Measuring and Comparing Accuracy of Emissions Analyzers for Use with IC Engines (ASME IMECE2009-11295, 2009) 1.1 Abstract

Automotive emission analyzers vary in price from under $1000 to well over $100,000. Different analyzers use various technologies to detect exhaust concentrations, and differ in how they condition the sample – leading to a difference in price and performance. Manufacturer claims on accuracy from less expensive analyzers are often similar to much more expensive analyzers. With a variety of analyzers available in the Small Engine Research Facility (SmERF) at the University of Idaho, this often leads to confusion in reporting accuracy of exhaust gas measurements. This study benchmarks the performance of three different analyzers: A portable 5-gas analyzer using NDIR and electrochemical cells which costs ~$5000, a portable 7-gas analyzer using separate sensors for each gas which costs ~$10,000, and a FTIR spectrometer which costs ~$100,000. High and low concentrations of single-species calibration gases (methane, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, hydrogen, and oxygen) were run through each machine. Initial findings showed that all species measured by the 5-gas analyzer were precise around the point of calibration, with CO and CO2 quite accurate across their whole range. The 7-gas analyzer was less accurate than the 5-gas when measuring CO, CO2, and O2, but was far more accurate for THC, NO, and NO2 measurements. The FTIR was very precise provided that water vapor was effectively removed and sample lines were adequately heated. Both of the less expensive analyzers showed reduced accuracy the further away from their calibration points. Because of high setup time, use of the FTIR should be limited to detailed emissions studies, and is not recommended for coarse tuning of an engine.



There is a large variety of technologies available for emissions sampling of engine exhaust gases. Accuracy of results depends on what type of equipment is used, and changes in ambient conditions. The intended use of the analyzer will dictate what it is designed for. Common uses for emissions analyzers are: Tuning engines, local/state emission recertification, engine research, and EPA certification.


Emission analyzers are found in many different price brackets. The cheapest portable multi-gas analyzers are commonly found under $5000. Portable units with improved sample conditioning and added program functionality are often found in the $5000 to $25,000 price range. Less portable units like Gas Chromatograph and Fourier Transform Infrared can cost over $100,000. And a full multi-gas rack-mount system is usually well over $100,000. Another thing to consider when selecting emissions sampling equipment is the learning curve necessary for successful operation. Some of the simpler and less expensive analyzers are almost ‘plug and play’ with no user interaction necessary. For simple units with a few options, often the user’s manual is sufficient to learn necessary procedures. The more complicated analyzers often require a day of on-site training to set up and familiarize the technician with operation of the equipment. It is not uncommon to have a large portion of an advanced degree becoming proficient with the more advanced emission analyzers. The Small Engine Research Facility (SmERF) at the University of Idaho has three different emissions analyzers: A portable 5-gas emissions analyzer, a portable 7-gas analyzer, and a Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (FTIR). The goal of this research is to help select appropriate emissions sampling equipment, and to measure the accuracy of each of these analyzers over a range of gas concentrations.


Laboratory Engines

The SmERF lab at the University of Idaho sees a variety of user needs for emissions sampling equipment. As part of the SAE Clean Snowmobile Challenge (CSC), testing of traditional 2-stroke engines is encountered. These engines tend to run rich air/fuel mixtures. Also, due to the consumption of lubricating oil, they often have a lot of soot/particulate/carbon in the exhaust stream. Older versions of the 2-stroke engine often have hydrocarbon (HC) emissions well over 15,000 ppm (Hexane equivalent). Other demands on the emissions equipment come from new technologies being used by the CSC team. Direct injection 2-stroke engines have promise to reduce HC emissions and improve fuel economy. Creating fuel maps for these engines is difficult because of their ability to operate in stratified-charge mode under low loads. Developing ECU maps that smoothly transition between stratified-charge and homogeneous-charge modes is especially complicated. In stratified mode

