Test Program to Evaluate a Fuel Conditioner
Report to Pendragon Holdings Ltd.
July 17, 2002

Summary
This document presents summary results and conclusions from a test programme conducted at Ricardo Consulting Engineers to evaluate a fuel conditioner, PD5. The tests were conducted on a diesel-fuelled year 2002 Passat 1.9Tdi and a gasoline fuelled year 2002 Volvo 1.8L S40 using chassis dynamometers. Drive cycle and full power tests were completed, and both engine-out and tailpipe emissions were recorded. As recommended in a previous report, only the performance and emissions were considered. Results from additional tests conducted at QUB are also presented and discussed.

The drive cycle tests at Ricardo showed that conditioning the fuel with PD5 caused the emissions generated by the vehicles to be reduced due to the use of PD5. The maximum power of the Volvo was increased by 4.2% on average with a maximum increase shown to be 6.8%.
The tests at QUB were performed on a single-cylinder diesel-fuelled Ricardo E6 research engine; this engine represents the type of engine found in a standard lorry or bus. In all fifteen sets of results for the base fuel were obtained during the testing, these were averaged and plotted against the results found for the conditioned fuel. All the results were found to be reasonably consistent and they showed an increase of 14.5% in fuel economy along with a 15.2% increase in thermal efficiency of the engine.

It has been concluded that the tests conducted at Ricardo and QUB have produced conclusive evidence that the fuel conditioner PD5 has had a positive effect on fuel economy, power and emissions generated by the three engines tested.

1.Introduction
The aims for the tests were to verify and quantify performance and emissions improvements arising from the use of PD5 in petrol and diesel-fuelled engines. The tests did not aim to investigate other improvements noticed from anecdotal testing relating to engine cleaning, less required maintenance etc. As recommended, the tests were carried out at Ricardo Consulting Engineers on passenger vehicles using chassis dynamometers. The vehicles chosen for the test were a Passat 1.9Tdi and a Volvo 1.8 S40. Both the cars were manufactured in 2002 and had little mileage recorded on them. The cars therefore can be regarded as new and any difference in results between the tests with and without PD5 can be attributable to the effect of PD5 on the combustion process rather than the detergent properties of the product. The Passat has a direct-injection turbocharged diesel-fuelled engine, and is representative of state of the art. The Volvo has a port injected gasoline fuelled engine, and is representative of the majority of currently available vehicles. Both vehicles are hence the most modern technology available and adhere to the latest Euro IV specifications regarding emissions and fuel economy.

Ricardo Consulting Engineers were responsible for the design of the test that followed standard industry protocol for passenger vehicle engine testing, namely, the EUDC and ECE15 urban and extra urban fuel consumption tests.
Ricardo has provided a written documentation, available on request, which outlines the testing protocol and gives a summary of the results. Detailed results, including the second by second emissions data were provided as Excel spreadsheets (these are also available).

2. Results (Ricardo Consulting Engineers)
2.1 Drive Cycle Tests
Detailed phase 1, phase 2 and second-by-second emissions test results were provided for the drive cycle tests.

It can be easily seen from the above graphs that there has been a reduction in the amount of engine out and tailpipe Hydrocarbon emissions produced by the vehicle tested due to the use of PD5 fuel conditioner.

The engine out and tailpipe Carbon Monoxide emissions were also reduced.
All the emission test data detailed in the graphs above does show that PD5 has an effect on the emissions generated by the vehicles tested. These differences have been experienced despite the fact that the vehicles tested were of the latest technology whose engines are designed to give out very low emissions, yet by the addition of PD5 the emissions have been lowered still, this suggests that the use of PD5 has lead to an advancement on engine technology.

2.2 Full Power Tests
Full power tests were run to verify Pendragon’s claims that PD5 lead to an increase in power of the vehicle it was used in. Six tests without PD5 using the base fuel were run and the results averaged. Then another three tests with PD5 added to the base fuel were conducted and averaged. The results are plotted here:

Each of the tests shown on the graph above were taken over 3600 test points logged by computer, the tests were then averaged over six runs without and three runs with PD5, they can therefore be regarded as highly accurate.

The graph shows that there is a definite and significant divergence of the graphs. This divergence represents an average of 4.2% increase in power of the vehicle tested with a maximum of 6.8% increase. This is due to the fact that the fuel introduced to the combustion chamber burns as fuel droplets leading to the mechanism of micro explosion that causes an increase in thermal efficiency and hence power of the system for the same amount of fuel. It will also lead to a reduction in emissions generated by the engine under these conditions.
The 4.2% increase in power is conversely an increase of 4.2% in fuel economy.

