - Median particle diameter WLTC - Worldwide harmonized Light-duty Test Cycle
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

18 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

Appendix A: Fuel Properties

TABLE A1 Fuel properties

EN590 F1 - F2 - LD F4 -
Property Units Method EN590 min max. EN590 B5 B5 F3 - PDF PDF50 F5 - B30 F6 - B30 + CNI
Appearance visual C&B C&B C&B C&B C&B C&B
Density at 15°C kg/l EN ISO 12185 820 845 0.845 0.805 0.764 0.805 0.825 0.826
Cetane number - EN ISO 5165 51 52.0 51.4 79.6 67.0 52.4 65.8
Carbon residue %m/m EN ISO 10370 0.3 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Flashpoint °C EN ISO 2719 55 58.5 56.5 73.0 65.5 62.0
Lubricity, WSD at um EN ISO 12156-1 460 n/a 194 400 247 n/a
60°C
Sulphur mg/kg ASTM D5453 10 10 1.5 1.0 5.9 1.8
Viscosity at 40°C mm2/s EN ISO 3104 2.57 1.66 1.95 2.18 2.09 2.10
Water content Mg/kg EN ISO 12937 200 50 30 40 120
FAME content %v/v EN 14078 7 4.6 5.1 <0.1 2.4 30.5 30.3
Mono-aromatics %m/m IP 391 mod 30.4 6.2 0.1 16.0 4.4
Di-aromatics %m/m IP 391 mod 3.6 0.8 <0.1 1.9 0.7
Tri+ aromatics %m/m IP 391 mod 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0
PAH content %m/m IP 391 mod 8.0 3.6 0.8 <0.1 1.9 0.7 0.4
Total aromatics %m/m IP 391 mod 34.0 7.0 0.1 17.9 5.1 4.5
Carbon content %m/m ASTM D3343 86.45 85.33 84.62 85.66 83.59 83.60
mod
Hydrogen %m/m ASTM D3343 13.05 14.12 15.38 14.08 13.12 13.12
content mod
Oxygen content %m/m EN 14078 0.50 0.55 0.00 0.26 3.29 3.27
Net heating MJ/kg ASTM D3338 42.69 43.23 44.17 43.38 41.69 41.69
value
E250 %v/v EN ISO 3405 65 36.7 n/a 62.1 48.8 57.5
E350 %v/v EN ISO 3405 85 93.4 n/a 98.7 97.0 95.7
IBP °C EN ISO 3405 162.1 171.2 192.5 176.8 173.7 169.3
T50 °C EN ISO 3405 277.4 209.4 238.3 251.9 230.7 233.4

© Concawe.
T95 °C EN ISO 3405 355.8 351.4 288.8 338.1 347.8 350.3
FBP °C EN ISO 3405 366.7 362.7 301.5 354.1 354.5 354.9
 TABLE B1 Test data Euro 5 WLTC
Test Fuel_ QCL_ QCL_ NO2_
No Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PM PN >23nm Cons Distance N2O NH3 DTT_4nm DTT_10nm GHG Frac NHV Density EC
g/km mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/km mg/ mg/ # l/100km km mg/ mg/km # # g/km MJ/ kg/l MJ/100km
km km km km km km km kg
1 Fuel#1 125.7 991.6 14.03 662.2 315.3 4.776 178.5 0.152 1.256E+10 4.757 23.26 9.158 0.1950 1.314E+10 1.415E+10 128.27 0.2695 42.69 0.8447 171.56
2 Fuel#4 120.2 932.8 10.20 629.3 305.2 3.338 160.5 0.188 1.239E+10 4.818 23.26 7.194 0.1756 1.190E+10 1.254E+10 122.16 0.2550 43.38 0.8045 168.13
3 Fuel#2 120.6 1062.0 16.40 598.2 294.5 4.725 147.0 0.199 1.479E+10 4.860 23.25 8.450 0.5104 1.564E+10 1.645E+10 122.98 0.2458 43.23 0.805 169.12
4 Fuel#5 121.7 768.6 17.14 665.4 320.9 4.631 173.6 0.158 1.024E+10 4.867 23.26 7.657 0.1656 1.026E+10 1.069E+10 123.85 0.2609 41.69 0.8247 167.34
5 Fuel#1 123.0 1093.4 17.05 612.0 288.3 4.843 169.9 0.587 2.238E+11 4.664 23.25 8.689 0.3510 2.299E+11 2.475E+11 125.47 0.2776 42.69 0.8447 168.18
6 Fuel#3 117.4 1083.5 12.79 617.8 292.2 4.623 168.9 0.179 3.281E+10 5.025 23.25 6.707 0.1555 2.962E+10 3.102E+10 119.27 0.2733 44.17 0.7644 169.66
8 Fuel#2 119.5 1107.0 14.10 626.2 297.9 5.056 169.6 0.201 3.846E+10 4.818 23.26 7.804 0.2952 6.254E+10 3.545E+10 121.71 0.2708 43.23 0.805 167.67
9 Fuel#6 121.0 800.4 10.87 677.0 320.6 3.516 185.2 0.089 1.823E+10 4.835 23.28 7.279 0.2850 1.796E+10 1.869E+10 123.07 0.2736 41.69 0.8259 166.46
10 Fuel#1 122.7 860.3 13.10 645.3 301.1 3.891 184.3 0.322 4.211E+10 4.637 23.25 8.077 0.1231 3.941E+10 4.235E+10 124.93 0.2856 42.69 0.8447 167.21
Appendix B: Emissions Test Data

