Refine Your Search

Search Results

Viewing 1 to 3 of 3

Hydrocarbon Fouling of SCR During PCCI Combustion

The combination of advanced combustion with advanced selective catalytic reduction (SCR) catalyst formulations was studied in the work presented here to determine the impact of the unique hydrocarbon (HC) emissions from premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) combustion on SCR performance. Catalyst core samples cut from full size commercial Fe- and Cu-zeolite SCR catalysts were exposed to a slipstream of raw engine exhaust from a 1.9-liter 4-cylinder diesel engine operating in conventional and PCCI combustion modes. The zeolites which form the basis of these catalysts are different with the Cu-based catalyst made on a chabazite zeolite which las smaller pore structures relative to the Fe-based catalyst. Subsequent to exposure, bench flow reactor characterization of performance and hydrocarbon release and oxidation enabled evaluation of overall impacts from the engine exhaust.

Ionic Liquids as Novel Lubricants or Lubricant Additives

For internal combustion engines and industrial machinery, it is well recognized that the most cost-effective way of reducing energy consumption and extending service life is through lubricant development. This presentation summarizes our recent R&D achievements on developing a new class of candidate lubricants or oil additives ionic liquids (ILs). Features of ILs making them attractive for lubrication include high thermal stability, low vapor pressure, non-flammability, and intrinsic high polarity. When used as neat lubricants, selected ILs demonstrated lower friction under elastohydrodynamic lubrication and less wear at boundary lubrication benchmarked against fully-formulated engine oils in our bench tests. More encouragingly, a group of non-corrosive, oil-miscible ILs has recently been developed and demonstrated multiple additive functionalities including anti-wear and friction modifier when blended into hydrocarbon base oils.

Consumer Behavior and Risk Aversion

Auto manufacturers have known and surveys confirm that consumers require short payback periods (2-4 years) for investments in fuel economy. Using societal discount rates, engineering-economic generally find substantial potential to increase fuel economy, cost-effectively. This phenomenon, often referred to as the ?energy paradox?, has been observed in nearly all consumers? choices of energy-using durable goods. Loss aversion, perhaps the most well established theory of behavioral economics, provides a compelling explanation. Engineering economic analyses generally overlook the fact that consumers? investments in fuel economy are not sure things but rather risky bets. Future energy prices, real world on-road fuel economy, and many other factors are uncertain. Loss aversion describes a fundamental human tendency to exaggerate the potential for loss relative to gain when faced with a risky bet. It provides a sufficient explanation for consumers?