3.0 Tests on Ricardo E6 Research Engine by Queens University Belfast

Summary
I n order to quantify the likely effect of PD5 on an engine that is more reflective of an engine found in a bus or lorry (i.e. indirect injection diesel rather than direct injection) it was decided to carry out a series of tests on a single cylinder research engine owned by Queens University Belfast.
The results from the experiments showed that in the normal operating range of an engine (taken here at equivalence ratio 1.4) its use shows an increase in power of 14.5%, an improvement in thermal efficiency of 15.2% and a corresponding increase in fuel efficiency of 14.5%.

The Engine
The engine used for these tests was a single cylinder Ricardo E6/MS naturally aspirated four-stroke diesel engine mounted on a common bedplate with an electrical dynamometer. A complete description of the engine is available from Ricardo Consulting Engineers, Bridge Works, Shoreham by Sea, Sussex.
Testing Methodology
A simple test was run using diesel fuel and then repeated using diesel fuel with PD5 added in a dilution of 1:4000.

The test involved running the engine on varying equivalence ratios (i.e. the reciprocal of air to fuel ratio). This gives the range over which engines are operated and gives the results as a power curve for that particular engine. To vary the equivalence ratio a rack-screw with a vernier gauge is used and will be described in the results section as the rack setting (7.0 being the leanest or lowest amount of fuel that the engine will operate on and 13 being the richest fuel-air mix).
Each test was repeated (fifteen times for the base fuel and five times for the conditioned fuel) in order to establish the repeatability of the test. An average value for each setting was then calculated and the results plotted as Fuel used against Power generated and Equivalence Ratio against Thermal Efficiency.

Results
The results from the tests are best represented in graphical form due to large amount of data accumulated from each test (numerical data is available on request).
The Equivalence Ratio is the reciprocal of air to fuel ratio. When the equivalence ratio is 1 this means that there is the theoretical amount of oxygen present for the fuel to burn. A value less than one indicates that there is not enough oxygen present to completely burn the fuel. Typically a normal engine working under normal loads will operate from an equivalence ratio of 1 to 1.6 depending upon driving conditions.
Fuel Consumption is the rate at which the engine is burning fuel under the particular condition being tested and is measured in kg of fuel burnt per hour.
Power is the measurement of useful energy produced by the engine from the burning of the fuel and is measured in kW.

Thermal Efficiency of an engine is the percentage of the theoretical amount of heat derived from burning fuel that is actually transferred to useful energy in the engine. Typically heat energy from the burning of fuel is lost through the engine walls, escapes down the exhaust and is transferred to useful energy in the engine. Therefore it is theoretically possible to increase the thermal efficiency of the engine by accelerating combustion so that there is not as much heat loss through the exhaust, leading to more of the heat produced by the burning of the fuel being transferred to useful energy in the engine.

The results from the base fuel are shown by the blue line and its associated blue points, the results from the PD5 tests are shown in green:

Discussion of Results
From the graphs drawn it is easy to see that PD5 has had a significant effect on the performance of the Ricardo E6 engine. In the normal operating range of an engine (taken here at equivalence ratio 1.4) its use shows an increase in power of 14.5%, an improvement in thermal efficiency of 15.2% and a corresponding increase in fuel efficiency of 14.5%. It should be noted that the graphs converge at an equivalence ratio of 1, which is to be expected, as below a value of 1 there is not enough oxygen to burn the fuel and hence any benefit due to the use of PD5 cannot be realised.

The testing methodology and the best-fit trend lines derived from the results show very good accuracy as reflected by the R2 values (R2 values are a means of determining how accurate a particular trend line fits the results through which it is derived with an R2 value of 1 representing perfect fit). An average R2 value of 0.9819 represents a very acceptable accuracy level for these tests. Therefore the results obtained are indeed a fair reflection on the benefits expected by the use of PD5 on this particular engine. As mentioned previously the indirect injection Ricardo E6 research engine is more representative of a bus or lorry engine than the direct injection Passat engine used in the Ricardo test. Hence the improvement in power, fuel economy and thermal efficiency seen by these tests is more reflective in what would be expected with an indirect injection engine found in a lorry or bus etc.

A significant reduction in emissions would also be expected on this engine because of the use of PD5.

4 Conclusions
PD5 has been shown by both the Ricardo testing and the tests performed by Queens University Belfast to:

(i) Reduce emissions generated from the incomplete combustion of fuel on all the vehicles tested;
(ii) Improve the power output of a 1.8L Volvo S40 by 4.2% on average with a maximum improvement of 6.8%;
(iii) Improve the power, fuel economy and thermal efficiency of an indirect injection diesel engine (representative of the type found in a lorry or bus) by approximately 15%.

From the results detailed here there is conclusive evidence that PD5 has a significant positive effect on the operation of the internal combustion engine.