HC. Research on clean/efficient gasoline 4-stroke engines may be the application many of the less expensive analyzers are best designed for. This is also the application where most emission recertification is done. A global oxygen measurement is not sufficient to make changes to the fuel maps in the ECU. 1. This section describes each of the analyzers by their cost. Optional PC interface also allows remote display and recording of the data as well. while others are experimental like ethanol/water blends and HCCI using JP8. a 4-gas model (no NOx measurement) is available. Some are mainstream (E85 and Bio-diesel). Air fuel ratios are typically near stoichiometric. and unique features. and emissions of carbon monoxide (CO). However. It also covers the type of sensor used for each gas measurement. In each application there are often research questions about emissions that basic analyzers cannot measure. This often requires separate sensors/equipment. but ideally a small zone of combustion will be somewhere near stoichiometric conditions. Of primary concern are lowering NOx and soot/particulate emissions. and NOx. For lower cost. CO2. and HC are typically very low.2 the global air/fuel ratio will be quite lean. CO. precise measurement of CO and CO2 help estimate gross thermal efficiency. 4-stroke diesel engines are under increasingly stricter emissions standards. Running piston engines on alternative fuels is also common in the SmERF.4 Laboratory Equipment The University of Idaho SmERF has three emissions analyzers that represent typical analyzers in three cost/learning curve brackets. oxides of nitrogen (NOx). . Portable 5-Gas Emissions Analyzer This 5-gas analyzer is available with several different options. Few gas analyzers provide any soot/particulate measurement. The base unit costs ~$3500 and includes sensors for: O2. The direct injection 2-strokes produce much less soot/particulate/carbon than traditional 2-stroke engines. usability/learning curve. but this emission isn’t negligible. The unit can be upgraded to send the display values to Bluetooth compatible units where it can be monitored and recorded.

1: Portable 5-gas emissions analyzer This 5-gas unit uses electrochemical sensors for the O2 and NOx measurements. but in general they last ~ 1-2 years. Error codes will flash on the display when the sensors need replacement. CO. which makes it very simple to operate for almost any user. Re-calibrating the unit is done using a Bar 97 gas mixture. All sensors are calibrated at once. There are few programmable parameters on the unit. and CO2 are done with a NDIR cell. . but periodic checking should be done with a calibration gas. The analyzer will turn off after it senses CO levels below 3% for more than 15 minutes. The other measurements for HC. Calibrations are claimed to last up to a year. Life of these sensors varies with use.3 Figure 0. It will also perform an “auto zero” periodically when exhaust gases aren’t present. Attach 12V power to the lighter-style power plug and after a short warm up period the analyzer will display current exhaust concentrations.

The serial communications port on the 5-gas can communicate with several of the more common dynamometer data acquisition systems.01% ppm 25 (Nitric Oxide) ppm ppm HC CO CO2 O2 NOx Portable 7-Gas Emissions Analyzer The 7-gas analyzer was purchased to represents a high quality portable gas analyzer. It can be purchased in four different packages (kits).4 The manual for the 5-gas is about 20 pages long. Recently this 5-gas unit has been interfaced with other engine testing hardware. This allows real-time data streams from the analyzer. Data can be exported to a Microsoft Access database. and information about the run. Table 0. and does a good job explaining the purpose and meaning behind its features – even for users not very familiar with emission sampling equipment. Recorded data can be played back. The kits are set up for their intended usage. It does not use technical jargon. so recording emissions along with any other parameter from the dyno data acquisition is seamless. The kits are: . but it comes without column or page descriptions. The optional PC software allows recording data. You can save vehicle descriptions and perform a few different kinds of automated tests while connected to a PC. and easy for a non-technical audience to follow. but pulling the data out to a useful format (text or spreadsheet file) is not a simple task.06% 0.1: Claimed range and accuracy of 5-gas analyzer [1] Sensor Range 0-2000 (Hexane equivalent) 0-10% 0-20% 0-25% 0-5000 (Nitric Oxide) Accuracy ppm 4 (Hexane equivalent) 0.3% 0.