11 Fuel#5 123.3 761.8 14.40 649.1 305.0 4.365 181.5 0.326 1.668E+10 4.931 23.25 8.374 0.4305 1.570E+10 1.653E+10 125.67 0.2796 41.69 0.8247 169.54
12 Fuel#2 118.0 568.0 13.52 619.5 297.5 3.693 163.4 0.000 1.273E+10 4.727 23.27 6.963 0.4252 1.221E+10 1.271E+10 120.00 0.2638 43.23 0.805 164.51
13 Fuel#4 119.4 788.3 9.59 628.4 299.5 3.817 168.6 0.191 1.272E+10 4.779 23.27 6.606 1.1000 9.714E+09 1.015E+10 121.28 0.2682 43.38 0.8045 166.79
14 Fuel#3 117.8 1187.1 7.19 608.1 272.7 3.710 189.7 0.358 2.801E+11 5.049 23.24 6.840 0.2687 1.715E+11 1.776E+11 119.70 0.3119 44.17 0.7644 170.47
15 Fuel#1 124.8 1157.2 11.34 644.3 302.5 4.091 180.4 0.118 2.159E+10 4.732 23.24 9.147 0.6234 1.670E+10 1.765E+10 127.31 0.2801 42.69 0.8447 170.64
16 Fuel#6 121.3 526.2 7.76 702.5 326.7 2.358 200.7 0.204 1.195E+11 4.829 23.27 6.847 0.4039 4.850E+10 3.636E+10 123.22 0.2858 41.69 0.8259 166.28

© Concawe.
Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

19
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

20 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

TABLE B2 Test data Euro 5 WLTC low cycle

Fuel_ NO2_
TestNo Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PN Cons Distance Frac
g/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km # l/100km km
1 Fuel#1 150.9 2341.9 49.65 536.9 305.8 14.431 73.09 1.986E+10 5.784 3.099 0.1361
2 Fuel#4 147.0 2378.1 35.10 519.8 294.8 7.457 72.68 1.808E+10 5.975 3.096 0.1398
3 Fuel#2 148.2 2855.8 53.68 531.1 305.0 13.754 70.27 2.417E+10 6.071 3.088 0.1323
4 Fuel#5 149.3 2434.2 62.73 528.6 304.1 16.648 69.38 2.168E+10 6.070 3.087 0.1312
5 Fuel#1 151.2 2960.2 72.56 495.6 278.3 14.218 74.87 1.483E+12 5.832 3.093 0.1511
6 Fuel#3 142.6 1454.4 40.74 523.7 289.0 12.173 83.73 1.175E+11 6.116 3.094 0.1599
8 Fuel#2 147.1 1689.3 39.00 487.3 276.8 10.209 68.58 2.013E+11 5.953 3.109 0.1407
9 Fuel#6 149.9 1504.6 30.52 573.7 322.4 8.015 87.85 3.804E+10 6.021 3.094 0.1531
10 Fuel#1 153.7 1558.3 44.40 538.7 300.8 10.841 85.36 2.549E+11 5.841 3.073 0.1584
11 Fuel#5 161.2 1861.7 49.18 557.6 311.7 14.801 85.50 7.137E+10 6.505 3.078 0.1533
12 Fuel#2 141.2 558.8 36.22 480.6 276.5 6.587 64.98 2.992E+10 5.649 3.098 0.1352
13 Fuel#4 146.4 1296.5 24.55 487.1 276.8 6.794 68.08 2.792E+10 5.882 3.097 0.1398
14 Fuel#3 148.8 2034.9 21.38 549.4 294.3 8.408 103.73 1.943E+12 6.414 3.092 0.1888

