Search Results

Diesel engines are widely used to reduce CO2 emission due to its higher thermal efficiency over gasoline engines. Considering long term CO2 targets, as well as tighter gas emission, especially NOx, diesel engines must become cleaner and more efficient. However, there is a tradeoff between CO2 and NOx and, naturally, engine developers choose lower CO2 because NOx can be reduced by a catalytic converter, such as a SCR catalyst. Lower CO2 engine calibration, unfortunately, leads to lower exhaust gas temperatures, which delays the activation of the catalytic converter. In order to overcome both problems, higher engine out NOx emission and lower exhaust gas temperatures, close-coupled a diesel particulate filter (DPF) system with integration of SCR catalyst technology is preferred. For SCR catalyst activity, it is known that the catalyst loading amount has an influence on NOx performance, so a high SCR catalyst loading will be required.

Since the implementation of Euro 6 in September 2014, diesel engines are facing another drastic reduction of NOx emission limits from 180 to only 80 mg/km during NEDC and real driving emissions (RDE) are going to be monitored until limit values are enforced from September 2017. Considering also long term CO2 targets of 95 g/km beyond 2020, diesel engines must become cleaner and more efficient. However, there is a tradeoff between NOx and CO2 and, naturally, engine developers choose lower CO2 because NOx can be reduced by additional devices such as EGR or a catalytic converter. Lower CO2 engine calibration, unfortunately, leads to lower exhaust gas temperatures, which delays the activation of the catalytic converter. In order to overcome both problems, higher NOx engine out emission and lower exhaust gas temperatures, new aftertreatment systems will incorporate close-coupled DeNOx systems.

A Particle Number (PN) limit for Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) vehicles was introduced in Europe from September 2014 (Euro 6b). In addition, further certification to Real Driving Emissions (RDE) is planned [1] [2], which requires low and stable emissions in a wide range of engine operation, which must be durable for at least 160,000 km. To achieve such stringent targets, a ceramic wall-flow Gasoline Particulate Filter (GPF) is one potential emission control device. This paper focuses on a catalyzed GPF, combining particle trapping and catalytic conversion into a single device. The main parameters to be considered when introducing this technology are filtration efficiency, pressure drop and catalytic conversion. This paper portrays a detailed study starting from the choice of material recipe, design optimization, engine bench evaluation, and final validation inside a standard vehicle from the market during an extensive field test up to 160,000 km on public roads.

The automotive industry is currently evaluating the gasoline particulate filter (GPF) as a potential technology to reduce particulate emissions from gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines. In this paper, several GPF design measures which were taken to obtain a filter with lower pressure drop when compared to our previous concept will be presented. Based on engine test bench and vehicle test results, it was determined some soot will accumulate on the GPF walls, resulting in an increase in pressure drop. However, the accumulated soot will be combusted under high temperature and high O₂ concentration conditions. In a typical vehicle application, passive regeneration will likely occur and a cycle of soot accumulation and combustion might be repeated in the actual driving conditions.

Diesel engines are more fuel efficient due to their high thermal efficiency, compared to gasoline engines and therefore, have a higher potential to reduce CO2 emissions. Since diesel engines emit higher amounts of Particulate Matter (PM), DPF systems have been introduced. Today, DPF systems have become a standard technology. Nevertheless, with more stringent NOx emission limits and CO2 targets, additional NOx emission control is needed. For high NOx conversion efficiency, SCR catalysts technology shows high potential. Due to higher temperature at the close coupled position and space restrictions, an integrated SCR concept on the DPFs is preferred. A high SCR catalyst loading will be required to have high conversion efficiency over a wide range of engine operations which causes high pressure for conventional DPF materials.

Ammonia Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Lean NOx Trap (LNT) systems are key technologies to reduce NOx emission for diesel on-highway vehicles to meet worldwide tighter emission regulations. In addition DeNOx catalysts have already been applied to several commercial off-road applications. Adding the DeNOx catalyst to existing Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) and Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) emission control system requires additional space and will result in an increase of emission system back pressure. Therefore it is necessary to address optimizing the DeNOx catalyst in regards to back pressure and downsizing. Recently, extruded zeolite for DeNOx application has been considered. This technology improves NOx conversion at low temperature due to the high catalyst amount. However, this technology has concerned about strength and robustness, because the honeycomb body is composed of catalyst.

The in-line hydrocarbon (HC) adsorber is a passive after-treatment technology to address cold-start hydrocarbons in automotive engine exhaust gas. A major technical challenge of the in-line HC adsorber is the difference between the HC release temperature of the adsorber and the light-off temperature of the burn-off (BO) Catalyst. We call this phenomenon the “reversed-temperature difference”. To reduce the reversed temperature difference, NGK has proposed a new “In-line HC Adsorber System” which consists of light-off (LO) Catalyst + Barrel Zeolite Adsorber (BZA), with a hole through the center, BO Catalyst and secondary air injection management (SAE 970266). This, our latest paper, describes the evaluation of various adsorbents and the effect of the center hole on the Adsorber BZA. The adsorber system, which had the Adsorber BZA with a 25mm ϕ center hole and adsorbent coated, confirmed 30% lower FTP NMHC emission versus a system with no center hole or adsorbent coating.