It includes sensors for O2 and CO. CO low. It includes O2. and H2S measurements. CO. Turbine. NO. NO. The CxHy sensor is of a Pellistor type. and if a fresh-air purge is required. NO low. A circuit similar to a hotwire anemometer is used to determine the temperature. CO low. Pellistor sensors operate by catalytically burning carbon compounds. SO2. CxHy. If more than 6 sensors are desired. Engine. Also. CO. All of the units are expandable to use any six of their drop-in sensor modules. and touch screen. The type of gas being detected determines the sensing technology used. NO. The HC . so modules can be swapped in the field w/o the need to recalibrate. CO (with dilution options). CO. This brought the price of the unit to a little over $10. NO2. and NO2. with up to 6 sensors. It includes O2. Available sensors are: O2. in order to burn the carbon compounds. however. multiple units can be daisy-chained together and controlled by a common handheld unit. CO. NO. SO2. the CxHy measurement is only available when there is excess oxygen in the sample stream. with up to 6 sensors. and CO2. The University of Idaho SmERF purchased a Kit #3 and added CxHy and CO2 sensors. The 7-gas analyzer uses separate sensors for each gas to be measured.000. Electrochemical sensors are used for O2. Drying of the sample gas is critical because any water in the system will falsely change this temperature reading. the sensor will be shut down before damage can occur. and a fresh-air purge. Basic. H2S. CO (with dilution options). with up to 4 sensors. Each sensor is modular with all other sensors. with up to 6 sensors. For this reason. Each unit can hold up to six sensors.5     Boiler. The calibration is stored on the sensor body itself. and NO2. This gives the possibility of recording seven different gas concentrations. All of the electrochemical cells are continuously temperature and pressure compensated. and comparing temperature on each side of the catalyst. NO2. and the H2 concentration can be displayed by the analyzer. the CO sensor is hydrogen compensated. excess oxygen must be present. and NO2. It includes O2. and a fresh-air purge. and a fresh-air purge. NO low.

This option was purchased so a comparison could be made between the calculated and measured CO2 displayed by the unit. Calibration of sensors is done individually. the company now sells NDIR CO2 cells that measure the CO2 in the sample stream. but is not applicable for some alternative fuels.6 measurement typically does not work under rich conditions – often where the most HC’s would be produced. but it should be checked often with a calibration gas. Single gas mixtures (desired gas concentration in an inert dilution) can be used for calibration of individual sensors. Figure 0. and an input “Max CO2” level that is determined by the fuel type. Instead CO2 is calculated from the O2 measurement. Calibration is usually only required a few times per year. For better accuracy.2: 7-gas analyzer control unit and display . The calculated CO2 is relatively accurate for common fuels. None of the kits for this analyzer come with a CO2 sensor.

Initial setup time is a few hours.’ The unit also has a battery pack that allows sampling for 2-3 hours away from a plug in power source. there are over 100 pages of documentation. and store the data string in a single file location. Retrieving data from the software is very simple. Between these resources. it was recommended to purchase some on-site training session to help set up the analyzer for the intended usage. there is more to discuss in the manual. The optional PC based software used Microsoft Excel for the interface. but once set up in a desired configuration the unit is almost ‘plug and play. In this training the technician described how to navigate the menu system. The unit has a built-in Peltier condenser to help dry the gas before entering the unit. This is useful for monitoring flue gases. The unit can measure and record deltapressure. The 7-gas analyzer has a many features not typically found on less expensive analyzers. and engine RPM. it can be programmed to take a reading once every hour. or printed on the built-in thermal printer. or for long-term engine testing. and several supplements are offered covering topics such as calibration and software. . The manual for the 7-gas analyzer is about 60 pages long. and create custom programs. Because the unit has many programmable options. The level of knowledge necessary to understand the manual is matched for those who have some experience with emissions sampling. though at a basic level. The manufacturer web site also has forums and additional downloads. The programmability also allows monitoring of emissions in an automated mode. Data can be recorded in the unit.7 Because of the various setup options and programmability of the unit. For instance.

