As environmental alertness becomes more of our daily way of life, their is constant demand for products that are adaptable to existing vehicles and older engines to optimize their ability to perform. The fact is that most all diesel engines in use today have an engine crankcase that is open and vents directly to the atmosphere. Those vented crankcase gases posses many dangerous toxins, damaging to human health. This creates a growing need for closed crankcase emissions systems in retrofit applications are inexpensive, easily installed, and offer some positive advantages such as lower maintenance or increased fuel economy.

        The purpose of this study was to evaluate a product, the PowerValve, and measure its benefits when used in medium to heavy duty applications. In addition, the product evaluated in this study was tested in two (2) configurations in order to show its superiority over other products that offer similar benefits: 1.) two of the five trucks were instrumented with the complete PowerValve system including the throttle switch; and 2.) two other trucks out of the five selected were instrumented with the PowerValve without the throttle switch.

        The purpose of this is to show the true superiority of the S.V. Technologies, Inc. PowerValve over products of a similar theory such as the "RACOR Crankcase Emission Control System." The PowerValve is unique in fact to other devices such as the RACOR because it offers a valve assembly that accurately controls the recycling of the crankcase gases, rather than just returning them back to the intake manifold with no regulation what so ever. Products like the RACOR, that offer the benefit of a closed crankcase system do in fact aid on the growth of solid pollutants but many times have a negative affect on the life of the engine, fuel consumption, scheduled maintenance, and its general ability to operate.

Procedure of Evaluation:

The test procedure followed for this evaluation was developed by Kenneth L. Davis, and accepted as protocol by Coca-Cola Femsa, S.A. de C.V., INE, and S.V. Technologies, Inc. To begin, five (5) vehicles were selected by Coca-Cola Femsa from their existing delivery fleet. Each of the five vehicles were equipped with the identical Perkins diesel engine.

        Each Vehicle was thoroughly inspected by Coca-Cola maintenance staff prior to start. Each vehicle received a full baseline evaluation of one (1) delivery day on it's specified route, and a device test followed under the same conditions. In addition, each evaluation vehicle also received five (5) baseline daily inspections, and five (5) device daily inspections. These inspections took place once each day, on each vehicle, five (5) consecutive days in a row. After all test vehicles passed daily inspection, each one of the five vehicles received the following on a daily basis: (1) Oil level verification. Additional oil needed was added and documented at the time of each inspection; (2) Fuel level Verification. Each of the five (5) test (continued)

21971 Sandra Street, Lake Forest, California 92630
Phone: (714) 768-8320        FAX: (714) 631-4944

vehicles were filled to the same level on a daily basis, in the morning prior to departure on a given delivery route; (3) Exhaust Gas Emissions Measurement. Each Morning prior to departure, each evaluation vehicle received a stationary exhaust gas test at "Idle" and again at "2000 RPM". This data was recorded every day during the study. The test protocol followed while on delivery route was as follows: Samples were collected in four (4) steps each day, collecting ten (10) samples in thirty (30) second intervals at each step. Each of the four samples were timed approximately 1.5 hours apart. Due to the nature of the delivery route, it was estimated that three of the four samples would be taken at an idle mode, and an attempt would be made to collect the fourth sample during some type of highway or high RPM condition. This should allow for the best comparison to the vehicle in its daily function as about seventy five (75%) percent of the time during a delivery route, the truck is at idle with no load.

Findings:

After the changes were made to the vehicles and each evaluated, the use of the PowerValve proved to be the most beneficial of the applications, when compared to OEM conditions and typical closed crankcase aftermarket systems.

        Whereas typical aftermarket closed crankcase systems cause an increase in the exhaust gas emissions and fuel consumption, the changes made to the exhaust gas constituents in adding the PowerValve proved that reducing exhaust gas emissions, while increasing the efficiency of combustion can be achieved with the addition of the device. The relative changes to the exhaust gas values based on the before and after installation of the device, and with and without crankcase gas control are described in the following summary:





21971 Sandra Street, Lake Forest, California 92630
Phone: (714) 768-8320        FAX: (714) 631-4944

        In review of over 3000 collected data points, it is clear that when using the PowerValve to regulate and control crankcase gases proves to be superior in its application. The summary of Configuration #1 concludes that when a typical crankcase recirculation system is installed, it has a tendency to increase exhaust gas emissions. This would give direction as to the projected out come of a study using a RACOR recover system. Configuration #2 concludes that using the PowerValve can reduce exhaust gas emissions and still gain combustion efficiency. Although the results of the PowerValve have proven to reduce exhaust gas emissions it should be noted that these results were particularly good on these specified vehicles. All of the vehicles used in this evaluation use the same Perkins diesel engine. Further studies should be performed if this product is considered for usage in other applications as results may vary.



SIGNED
Kenneth L. Davis

All data and report contents are the exclusive property of Kenneth L. Davis and S.V. Technologies, Inc. The contents of this report cannot be copied or reproduced except in its entirety, without written permission from both Kenneth L. Davis and S.V. Technologies, Inc.


21971 Sandra Street, Lake Forest, California 92630
Phone: (714) 768-8320        FAX: (714) 631-4944

PowerValve is designed to vent blow-by gases from the crankcase of the engine and return them into the intake manifold to be re-burned as additional fuel, simultaneously, while separating the oil from the blow-by gases and returning the filtered oil back to the crankcase of the engine. The PowerValve is electronically activated by a switch installed directly at the throttle linkage. When the Electonic switch is activated, a solenoid valve located directly on the top of the PowerValve is signaled and the flow of crankcase emissions is introduced into the intake manifold. Due to the versatility of the products' design, it can easily be adapted to the OEM on board computer system (CPU), and incorporated directly into the electronics of the engine management system for a more accurate control. In addition, S.V. Technologies, Inc., testifies that usage of the PowerValve reduces exhaust gas emissions, enhances fuel economy, extends time between oil changes and tune-ups by lessening oil sludge and contamination.