© Concawe.
15 Fuel#1 157.9 2487.3 36.09 537.1 301.0 9.273 81.55 3.604E+10 6.053 3.091 0.1518
16 Fuel#6 152.1 1119.7 21.79 619.1 339.7 5.382 104.65 8.548E+11 6.083 3.108 0.1690
 TABLE B3 Test data Euro 6b WLTC
Test Fuel_ QCL_ QCL_ NO2_
No Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PM PN >23nm Cons Distance N2O NH3 DTT_4nm DTT_10nm GHG Frac NHV Density EC
g/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km # l/100km km mg/km mg/km # # g/km MJ/kg kg/l MJ/100km
1 Fuel#1 137.09 25.61 21.78 99.68 42.89 19.50 33.83 0.0813 5.851E+09 5.128 23.25 7.137 0.9165 5.202E+09 5.503E+09 139.57 0.3394 42.69 0.8447 184.90
3 Fuel#2 134.38 14.10 20.52 104.19 48.10 19.17 30.39 0.1506 6.911E+07 5.343 23.27 5.393 0.2220 6.954E+08 7.258E+08 136.39 0.2917 43.23 0.805 185.92
4 Fuel#5 135.60 18.15 21.94 92.48 43.49 20.42 25.83 0.1254 7.887E+07 5.372 23.26 7.012 0.3771 7.123E+08 7.170E+08 138.08 0.2793 41.69 0.8247 184.71
5 Fuel#1 138.32 24.71 22.66 126.80 59.93 19.37 34.89 0.0768 4.689E+10 5.173 23.25 6.621 0.1977 4.750E+10 5.166E+10 140.65 0.2752 42.69 0.8447 186.56
6 Fuel#3 128.85 19.43 18.20 98.45 43.68 17.45 31.55 0.2640 2.713E+11 5.440 23.28 6.349 0.2991 2.510E+11 2.639E+11 131.06 0.3205 44.17 0.7644 183.68
7 Fuel#6 134.84 14.06 19.58 81.40 34.48 18.49 28.48 0.4166 1.183E+12 5.332 23.26 6.275 0.2673 1.023E+12 1.071E+12 137.05 0.3498 41.69 0.8259 183.60
8 Fuel#2 132.23 18.75 20.26 98.77 41.43 19.23 35.09 0.1303 4.196E+10 5.257 23.26 6.144 0.4286 3.426E+10 3.607E+10 134.44 0.3553 43.23 0.805 182.95
9 Fuel#6 135.21 19.38 24.11 97.87 43.44 22.55 31.23 0.1082 3.155E+09 5.348 23.26 7.880 0.2878 2.763E+09 2.932E+09 137.98 0.3190 41.69 0.8259 184.14
10 Fuel#1 136.36 27.75 22.62 117.39 52.72 19.33 36.57 0.3343 6.294E+07 5.100 23.25 6.501 0.2768 6.198E+08 6.615E+08 138.66 0.3116 42.69 0.8447 183.92
11 Fuel#5 131.58 15.75 20.65 90.03 41.02 19.40 27.10 0.2455 6.976E+07 5.213 23.30 6.158 0.1676 6.300E+08 6.327E+08 133.80 0.3011 41.69 0.8247 179.22
12 Fuel#2 128.79 18.36 21.37 106.78 50.04 19.86 30.02 0.2420 3.262E+10 5.121 23.26 8.345 0.2767 2.826E+10 2.962E+10 131.60 0.2811 43.23 0.805 178.20
13 Fuel#4 132.17 14.61 16.59 100.08 47.39 16.45 27.48 0.2704 3.227E+10 5.237 23.27 5.240 0.1667 2.701E+10 2.829E+10 134.05 0.2745 43.38 0.8045 182.77
14 Fuel#3 128.32 13.75 16.26 95.89 38.13 16.60 37.19 0.3893 5.718E+11 5.417 23.26 5.880 0.3319 4.573E+11 4.783E+11 130.37 0.3879 44.17 0.7644 182.90
15 Fuel#1 134.78 29.97 28.08 98.13 43.10 23.99 31.98 0.1144 6.415E+09 5.042 23.28 9.837 0.8725 6.458E+09 7.081E+09 138.11 0.3259 42.69 0.8447 181.83
16 Fuel#4 133.12 17.34 23.02 116.35 50.92 21.36 38.44 0.0568 9.534E+08 5.276 23.11 10.021 0.6028 1.248E+09 1.331E+09 136.42 0.3304 43.38 0.8045 184.12