v. 5 ppm (0-99ppm). The height and frequency of peaks or valleys in the IR signature are compared to compounds in the database for matches.v. then 5% m. the equipment was valued at ~$150. wavelength of a beam through inert gas (Nitrogen) is compared to that same beam going through the sample gas.2: Claimed range and accuracy of 7-gas analyzer [2] Sensor Range 0-44. 2 ppm (0-35ppm). ppm HC CO CO low NO NO low NO2 CO2 (calculated) CO2 O2 0-‘max vol %’ Calculated from O2 0-50% 0-25% 0. detection is done by absorption.2% of m. the computer uses a spectral database of compounds. In the configuration it was delivered in. a FTIR spectrometer uses infrared radiation to detect compounds.v.v. For gas sampling.v.3% plus 1% m. then 5% m. 2 ppm (0-35ppm). then 5% m.v.000.8 Table 0. Because there are not individual sensors in a FTIR. then 5% m.000 (Methane equivalent) 0-10% 0-500 ppm 0-3000 ppm 0-300 ppm 0-500 ppm Accuracy ppm 400 (Methane equivalent) 5 ppm (0-99ppm). 5 ppm (0-99ppm). the ability to detect species concentrations depends more on the methods reference in the computer. The FTIR that is in the SmERF was donated by a local company. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer [3] Useful for more than just emissions sampling. then 5% m. Instead of sensors.v. If the desired compound is in . The intensity vs. 0.

Thus. Usually a representative from the supplier will come out for a day or two to set up the equipment and train operators on how to use it. Preparing the FTIR for emission measurement takes more time than the portable analyzers. Drastic changes in composition may take a few minutes to reach their true values. nitrogen purge. the equipment will be able to calculate the percent composition of that species in the sample [4]. the FTIR is used primarily for steady state testing. A high temperature pump is necessary to bring samples in. The large size and sensitivity of the laser and optics make the FTIR a relatively stationary piece of equipment. and line heaters need to be installed and maintained. Methods for detecting desired species are usually purchased from the supplier and loaded on the computer during the on-site training. the time response to changes is not as fast as some of the other analyzers. While not currently regulated. the FTIR can be used to provide volume fractions of any specific hydrocarbon chain in the methods. The range and accuracy of gases was not provided with the FTIR. It can be moved around in the lab. as ethanol-based fuels become more popular having a detailed breakdown of the HC emissions will help target appropriate after treatment systems [5]. and filters for particulate. In the combustion of ethanol. Also. The FTIR at the SmERF lab did not come with any sample preparation hardware. aldehydes are formed. Accuracy is determined by the software and the methods programmed in the machine. but is not likely going to be used for any dynamic in-vehicle testing. while testing alternative fuels performing a hydrocarbon speciation is highly valuable. Because of the volume of the sampling cell. gas dryers. Setup and use of a FTIR is not trivial. Liquid nitrogen is used to cool the sensors. and the equipment should be turned on for at least 30 minutes to allow the laser to stabilize and the test cell to reach operating temperature. One very useful feature of the FTIR is the ability to provide hydrocarbon speciation. In particular. Where other analyzers just read an equivalent HC. and exhaust sample inputs. A lot of plumbing and valves were added to allow quick changes from calibration.9 this database. A background spectrum is collected . the system needs to be purged with a low flow of nitrogen during the whole sampling period.

