A 6-mm-diameter, plane-wave shock generation system has been developed and characterized as a laboratory bench driver for small scale experiments. The driver is based on an exploding-foil-driven slapper used either directly or to initiate an HE pellet. The slapper is driven by a low-inductance fireset with burst currents on the order of 30 kA and burst times of about 250ns, with a time-to-burst jitter under 10ns. Both the slapper impact and the detonation breakout of the pellet have been measured to be flat to within 10ns over a 6-mm diameter. Fabry-Perot velocimetry of impacts with LiF crystals were used to characterize shock pressures and durations. Attenuator plates and flyers driven by the HE were also measured, which provided a variety of available pulse shapes and data for modeling efforts.

Although various legislation and regulations have been adopted to promote the use of alternative-fuel vehicles for curbing urban air pollution problems, there is a lack of systematic comparisons of emission control cost-effectiveness among various alternative-fuel vehicle types. In this paper, life-cycle emission reductions and life-cycle costs were estimated for passenger cars fueled with methanol, ethanol, liquefied petroleum gas, compressed natural gas, and electricity. Vehicle emission estimates included both exhaust and evaporative emissions for air pollutants of hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and air-toxic pollutants of benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acetaldehyde. Vehicle life-cycle cost estimates accounted for vehicle purchase prices, vehicle life, fuel costs, and vehicle maintenance costs. Emission control cost-effectiveness presented in dollars per ton of emission reduction was calculated for each alternative-fuel vehicle types from the estimated vehicle life-cycle emission reductions and costs. Among various alternative-fuel vehicle types, compressed natural gas vehicles are the most cost-effective vehicle type in controlling vehicle emissions. Dedicated methanol vehicles are the next most cost-effective vehicle type. The cost-effectiveness of electric vehicles depends on improvements in electric vehicle battery technology. With low-cost, high-performance batteries, electric vehicles are more cost-effective than methanol, ethanol, and liquified petroleum gas vehicles.