Advanced A/T technology Development

for CIDI Diesel Engines

7th Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction Workshop

August 7, 2000
Robert C Yu and Scott Cole
Cummins, Inc
Ken Howden
Department of Energy
Office of Advanced Automotive Technology
Outline of Presentation
• EAS Efficiency Requirements
• Technology Selection
• EAS Configuration Impact
• Fuel Sulfur Management
• Simulated FTP-75 Test Results
• Summary
Engine Out Emissions VS. EAS Efficiency Requirements

Future Emission Standards are “Aftertreatment Forcing”

3.25
US-HD 0.105 0.8
FTP-75 0.085
0.1
0.08
Engine Out 0.1
Engine Out 0.08
3
0.095
2006-2008 Proposed Standard 2006-2008 Proposed Standard 0.075
0.7
2.75 0.09
0.07
0.085
2.5 0.6 0.065
0.08
0.6
0.075 0.06
2.25
0.07
2 0.055
2 0.065 0.5
0.05
B S N O x (g / h p -h r )

B S P M (g / h p -h r )
0.06
90%

P M (g / m i le )
N O x (g / m i le )
1.75 0.045
0.055
0.05
0.4 88%
1.5 0.04
0.045
0.035
1.25 0.04 0.3 88%
90% 0.035
0.03
1
0.03 0.025

0.025 0.2
0.75 0.02
0.02
0.015
0.5 0.015 0.01
0.01 0.1 0.01
0.07
0.2 0.01
0.25
0.005 0.005

0 0 0 0
BSNOx BSPM BSNOx BSPM
1 1
NOx Technology Selection
A. Selective Catalytic Reduction-HC (SCR-HC)
HC

DeNOx DeNOx

B. Plasma Assisted Catalytic Reduction (PACR)

HC HC

Plasma Processor DeNOx DeNOx

C. NOx Adsorber Catalyst (AC), Full Flow

HC

S-trap AC AC

D. NOx Adsorber Catalyst (AC), By Pass

HC
AC

S-trap HC
AC
HC-Selective Catalytic Reduction
ECU

CATALYST

HC addition Combination catalyst for

NOx reduction over a
wider space velocity,
and temperature range

• Catalyst+NO+Urea+O2 --> N2+CO2+H2O (Urea-SCR)

VS.
• Catalyst+NO+HC+O2 --> N2+CO2+H2O (HC-SCR)
 Technology Status - SCR-HC
80
Positives
SV=17 k/hr
70
SV=35 k/hr • Can use diesel fuel as reductant, diesel fuel can be
60
added to exhaust or in-cylinder
NOx Conversion Efficiency (%)

50
• A 40% NOx conversion efficiency was
demonstrated with diesel as injection reductant
40

30 • Simple injection strategy with low complexity for

implementation
20

10

0
30 70 110 150 190 230 270 310 350
Temperature (C)
 Technology Status - SCR-HC
35 35
Negatives
30 30
• High NOx conversion to N2O (about 50%-60%
of the NOx reduced), N2O is a greenhouse gas
25 25

• High sulfate formation rates at high

NOx Conversion, %

N2O Formation, %
20 20 temperature for high sulfur fuel. Not an issue
with future ultra low sulfur fuel
15 15

• Need combination of different catalyst to cover

10 10
the whole exhaust temperature range for FTP-
75 and US06 cycles
5 5

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Inlet Temperature, °C
Plasma Assisted Catalytic Reduction (PACR)
Electrical
ECU power

CATALYST

PLASMA
Addition
Addition GENERATOR point for
point for diesel fuel
diesel fuel

• Plasma converts NO to NO2

• HC added to exhaust or in cylinder enhances this process
• Activated HC reduces NO2 over catalyst
 Technology Status - PACR
60 Positives
SV=2 k/hr • Conversion of NO to NO2 at low temperatures,
50
SV=18 k/hr without SO2 to SO3 oxidation
• Can enhance NOx conversion at low
NOx Conversion Efficiency (%)