the high concentration will be used for calibration.2% 100 ppm 250 ppm 1% High Value 14. Two concentrations. Table 0.10 before and after each sample measurement. A second side effect of the long cell was that any particulates in the exhaust sample tended to leave deposits on the optics in the cell. the SmERF FTIR had a 32 meter cell. This proved to be far too long. and NO2. and the high concentration will be sampled using the same technique. one low and one high of each species will be used. the experiment will be repeated using the low concentration for calibration. created by bouncing the laser path 32 times across a 1 meter length cell.500 ppm (CH4) 5000 ppm 5% 2000 ppm 2000 ppm 15% . 1. This will be repeated on 5 different occasions. The analyzer value will be compared to the known calibration. HC. and the lower will be sampled by the analyzer. O2. A shorter 18 centimeter cell was built that eliminated the mirrors in the long cell. Single species calibration gases are going to be used to calibrate each sensor for CO. As delivered.3: Species concentrations for single calibration gases Species HC CO CO2 NO NO2 O2 Low Value 300 ppm (CH4) 100 ppm 0. and depending on the signal/noise ratio.5 Experimental Design A simple experiment has been designed to compare analyzer accuracy and precision across all three of the above mentioned analyzers. the error on each gas measurement is calculated. requiring frequent cleanings. This is the longest cell that could be used in this particular FTIR with a single laser path. CO2. The range depends somewhat on the length of the laser path through the sample chamber. First. Once complete. as most of the exhaust gas readings were saturated and undetectable.

11 1. The 90% confidence interval is provided in the “Precision” column. There was a slight error on the O2 accuracy. which had a 3x greater error than claimed. This value was calculated using the standard deviation after five separate runs of data collection. The last column is the claimed accuracy by the manufacturer. The “Accuracy” column compares the average reading from the five replicates to the known gas concentration.6 Results The first single species experiment was done by calibrating with a high concentration. and is weighted using the t-statistic. but it was not significant. The O2 reading was also significantly off compared to the claimed accuracy. and simulate a clean or diluted exhaust mixture. In the case of NO2. Also surprising is the error on the CH4 reading. For the 5-gas analyzer the accuracy for the NO2 reading and CH4 are greater than was claimed by the manufacturer. The accuracy of the 7-gas analyzer was also not as good as claimed for the CO measurement. but did not detect most of the methane sampled. In each table. If the reading was lower than the actual concentration. The unit is supposed to provide Hexane equivalent hydrocarbons. Table 4 shows the results for the 5-gas analyzer. a negative number is in the table. Also noticeable was the NO measurement. This method should give a strong 2-point calibration. The unit is sold as being capable of detecting NOx. then sampling a low concentration. . but likely it only detects NO. and Table 5 shows the results for the 7-gas analyzer. it appears the sensor may not be capable of detecting that species. the sample species and concentration are provided.

00% 3.84 ppm 0.2%] NO – [100 ppm] NO2 – [50 ppm] O2 – [1.31 ppm 1.1 ppm Accuracy 0.23% 14 ppm 1.06% 0. and then the high concentration gas was sampled.5: 7-gas analyzer with high concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.04% 27. However.00% 0.00% 400 ppm The next two tables show the results of the second single species experiment.63% -286 ppm Claim 0.00% 0.52 ppm 0.2%] NO – [100 ppm] NO2 – [50 ppm] O2 – [1. for this experiment it also showed more error than claimed for the NO measurement. O2.3 ppm 0.0%] CH4 – [300 ppm] Precision 0.01%] CO2 – [0. and CH4.00% 11.10% -11.10% 2.57 ppm -46. and Table 7 is for the 7-gas.4: 5-gas analyzer with high concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.0%] CH4 – [300 ppm] Precision 0.12 Table 0.266 ppm 0.00% 0.01% -0.06% 117 ppm Claim 0.598 ppm 0. As noted previously. .30% 25 ppm N/A 0. the 5-gas analyzer had difficulty measuring the NO2.01%] CO2 – [0. Table 6 is for the 5-gas analyzer.00% -0.5 ppm Accuracy 0.01% 4 ppm Table 0. In this case the calibration was done with the low concentration values.30% 5 ppm 5 ppm 0.

