Approval Details

Valid E.O.

Validity

This Executive Order approved the specified parts on on May 29, 1997.
As of Monday, July 22nd, 2019 this Executive Order has not been overturned or superceeded.

Approved Parts

Models
1993-1997 trucks equipped with a turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.

This Executive Order may be listed as:
  • C.A.R.B.E.O. D-175-13
  • Executive Order 175-13 / D175-13
  • ARB # D-175-13
  • Executive Order No: D-175-13
  • C.A.R.B. No. D-175-13
  • Resolution D-175-13
For Free CARB Executive Order Status verification, email an image of the device Executive Order label as well as the Year/Make/Model and Test Group # of the vehicle to [email protected]

Download: Executive Order D-175-13 PDF

D-175-13 Document:



                                 State of California
                                 AIR RESOURCES   BOARD

                               EXECUTIVE ORDER D—175—13
                   Relating to Exemptions Under Section 27156
                                 of the Vehicle Code

                              HYPERMAX ENGINEERING, INC.
                                 FUEL INJRCTION NOZZLE


Pursuant to the authority vested in the Air Resources Board by Section 27156
of the Vehicle Code;    and

Pursuant to the authority vested in the undersigned by Section 39515 and
Section 39516 of the Health and Safety Code and Executive Order G—45—9;

IT IS ORDERED AND RESOLVED:      That the installation of the Fuel Injection
Nozzle marketed by Hypermax Engineering,     Inc.,   255 E Route 72, Gilberts,
Illinois 60136 has been found not to reduce the effectiveness of the
applicable vehicle pollution control system and, therefore, is exempt from the
prohibitions of Section 27156 of the Vehicle Code for 1993—97 trucks equipped
with a turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.

The Fuel Injection Nozzle is a complete set of new fuel injectors that have
been designed to increase fuel flow at WOT.

This Executive Order is valid provided that the installation instructions for
the Fuel Injection Nozzle will not recommend tuning the vehicle to
specifications different from those of the vehicle manufacturer.

Changes made to the design or operating conditions of the Fuel Injection
Nozzle, as exempt by the Air Resources Board, which adversely affect the
performance of the vehicle‘s pollution control system shall invalidate this
Executive Order.                      '

Marketing of the Fuel Injection Nozzle using any identification other than
that shown in this Executive Order or marketing of the system for an
application other than those listed in this Executive Order shall be
prohibited unless prior approval is obtained from the Air Resources Board.
Exemption of the system shall not be construed as exemption to sell, offer for
sale, or advertise any component of the kit as an individual device.

This Executive Order does not constitute any opinion as to the effect the use
of the Fuel Injection Nozzle may have on any warranty either expressed or
implied by the vehicle manufacturer.

THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CERTIFICATION, ACCREDITATION,
APPROVAL, OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENDORSEMENT B¥ THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD OF ANY
CLAIMS OF THE APPLICANT CONCERNING ANTI—POLLUTION BENEFITS OR ANY ALLEGED
BENEFITS OF HYPERMAX ENGINEERING, INC.‘S FUEL INJECTION NOZZLE.

No claim of any kind, such as "Approved by the Air Resources Board", may be
made with respect to the action taken herein in any advertising or other oral
or written communication.

Violation of any of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of
this order.  The order may be revoked only after a ten—day written notice of
intention to revoke the order, in which period the holder of the order may
request in writing a hearing to contest the proposed revocation.  If a hearing
is requested, it shall be held within ten days of receipt of the request and
the order may not be revoked until a determination after hearing that grounds
for revocation exist.                        :fi

Executed at El Monte,   California,   this   2


                          State of California
                          AIR RESOURCES BOARD




                EVALUATION OF HYPERMAX ENGINEERING, INC.‘S
FUEL INJECTION NOZZLE FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE PROHIBITIONS OF VEHICLE CODE
     SECTION 27156 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2222, TITLE 13, OF THE
                      CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS




                               May 1997


                              State of California
                              AIR RESOURCES   BOARD




                    EVALUATION OF HYPERMAX ENGINEERING, INC.‘S
   FPUEL INJECTION NOZZLE FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE PROHIBITIONS OFP VEHICLE CODE
         SECTION 27156 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2222, TITLE 13, OF THE
                          CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS




                                      by
                      Mobile Source Operations Division
                             9528 Telstar Avenue
                              El Monte, CA 91731




(This report has been reviewed by the staff of the California Air Resources
Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources
Board, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.)


                                          SUMMARY



         Hypermax Engineering,     Inc.    of 255 E Route 72,   Gilberts,   Illinois

60136 has applied for an exemption from the prohibitions in Section 27156 of

the California Vehicle Code (VC)    for their Fuel Injection Nozzle designed for

1993—97 trucks equipped with a turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.

         Based on submitted emissions test data,        the staff concludes that the

Fuel Injection Nozzle will not adversely affect exhaust emissions from

vehicles for which the exemption is requested.

         The staff recommends that Hypermax Engineering,          Inc.   be granted an

exemption as requested and that Executive Order D—175—13 be issued.