© Concawe.
Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

21
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

22 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

TABLE B4 Test data Euro 6b WLTC low cycle

TestNo Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PN Fuel_Cons Distance NO2_Frac
g/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km # l/100km km
1 Fuel#1 169.55 78.80 5.216 43.31 26.59 4.319 3.214 4.200E+10 6.342 3.092 0.0742
3 Fuel#2 168.75 45.92 5.120 38.81 23.72 4.390 2.643 2.962E+08 6.708 3.096 0.0681
4 Fuel#5 168.53 57.50 4.285 47.70 28.74 4.952 4.161 4.232E+08 6.676 3.096 0.0872
5 Fuel#1 171.39 78.24 6.370 43.66 26.97 4.428 2.881 2.669E+11 6.411 3.096 0.0660
6 Fuel#3 161.27 59.38 0.798 49.52 29.84 1.967 4.493 1.500E+12 6.809 3.102 0.0907
7 Fuel#6 170.17 36.46 3.039 40.51 24.64 1.913 3.259 7.961E+12 6.728 3.094 0.0805
8 Fuel#2 167.31 56.06 4.537 47.34 28.17 6.992 4.779 3.136E+11 6.651 3.096 0.1010
9 Fuel#6 166.67 35.78 2.061 61.34 36.53 3.355 6.225 2.321E+10 6.590 3.102 0.1015
10 Fuel#1 172.45 102.98 5.775 43.57 26.25 3.036 3.792 2.786E+08 6.452 3.092 0.0870
11 Fuel#5 164.81 58.44 4.313 43.31 25.70 2.993 4.126 4.012E+08 6.529 3.104 0.0953
12 Fuel#2 158.91 69.09 7.533 48.86 29.38 3.365 4.303 1.681E+11 6.319 3.092 0.0881
13 Fuel#4 167.88 25.82 2.707 36.90 22.22 4.064 3.338 1.613E+11 6.650 3.097 0.0905
14 Fuel#3 161.90 35.39 1.643 48.34 28.26 3.605 5.709 4.170E+12 6.834 3.092 0.1181