5%] CO2 – [5.34 ppm 3.8 ppm Accuracy 0.11% -127.35% 100 ppm 12.025% 0.02% 0.01% 4 ppm N/A Table 0.4 ppm N/A Accuracy 0.500 ppm] H2 [1000 ppm] Precision 0.38% 293.08% 11.04% 361 ppm 191.13 The 7-gas analyzer had a lot of error on the NO measurement.60 ppm 0.5%] CO2 – [5.11 ppm 3.5 ppm 0.4 ppm -391 ppm Claim 0.43% -14.06% 0.0%] NO – [2000 ppm] NO2 – [250 ppm] O2 – [15 %] CH4 – [14.03% 400 ppm None Given .6: 5-gas analyzer with low concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.3 ppm 0.02% -0.30% 25 ppm N/A 0. Table 0. The O2 reading was quite a ways off of actual when calibrated with low concentrations.04% 60. and was slightly out of the claimed accuracy for CO2 as well.000 ppm N/A Claim 0.3 ppm -7.23 ppm 0.0%] NO – [2000 ppm] NO2 – [250 ppm] O2 – [15 %] CH4 – [14.9 ppm -228.10% 3.7: 7-gas analyzer with low concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.11% 55.03% 0.500 ppm] H2 [1000 ppm] Precision 0.04% 0.771 ppm -0.

the NDIR cell was more accurate at detecting CO and CO2 than the more expensive 7-gas analyzer. The 7-gas unit adds separate NO and NO2 measurements. From the mixed gas results. and marginally accurate for NO. The 7-gas unit uses a much lower sample flow rate than the 5-gas and FTIR. with the ability for hydrocarbon speciation down to a +/. It is usually the case with IC engines that CO and HC emissions are highest when the engine is operating under rich conditions. Operators manual for 7-gas analyzer 3. It proved to be highly inaccurate for NO2. Rather. 1. The FTIR showed the lowest error. Between changes in gas concentration there was often as long as 2 minutes before the readings reached steady state.7 Conclusions The 5-gas analyzer was about 1/3 the price of the 7-gas analyzer. but the NO measurement was nearly 3x high in both cases. However.. the CO/CO2 interaction seems to be a little off. and HC measurements require excess oxygen to function correctly. due to the time overhead and slow time response this is not the instrument of choice for tuning an engine. Manning. Another positive for the 5-gas unit are that it is very simple for students to use. but it still provides reasonable results.14 1. the indicated flow was off by ~75% of the measured value. This allows long life of calibration gases. as was the concentration measurement. The NO2 measurement was consistently within the claimed accuracy. and had more error than advertised. Washington DC. and the ability to sense hydrogen. H2. 2000 . but also makes for slow transient response.” American Chemical Society National Meeting. Chris “A Brief Introduction to Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry. However.01 ppm accuracy. Operators manual for FTIR 4. It was also poor at detecting CH4.8 References 1. The main concern in using this as an engine analyzer is that the CO. this is better used to make measurements once an engine is tuned with the other analyzers. The O2 reading was inaccurate at low levels. The 7-gas unit was also equipped with a dilution system for the CO measurement. This made the dilution feature unusable. Under these conditions there will not be enough oxygen present for the analyzer to measure these species. Operators manual for 5-gas analyzer 2. When checked with a precision flow meter.

