Search Results

Significant reduction in Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions will be required to meet LEV III/Tier III Emissions Standards for Light Duty Diesel (LDD) passenger vehicles. As such, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are exploring all possible aftertreatment options to find the best balance between performance, durability and cost. The primary technology adopted by OEMs in North America to achieve low NOx levels is Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). The critical parameters needed for SCR to work properly are: an appropriate reductant such as ammonia (NH3) provided as Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF), which is an aqueous urea solution 32.5% concentration in weight with water (CO(NH2)2 + H2O), optimum operating temperatures, and optimum nitrogen dioxide (NO2) to NOx ratios (NO2/NOx). The NO2/NOx ratio is most influenced by Precious Group Metals (PGM) containing catalysts upstream of the SCR catalyst.

New Particulate Matter (PM) and Particulate Number (PN) regulations throughout the world have created a need for aftertreatment solutions that include particulate control as an option to comply with the legislation. However, limitations in other criteria emissions cannot be sacrificed to accomplish the reduction of PM/PN. For this work, three-way washcoat catalyzed wall-flow Gasoline Particulate Filters (GPF) and similarly catalyzed flow-through catalysts of common defined volume were tested. Their catalytic performance was determined by measuring NOx, CO and HC conversion efficiencies and CO2 levels over the U.S. Federal Test Procedure 75 (FTP-75) and US06 Supplemental Federal Test Procedure (US06) cycles. Analysis of the impact on CO2 emissions was also evaluated in relation to backpressure from 1-D modeling analysis. All exhaust systems used the same loading and ratio of Platinum Group Metals (PGM), but employed different cell structures in their substrates.

In order to meet LEV III, EURO 6C and Beijing 6 emission levels, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) can potentially implement unique aftertreatment systems solutions which meet the varying legislated requirements. The availability of various washcoat substrates and PGM loading and ratio options, make selection of an optimum catalyst system challenging, time consuming and costly. Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) methodologies have been used in industry since the 1990s. One of the earliest applications was at Motorola where the methodology was applied to the design and production of a paging device which Consumer Reports called “virtually defect-proof”.[1] Since then, the methodology has evolved to not only encapsulate complicated “Variation Optimization” but also “Design Optimization” where multiple factors are in play. In this study, attempts are made to adapt the DFSS concept and methodology to identify and optimize a catalyst for diesel applications.

Significant reduction in Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions will be required to meet LEV III Emissions Standards for Light Duty Diesel passenger vehicles (LDD). As such, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are exploring all possible aftertreatment options to find the best balance between performance, robustness and cost. The primary technology adopted by OEMs in North America to achieve low NOx levels is Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) catalyst. The critical parameters needed for SCR to work properly are: an appropriate reductant such as ammonia (NH3) typically provided as urea, adequate operating temperatures, and optimum Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) to NOx ratios (NO2/NOx). The NO2/NOx ratio is mostly influenced by Precious Group Metals (PGM) containing catalysts located upstream of the SCR catalyst. Different versions of zeolite based SCR technologies are available on the market today and these vary in their active metal type (iron, copper, vanadium), and/or zeolite type.

Advances in diesel engine and catalyst technologies have enabled light passenger vehicles in meeting the most stringent Tier 3/LEV III emission levels and durability requirements. The advancements in diesel aftertreatment catalyst technology have made catalysts more susceptible to low levels of impurities, typically referred to as poisons. Published studies over the last two decades, have shown a significant impact on the performance of catalysts, to the presence of sulfur and other inorganics in fuels and oils. The design of an aftertreatment system (ATS) typically sets limits for lubricant and fuel quality, specific to the geographical region and availability of certain level of regulated fuels. In this study, we investigate a real-world aged diesel vehicle which exhibited deterioration in tailpipe emissions, beyond levels targeted during engineering development.

In the light duty diesel segment, the need persists for an advanced control system to monitor the health of an aftertreatment system throughout a vehicle’s life in order to maintain compliance with ever tightening emissions levels. In on-board diagnostics (OBD), every diagnostic is validated during development stages to detect when a system under monitoring of that diagnostic has failed. This necessitates the need to create parts which represent a failure that would be observed on the vehicle. These failed parts, referred to as limit or threshold parts, are developed through a limit part creation process. Although there are commonalities amongst Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), each OEM has their own detection logic which will require a unique and specific limit part. Various methods exist for creating these limit parts, and each method produces a different combination of ability to detect the failure and its associated tailpipe emissions.