Search Results

A 1991 Toyota Camry equipped with an electrically-heated catalyst (EHC) system was evaluated in duplicate over the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) with three different fuels. Evaluations were conducted with the EHC in place but without any external heating, and with the EHC operated with a post-crank heating strategy. The EHC system was placed immediately upstream of an original production catalyst, which was then moved to a location 40.6 cm from the exhaust manifold. The three test fuels were: 1) the Auto/Oil industry average gasoline, RF-A; 2) a fuel meeting California's Phase II gasoline specifications; and 3) a paraffinic test fuel. Non-methane organic gas (NMOG) emission rates with the EHC active were similiar with all three fuels, with absolute levels less than or equal to California's 50,000 mile Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standard. Substantial differences, however were observed in the ozone forming potential of these fuels with the EHC active.

Improved designs of extruded metal electrically heated catalysts (EHC) in combination with a traditional converter achieved the California ultra-low emission vehicle (ULEV) standard utilizing 50% less electrical energy than previous prototypes. This energy reduction is largely achieved by reducing the mass of the EHC. In addition to energy reduction, the battery voltage is reduced from 24 volts to 12 volts, and the power is reduced from 12 kilowatts to 3 kilowatts. Also discussed is the impact EHC mass, EHC catalytic activity, and no EHC preheating has on non-methane hydrocarbon emissions, energy requirements, and power requirements.

A 1991 Toyota Camry equipped with an electrically-heated catalyst/light-off converter system was evaluated for emissions in duplicate over the light-duty Federal Test Procedure (FTP) with three different fuels. Evaluations were conducted with the electrically heated catalyst (EHC) in place, both without any external heating and with the EHC operated using a post-crank heating strategy The EHC system was placed immediately upstream of an original production catalyst which was located 40.6 cm from the exhaust manifold. The three test fuels were: 1) a fuel meeting California's Phase II gasoline specifications; 2) a low-sulfur (48 ppm) version of the Auto/Oil industry average gasoline; and 3) the Auto/Oil industry average gasoline, RF-A. On average, NMOG emissions and the ozone forming potential of the exhaust hydrocarbons exhibited the following trend for tests run in unheated and EHC-active modes: Phase II < low-sulfur RF-A < RF-A.

Low mass extruded electrically heated catalysts (EHC) followed directly by light-off and main converters resulted in non-methane hydrocarbon emissions (NMHC) between .020 and .023 g/mi at power levels as low as 1 kw and energy levels as low as 4 whr. These results were achieved on a 1993, 2.2 liter vehicle. The success of this system is due to rapid heat up of the catalyzed surface areas of both the heater and light-off converter. The energy added to the exhaust from both the heater and the light-off is then efficiently transferred to the main converter. In addition, the impact of power and energy on NMHC levels was determined. The Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle (ULEV) standard was also achieved with uncatalyzed heaters and on a 1990, 3.8 L vehicle. The new California Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) and Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standards require a significant reduction in tail pipe emissions compared to current standards.

A program to demonstrate the performance of advanced emission control systems in light of the California LEV II light-duty vehicle standards and the EPA's consideration of Tier II emission standards was conducted. Two passenger cars and one light-duty pick-up truck were selected for testing, modification, and emission system performance tuning. All vehicles were 1997 Federal Tier I compliant. The advanced emission control technologies evaluated in this program included advanced three-way catalysts, high cell density substrates, and advanced thermally insulated exhaust components. Using these engine-aged advanced emission control technologies and modified stock engine control strategies (control modifications were made using an ERIC computer intercept/control system), each of the three test vehicles demonstrated FTP emission levels below the proposed California LEV II 193,000 km (120,000 mile) ULEV levels.