40
temperatures on other NOx aftertreatment
technologies
30 • Can use Diesel Fuel as reductant
• Simple reductant injection strategy,
20 similar to SCR-HC

10

0
30 70 110 150 190 230 270 310 350
Temperature (C)
 Technology Status - PACR
80
Negatives
70 • Additional power required for Plasma generation
SCR PACR
• Very low space velocity/very large catalyst
60
volume required for high conversion efficiency, a
40% NOx reduction was achieved with 90 L
50
NOx Removal (%)

Gamma-Alumina catalyst
40 • Potential safety issues due to high voltage /
possible EMI generation
30
• Benefit of non-thermal plasma decreases as the
temperature is increased. No benefit was
20
observed at temperatures greater than 3000 C
10 • Evidence of NOx adsorption as significant NOx
consumption pathway
0
0 25 50 75 100 125
Elapsed Time (min)
NOx Adsorber Catalyst
ECU CATALYST

SOx Trap

CATALYST

Low cost By-pass Advanced

disposable/ regeneration NOx adsorber
serviceable for minimal catalyst
SOx trap fuel economy
penalty
NO2 desorption and reduction

NOx storage

Rich HC pulse
time
Technology Status - NOx Adsorber
100 Positives
90
• Potential for high NOx conversion
80
(>88%)
70
• Wide temperature range of peak
NOx Conversion (%)

60 operation (330 deg C to 450 deg C)

50 • Can use diesel fuel as reductant - easier
40 enforcement/anti-tampering control
Catalyst A
30 • No infrastructure issues (as with urea
Catalyst B
Catalyst C distribution)
20

10

0
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Catalyst Inlet Temperature (C)
Technology Status - NOx Adsorber
Negatives
100
• Still requires formulation
Peak NOx Reduction [%]

improvement/active control of exhaust

80 temperature.
• Rapidly poisoned by sulfur in the fuel
60 and lube, a sulfur trap will be required
410 ppm
40 • Rich operation of injected hydrocarbon
11 ppm leading to high fuel penalty, HC slip, and
SOF particulate
20
• Partial flow regeneration adds
complexity but offers lower fuel
0 economy penalty
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 • Complex reductant injection / control
system
Test Duration [Hours]
3.2 g/kW-hr BSNOx Engine Out
Program Emissions Fuel Up Front Service Interval/ Size/ Composite
Reliability
Target Capability Economy Cost Service Hassle Weight Score

Weighting Factor 10 9 9 7 5

PACR No 3 3 3 3 2 0

SCR-HC No 5 5 5 5 5 0

NOx Adsorber Yes 4 5 4 3 4 162

5 = Best 1 = Worst
Impact of System Configuration Arrangement

HC

HC AC

AC AC
VS HC

AC

Full Flow By-pass

Impact of By-pass System on Fuel Economy Penalty
100 20

90 18

By-pass (NOx Conv.)

80 16
Full Flow (NOx Conv.)
NOx Conversion Efficiency (%)

70 By-pass (FEP) 14

Fuel Economy Penalty (%)

Full Flow (FEP)

60 12

50 10

40 8

30 6

20 4

10 2

0 0
250 300 350 400 450
Mean Catalyst Temperature (C)
Sulfur Management - NOx Adsorber Degradation

• SOx competes for active NOx adsorption and precious metal

oxidation sites
• SOx combines with adsorber sites to form thermodynamically stable
compounds that require extremely high temperatures (>650 oC) and
reductant to regenerate the adsorber
• The stability of the noble metal component can be effected at >650 oC
due to the close proximity to the NOx storage component (typically
alkaline or alkaline-earth elements)
• NOx adsorber conversion efficiency decreases at a rate of
approximately 0.1 % per hour with 11 ppm sulfur fuel without a
sulfur trap
• In addition to fuel sulfur content, the sulfur in the lube oil also plays a
major role in adsorber sulfur loading and performance degradation
Contribution of Lube Oil to Exhaust S Concentration
(Arco EC-D Fuel, Premium Blue Engine Oil)
60