Care was taken to position the fittings such that the center cover could be used. and 0. 2365. With these changes. Steven T. sealing the full laser path. the measured concentration and calculated error were significantly different than the actual calibration gases. This is the longest single-pass cell that can fit in to the FTIR. Data taken with the FTIR is shown in Table 8. A new bottom mounting plate was made that used bulkhead fittings also sealed the bottom of the cell from ambient air. 1995 1. and most of what the unit picked up was overshadowed by the water signal. Lowry. v. Bellingham. The volume of the laser path should be sealed to that the cavity can be purged with nitrogen. With one of the covers missing there was a portion of the laser path that was going through ambient air. Calculated errors were much smaller with the new cell and sealed laser path. Measurements of CO2 in the 5% range were seeing calculated errors in the +/2% range.15 5. and 0.00005 V peak to peak.5 cm cell and installed this in the FTIR. SNR was a full order of magnitude lower ( averaging around 0. As delivered it had a 32 meter laser path. To improve the error of the cell. Due to the placement of the inlet/outlet plumbing and cell pressure sensor one of the covers on the FTIR was not able to be used. In the last week of their project the capstone team acquired a shorter 7. a new 18 cm cell was built. but opened up other problems. This caused the calculated error in measurement to be nearly an order of magnitude greater.0001 V RMS). But when testing with various calibration gases.000001 V RMS) than achieved with the original 32 meter cell. A capstone team was assigned the task of getting the machine operational as an exhaust analyzer that was capable of speciating hydrocarbons. the 32 meter cell proved to be too long. The shorter cell did fix the problem with signal saturation. Because of the high moisture content of exhaust gas. along with the measured concentration and calculated error from . “Direct Comparisons of FTIR with conventional analyzers for the measurement of vehicle emissions. WA. The sample concentration is shown.” Proceedings of SPIE – The International Society of Optical Engineering. This and the short length of the cell caused the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the detector to be greatly reduced.9 Appendix 1 – Modification to FTIR The Nicolet FTIR was donated to the University of Idaho by Micron Technologies.0005 V peak to peak. the SNR was improved to original values (typically ~0.

842 ppm Calculated Error 5 ppm 598 ppm 1037 ppm 1188 ppm 51.16 the FTIR.342 ppm Two bottles of calibration gas mixtures were also run through the FTIR.14 ppm 32. None of the measurements fall within the calculated error bounds of the actual concentration.500 ppm] Measured Value 186.025 ppm 550 ppm 10.139 ppm 368.14 ppm 18. none of the actual concentrations fall within the measurements and error bounds.5 ppm 12.5 ppm 7025 ppm -1450 ppm -39.2 ppm 1650 ppm Actual Error 86. 0.861 ppm 668.000 ppm CH4 – [300 ppm] CH4 – [14. Just as with the single species calibration gas. These results are shown in Table 9. .8: Data from FTIR with 18 cm cell and sealed laser path Sample CO – [100 ppm] CO – [5000 ppm] CO2 – [2000 ppm] CO2 – [50.

59 CO2: 1. Table 0.17 Table 0.916 ppm ppm -37.73 CH4: C2H6: 1.470 5. CO2 and CO have the highest errors.859 CO: 0. This is strange because state-of-the-art equipment for measuring exhaust emissions often uses a FTIR for CO2 and CO measurement.175 1507.1615 NO: 0. The readings are shown in Table 10. all of the readings are within the error calculated by the instrument.5379 41.381 N2O: -15.67 3.02 3.10: FTIR readings with nitrogen purging the cell Sample Nitrogen – [100%] Measured Value CO2: CO: NO: NO2: N2O: CH4: C2H6: 0.16 ppm 2059 ppm ppm 579 ppm 1669 ppm 24.009 CO2 – [50.9: Calibration gas mixtures Sample Measured Value in Calculated Error in Actual Error in methods ppm Hexane – [1481 ppm] Not methods Not ppm 9580 methods Not CO – [40.009 41.000 ppm] 13.248 ppm ppm ppm CO2 – [60. In this case.613 .53 Calculated Error 480. the cell is purged with nitrogen. with the exception of CO.000 ppm] CO 8084 ppm ppm 60.000 ppm] 100.16 ppm NO2 – [0 ppm] After the testing is complete.624 ppm 302.9 0.376 NO – [298 ppm] 600. Measurements were recorded once the readings reached stead state with a constant flow of nitrogen through the cell.3 3.02 3.752 ppm -46.327 0.551 NO2: -0.20 ppm – [5000 ppm] 12. However.