© Concawe.
15 Fuel#1 165.28 98.25 9.684 57.95 34.37 3.756 6.118 4.730E+10 6.184 3.093 0.1056
16 Fuel#4 170.32 35.97 2.243 54.90 32.09 1.951 6.427 6.776E+09 6.747 3.082 0.1171
 TABLE B5 Test data Euro 6d-TEMP WLTC
Fuel_ QCL_ QCL_ NO2_
TestNo Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PM PN >23nm Cons Distance N2O NH3 DTT_4nm DTT_10nm GHG Frac NHV Density EC
g/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km # l/100km km mg/km mg/km # # g/km MJ/kg kg/l MJ/100km
1 Fuel #1 123.60 81.14 4.157 68.40 42.58 1.87 5.88 0.000 1.495E+09 4.624 23.18 7.71 20.06 1.526E+09 1.624E+09 125.70 0.0860 42.69 0.8447 166.76
2 Fuel#4 119.40 34.50 1.781 63.73 39.28 1.77 5.53 0.078 9.003E+08 4.731 23.27 6.57 15.84 6.380E+08 6.706E+08 121.20 0.0868 43.38 0.8045 165.11
3 Fuel#2 119.82 56.84 2.896 57.94 35.80 1.74 5.21 0.069 3.260E+08 4.764 23.24 6.75 18.74 5.340E+08 5.585E+08 121.66 0.0899 43.23 0.805 165.80
4 Fuel#6 119.81 27.61 2.584 88.35 49.65 1.39 14.35 0.279 5.241E+11 4.737 23.25 7.86 9.34 3.333E+11 3.498E+11 121.94 0.1624 41.69 0.8259 163.11
5 Fuel#1 123.03 72.15 3.783 61.68 38.08 1.69 5.54 0.096 7.116E+08 4.603 23.27 7.48 16.20 1.148E+09 1.232E+09 125.07 0.0899 42.69 0.8447 165.98
6 Fuel#5 121.08 48.78 3.820 69.11 43.52 1.83 5.02 0.214 3.429E+08 4.797 23.24 7.55 22.71 8.215E+08 7.943E+08 123.14 0.0726 41.69 0.8247 164.93
7 Fuel#2 119.45 50.70 3.466 56.75 35.76 1.56 4.17 0.189 4.731E+08 4.749 23.24 6.82 15.80 7.915E+08 8.279E+08 121.31 0.0735 43.23 0.805 165.28
8 Fuel#3 119.57 19.04 1.316 52.08 31.82 1.34 5.01 0.130 3.829E+08 5.046 23.26 6.82 17.60 7.421E+08 7.545E+08 121.42 0.0963 44.17 0.7644 170.38
9 Fuel#1 122.86 53.21 4.163 66.29 40.09 2.08 6.94 0.000 4.508E+11 4.595 23.26 8.88 12.61 4.617E+11 5.044E+11 125.28 0.1047 42.69 0.8447 165.71
10 Fuel#3 119.27 24.78 1.702 59.18 36.75 1.42 4.87 0.000 2.909E+09 5.034 23.27 7.29 16.06 2.496E+09 2.664E+09 121.25 0.0823 44.17 0.7644 169.98
11 Fuel#5 121.46 39.16 2.768 62.79 38.98 1.39 5.16 0.109 8.543E+08 4.811 23.24 7.37 20.35 1.200E+09 1.278E+09 123.45 0.0822 41.69 0.8247 165.42
12 Fuel#2 121.29 46.58 2.534 55.57 34.39 1.65 4.97 0.163 1.650E+09 4.822 23.24 7.09 16.89 1.332E+09 1.406E+09 123.22 0.0894 43.23 0.805 167.81
13 Fuel#4 120.57 26.62 1.366 53.71 32.05 1.54 6.27 0.100 2.641E+09 4.777 23.21 6.78 15.24 2.186E+09 2.293E+09 122.42 0.1168 43.38 0.8045 166.71
14 Fuel#6 119.63 33.37 2.395 68.41 41.87 1.25 6.21 0.000 1.156E+10 4.731 23.26 7.07 21.65 1.028E+10 1.087E+10 121.54 0.0908 41.69 0.8259 162.88
15 Fuel#1 122.85 82.56 4.435 70.10 44.17 1.81 5.05 0.028 2.921E+08 4.597 23.26 7.82 19.47 7.864E+08 8.329E+08 124.98 0.0720 42.69 0.8447 165.76