                               TABLE OF CONTENTS



                                                   Page Number



SUMMARY                                               1

CONTENTS                                              i1

I.    INTRODUCTION                                     1

II.   CONCLUSION                                       1

III. RECOMMENDATION                                    1

IV.   FUEL INJECTION NOZZLE DESCRIPTION                1

v.    DISCUSSION OF THE FUEL INJECTION NOZZLE         2


                       EVALUATION OF HYPERMAX ENGINEERING,          INC.‘S
  FUEL   INJECTION NOZZLE       FOR AN EXEMPTION     FROM THE   PRORIBITIONS OF VEHICLE CODE
          SECTION 27156 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2222, TITLE 13,               OF THE
                           CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS


I.      INTRODUCTION

             Hypermax Engineering,        Inc. of 255 E Route 72,    Gilberts,    Illincis

60136 has applied for an exemption from the prohibitions in Section 27156 of

the California Vehicle Code (VC)           for their Fuel Injection Nozzle for 1993—97

trucks equipped with a turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.

II.      CONCLUSTONS

             Based on submitted emissions test data, the staff concludes that

Hypermax Engineering, Inc.‘s Fuel Injection Nozzle will not adversely affect

exhaust emissions from the vehicles for which the exemption is requested.

III.      RECOMMENDATION

             The staff recommends that Hypermax Engineering,            Inc.   be granted an

exemption for their Fuel Injection Nozzle for installation on 1993—97 trucks

equipped with a turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.                The staff also

recommends that Executive Order D—175—13 be issued.

IV.     FUEL INJRCTION NOZZLE DESCRIPTION

            The Fuel Injection Nozzle manufactured by Hypermax Engineering has

been specifically designed for installation on 1993—97 trucks equipped with a

turbocharged Navistar 7.3L diesel engine.

            The purpose of using Hypermax‘s Fuel Injection Nozzle is to enhance

the performance of the 7.3L diesel engine during high torque and wide open

throttle conditions        (WOT)}).   The kit includes a new set of injectors.

            The new set of injectors, described as a Hydraulically Actuated

Electronic Controlled Unit Injector           (HEUI},   have a higher maximum fuel flow

rate at WOT than the factory stock injectors.              Hypermax claims that these

injectors maintain stock flow characteristics during normal driving

conditions,    those conditions similar to the CVS—75 Federal Test Procedure.

The HEUI has four major components:            Solenoid, poppet valve,       intensifier

piston & plunger,      and the nozzle assembly.         The poppet valve is held on its

lower seat by a spring.          In this closed position, high pressure inlet oil is

blocked and the intensifier cavity is open to drain.               When the solencid is

energized, the poppet is quickly lifted off of the lower seat to the upper

seat.    The path to the drain is now closed and the inlet for high pressure oil
                                               ~1—


is opened.    The high pressure oil enters the injector and acts on top of the

intensifier piston.        Pressure builds on the intensifier, pushing it and the

plunger down.     The intensifier is 7 times larger in surface area than the

plunger, providing an equal multiplication of force creating the injection

pressure.    The downward movement of the plunger pressurizes the fuel in the

plunger cavity, causing the nozzle to open.

v.          DISCUSSION OF THE FUEL INJECTION NOZZLE

            A 1995 Ford F~350 equipped with a 7.3L turbocharged diesel engine

was used for the evaluation of the Fuel Injection Nozzle.                Testing consisted

of one Cold 505 in the baseline configuration and one Cold 505 in the modified

configuration.     The dynamometer inertia weight and horsepower settings were

8000—lbs. and 19.3—hp.,       respectively.       The emissions testing was conducted by

Roush Laboratories       for Hypermax,    data was evaluated against the vehicles‘s

baseline emission levels.        Table 1 lists those results.

                                            Table 1.

                                      (gm/mile)

                   HC            co               NOx           Particulates

Baseline         0.89           4. 68             7.8   ©         0.15

Modified         0. 60          4.60              8.0       ‘     0.11

            The ARB did not perform testing to confirm the emission test results

submitted by the applicant.        Emission test results submitted were below the

vehicle‘s baseline emission levels or within the allowable increases of 0.1

grams/mile or 10 percent on HC or NOx,            1.0 grams/mile or 15 percent on CO, and

0.03 grams/mile or 15 percent on Particulates.

            In addition to their emissions evaluation Roush also performed a key

on engine off (KOEO) test and a key on engine running (KOER) test with the

vehicle in the baseline and modified confiqguration.              Hypermax used a new 1997

Ford F—350 truck with the 7.3L diesel engine to evaluate the affect of the

device on the vehicle‘s limited on—board diagnostic (OBD) II system.                The OBD

II system was introduced only on medium—duty diesels trucks in 1997.                No codes

were detected and the vehicle‘s monitors completed their check.                An incomplete

monitor would mean that the vehicle‘s computer had not been able to complete

its evaluation of the sensors associated with that monitor.               Therefore, based

                                              —2—


on the test results and the OBD II checks,   the staff concludes that the

installation of the Fuel Injection Nozzle will not have an adverse effect on

exhaust emissions on those applicable vehicles.

         Hypermax Engineering has submitted all the required information and

fulfilled the requirements for an exemption.



Document Created: 2005-09-01 12:42:10
Document Modified: 2005-09-01 12:42:10

Previous E.O. D-175-12 | Previous E.O. D-174 | Next E.O. D-175-14 | Next E.O. D-176