Search Results

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), using urea injection, is being examined as a method for substantial reduction of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) for diesel engines, but the urea injection rates must be controlled to match the NOx production which may need to be predicted during open loop control. Unfortunately NOx is usually measured in the laboratory using a full-scale dilution tunnel and chemiluminescent analyzer, which cause delay and diffusion (in time) of the true manifold NOx concentration. Similarly, delay and diffusion of measurements of all emissions cause the task of creating instantaneous emissions models for vehicle simulations more difficult. Data were obtained to relate injections of carbon dioxide (CO2) into a tunnel with analyzer measurements. The analyzer response was found to match a gamma distribution of the input pulse, so that the analyzer output could be modeled from the tunnel CO2 input.

The study was aimed at assessing in-use emissions of a USEPA 2010 emissions-compliant heavy-duty diesel vehicle powered by a model year (MY) 2011 engine using West Virginia University's Transportable Emissions Measurement System (TEMS). The TEMS houses full-scale CVS dilution tunnel and laboratory-grade emissions measurement systems, which are compliant with the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Title 40, Part 1065 [1] emissions measurement specifications. One of the specific objectives of the study, and the key topic of this paper, is the quantification of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (CO2, N2O and CH4) along with ammonia (NH3) and regulated emissions during real-world operation of a long-haul heavy-duty vehicle, equipped with a diesel particulate filter (DPF) and urea based selective catalytic reduction (SCR) aftertreatment system for PM and NOx reduction, respectively.

West Virginia University characterized the emissions and fuel economy performance of a 30-foot 2010 transit bus equipped with urea selective catalytic reduction (u-SCR) exhaust aftertreatment. The bus was exercised over speed-time driving schedules representative of both urban and on-highway activity using a chassis dynamometer while the exhaust was routed to a full-scale dilution tunnel with research grade emissions analyzers. The Paris speed-time driving schedule was used to represent slow urban transit bus activity while the Cruise driving schedule was used to represent on-highway activity. Vehicle weights representative of both one-half and empty passenger loading were evaluated. Fuel economy observed during testing with the urban driving schedule was significantly lower (55%) than testing performed with the on-highway driving schedule.