© Concawe.
Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

23
 Downloaded from SAE International by SAE International [Sales Team], Tuesday, December 15, 2020

24 FUEL EFFECTS ON REGULATED AND UNREGULATED EMISSIONS

TABLE B6 Test data Euro 6d-TEMP WLTC low cycle

Fuel_
TestNo Fuel CO2 CO THC NOx NO CH4 NO2 PN Cons Distance NO2_Frac
g/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km mg/km # l/100km km
1 Fuel#1 129.85 512.47 23.956 281.6 175.8 7.362 25.97 3.158E+09 4.886 3.051 0.0922
2 Fuel#4 125.02 183.32 8.790 257.3 159.3 3.174 23.25 3.319E+09 4.963 3.076 0.0903
3 Fuel#2 126.19 368.21 14.294 265.2 164.5 4.981 24.14 1.266E+09 5.038 3.082 0.0910
4 Fuel#6 126.38 190.70 15.230 324.3 188.1 3.859 46.33 3.607E+12 5.009 3.074 0.1428
5 Fuel#1 132.46 474.07 22.583 250.7 155.1 6.089 23.48 8.626E+08 4.981 3.081 0.0937
6 Fuel#5 129.57 299.79 17.372 272.5 171.9 5.035 21.34 1.977E+08 5.150 3.08 0.0783
7 Fuel#2 125.51 314.06 15.959 239.6 151.2 4.297 18.67 6.031E+08 5.008 3.08 0.0779
8 Fuel#3 128.98 93.39 5.747 255.7 157.9 2.876 23.07 1.010E+09 5.449 3.085 0.0902
9 Fuel#1 130.93 368.39 26.277 297.0 180.9 9.972 30.85 3.162E+12 4.918 3.092 0.1039
10 Fuel#3 129.11 117.48 7.047 266.3 165.9 3.562 22.51 1.863E+09 5.456 3.093 0.0845
11 Fuel#5 132.34 256.53 14.777 283.4 175.7 4.347 24.77 4.267E+09 5.257 3.082 0.0874
12 Fuel#2 130.90 294.28 11.548 260.4 163.0 4.589 22.20 1.832E+09 5.221 3.088 0.0853
13 Fuel#4 130.31 175.62 7.924 249.6 152.4 5.240 25.09 6.306E+09 5.172 3.078 0.1005

© Concawe.
14 Fuel#6 127.02 221.29 12.016 301.6 185.1 3.145 28.03 8.408E+10 5.035 3.088 0.0929
15 Fuel#1 131.29 540.75 26.273 293.0 184.2 6.276 23.42 4.892E+08 4.941 3.081 0.0799

TABLE B7 Test data Euro 6d-TEMP engine-out

EO_CO2_ EO_CO_ EO_THC_ EO_NOx_ EO_CO2_ EO_CO_ EO_THC_ EO_NOx_

Date Fuel WLTC WLTC WLTC WLTC Bag1 Bag1 Bag1 Bag1
16/08/2019 Fuel#1 122.94 581.78 110.04 371.84 128.62 1230.75 297.04 326.67
20/08/2019 Fuel#4 119.45 485.09 76.81 333.95 124.31 680.53 122.62 298.61
28/08/2019 Fuel#2 119.87 606.99 103.52 343.68 126.79 1021.97 235.43 321.27
03/09/2019 Fuel#6 120.86 381.4 75.13 387.82 128.49 738.28 159.18 377.48
06/09/2019 Fuel#1 124.21 577.66 104.2 343.67 134.91 1205.17 275.82 305.75
19/09/2019 Fuel#2 121.16 532.21 99.29 321.4 129.53 948.22 224.97 298.95
23/09/2019 Fuel#3 120.53 529.53 70 348.19 131.07 628.79 95.36 333.83
25/09/2019 Fuel#1 123.5 557.04 116.33 382.97 131.62 1187.09 314.77 368.07
27/09/2019 Fuel#3 119.71 518.04 73.72 355.08 131.84 668.08 112.85 338.79
04/10/2019 Fuel#2 120.21 629.2 93.99 348.5 130.52 985.12 191.19 330.25
10/10/2019 Fuel#4 123.11 497.48 75.7 346.3 135.2 792.75 120.16 325.51

© Concawe.
15/10/2019 Fuel#6 122.74 434.76 71.97 392.95 132.35 756.7 140.71 379.39
18/10/2019 Fuel#1 124.14 616.71 106.02 382.25 134.97 1277.14 296.74 362.79

© 2020 Concawe. Published by SAE International. This Open Access article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original
author(s) and the source are credited.

Positions and opinions advanced in this work are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. Responsibility for the content of the work lies
solely with the author(s).

ISSN 0148-7191