1. CO. The unit has built-in diagnostics and advanced users can access higher level features and custom menus.18 Because the FTIR is not reading correctly. . with improved accuracy over the previous 5-gas analyzer. It also used a NDIR cell and electrochemical sensors to measure exhaust emissions of CO2. Results are shown in Table 12 and 13. but costs closer to $12. it should be looked at by a specialist. but a separate manual of equal size is provided specifically for the serial communication and analog output specifications. The Horiba 5-gas analyzer was put through the same test procedure as the 5 and 7 gas analyzers in this chapter. and NO. The Horiba unit operates from a 120 VAC power source. It is possible that someone from the Chemistry department or Manning Applied Technology would be able to recommend a solution for the errant analyzer readings. HC. It was purchased to represent a simple to use analyzer.10 Appendix 2 – Horiba 5-gas Analyzer The Horiba MEXA-584L is a 5-gas analyzer similar to the one covered earlier in this chapter. The manual for the Horiba analyzer is about 60 pages long. It also has additional inputs for engine speed. but functions as a plug-n-read type of device that is very easy for students to become comfortable using.000 depending on features. can be used with Labview for our dilution tunnel system. or transported with a vehicle (like the Clean Snowmobile) and recorded on a small USB analog recorder. Claimed accuracy for the analyzer is given in Table 11. and oil temperature that can be recorded. Improved features that this unit has over the other 5-gas analyzer in the lab are a set of analog outputs. O2. This makes the analyzer very easy to interface with other data logging devices. The system can be fed in to the dynamometer software.

2%] NO – [100 ppm] NO2 – [50 ppm] O2 – [1.02% -7 ppm -49 ppm -0.03% or 3% of reading CO 0-10% (whichever is larger) Within 0.1% or 3% of reading O2 0-25% (whichever is larger) Within 25 ppm or 4% of reading (0-4000 ppm) Within 8% of reading (4000-5000 ppm) NO 0-5000 ppm Table 0.03% 0.5 ppm Accuracy 0.00% 0.00% 2 ppm 1 ppm 0% 2.06% (15-20%) Within 0.03% -210 ppm Claim 0.000 (Methane equivalent) Accuracy ppm Within 60 ppm or 5% of reading HC (whichever is larger) Within 0.04% (8-15%) Within 0.03% or 5% of reading (0-8%) CO2 0-20% Within 0.12: Horiba 5-gas analyzer with high concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.11: Claimed range and accuracy of the Horiba 5-gas analyzer Sensor Range 0-60.19 Table 0.01%] CO2 – [0.1% 15 ppm .0%] CH4 – [300 ppm] Precision 0.03% 22 ppm No claim to measure NO2 0.01% -0.

The Horiba 5-gas analyzer should be a simple to use. Given its relatively low cost to individual detectors. Continual use will show if this analyzer is rugged enough to put up with the abuse of student use and projects. Tests using Hexane were within the manufacturer specifications of error. but still out of spec. The analyzer does not claim to measure NO2.5%] CO2 – [5.03% 0. The hydrocarbon measurement is out of spec in both instances. This is largely due to the calibration being done with hexane (C6H14). but the analyzer still does a very poor job at detecting methane. and the reported hydrocarbons on the analyzer is supposed to be in hexane equivalent (ie: methane. .45% 725 ppm N/A Unlike the other analyzers in this chapter. CH4 will read 1/6th of the actual value).02% 0. This was corrected for in the data. accurate device for students to make exhaust emissions measurements with. this looks to be a fair price for an analyzer that is simple to use and has better accuracy than the other analyzers in this chapter.20 Table 0.850 ppm N/A Claim 0.30% 80 ppm No claim to measure NO2 0.32% -11.13: Horiba 5-gas analyzer with low concentration calibration Sample CO – [0.1 ppm N/A Accuracy 0. Tests conducted with propane (C3H8) were improved.500 ppm] H2 [1000 ppm] Precision 0. the error of the Horiba seems to be within the range specified by the manufacturer.02% 0.02% 3 ppm 5 ppm 0% 3.12% 7 ppm -218 ppm 0. and for the most part it does not.0%] NO – [2000 ppm] NO2 – [250 ppm] O2 – [15 %] CH4 – [14. The hydrocarbon measurement is not reliable enough to use for carbon-balances. but should provide an adequate comparison of HC emissions for students to use while mapping an engine computer for improved emissions.