55
% of Total Sulfur in Exhaust

50

45

40

35

30

25

20
Engin

100
90
80
e
Load

70
60
(%)

50
40
30

2500
2100
1700
1300
900
500

Engine Speed (rpm)

NOx Adsorber Sulfur Management Strategy
Disposable/Offline Regenerable
• High adsorption capacity for sulfur.
• High selectivity toward sulfur adsorption
• No release of secondary emissions from
trap
• Usable life of SOx trap is dependent on
Sulfur level in fuel and lube oil
• Good protection of adsorber catalyst from
sulfur poisoning during miss-fueling
• Potential technology for light duty
applications-small size, low cost, and
limited useful life requirement
NOx Adsorber Desulfation Catalyst
• Integrated NOx trap and sulfur trap
function on one catalyst, does not require
separate SOx trap
• Requires on-board high temperature
exhaust management to release sulfur from
catalyst (>650 deg C)
• Additional fuel penalty will be incurred
during desulfation process
• Desulfation involves release of secondary
emissions hydrogen sulfide and/or sulfur
dioxides
• Catalyst material development required
compromise among NOx storage &
conversion, SOx storage & release, and
catalyst thermal durability, and etc
Sulfur Trap Replacement / Offline Regeneration Interval
(10 ppm Fuel Sulfur)

10 gm/L,5800ppm Oil Sulfur 20gm/L,5800ppm Oil Sulfur

20gm/L,2000ppm Oil Sulfur 30gm/L,1000 ppm Oil Sulfur
50000
Replacement Interval (Miles)

45230
45000
40000
35000
27741 31015
30000
25000 21274
19022
20000
14588
15000 10637
10000 7294
5000
0
1 2
17.5 (6 L) 60 (1.2 L)
Fuel Economy, Miles/Gal (Catalyst Volume, Liters)
NOx Conversion Efficiency vs Fuel Injection Penalty Development Status
(Simulated FTP-75, Breadboard ISB with NOx Adsorber / DPF System)
100%
NOx Conversion Efficiency
Soot Trapping Efficiency

88 %
90%

80%

70%

60% NOx

50%
NOx NOx NOx
40% DPF
DPF DPF
30%

20%
NOx

10%

0%

18%

16%
Fuel Economy Penalty

14%

12%

10%

8%
Fuel
Penalty
6%
Target
4% No
Injection
2%

0%

Pre-Conditioning No No No No Yes
Exh Temp Mgmt. No Yes Yes Yes Yes
DPF No No Yes Yes Yes
Configuration Full Flow Full Flow Full Flow Bypass Bypass
Summary
• The best NOx control approach for LDV and LDT applications is a NOx
adsorber catalyst system. A greater than 88% NOx reduction efficiency is
required to achieve 0.07 g/mile Tier II emissions standard. Active lean NOx
and PACR technologies are currently not capable.

• The NOx conversion verse temperature curves are identical between LDV
and LDT engines. This suggest that a fundamental and “displacement-size”
transparent understanding can be made on EAS technology development.

• Demonstrated a 40% to 50% reduction in fuel injection penalty with a by-pass

regeneration strategy as compared to a full flow regeneration strategy over a
simulated FTP-75 emission cycle. A by-pass regeneration system will be
needed to achieve the lowest fuel injection penalty.
Summary- Continued
• In addition to the fuel sulfur content, the sulfur in the oil also plays a major
role in adsorber sulfur loading and performance degradation. A low sulfur oil
is required to prolong the life of adsorber from sulfur poisoning.

• 84% NOx and 95% PM conversion efficiencies have been achieved with a
breadboard low emission ISB engine and an adsorber/CSF exhaust
configuration on the simulated FTP-75 emission cycle.

• Much work remains for real world implementation.

• Durability of devices such as regeneration hardware/sulfur poisoning/
thermal degradation/catalyst masking
• Transient control/OBD
• Cost and size of the system