the impact of biodiesel fuel blends on …webpages.eng.wayne.edu/nbel/nbb-conference/nrel - impact...
TRANSCRIPT
THE IMPACT OF BIODIESEL FUEL BLENDS ON AFTERTREATMENT
DEVICE PERFORMANCE IN LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
Matthew Thornton NREL, Marek Tatur and Dean Tomazic FEV Engine Technology Inc.
National Biodiesel Conference & Expo 2008
February 5th 2008
Disclaimer and Government License
This work has been authored by Midwest Research Institute (MRI) under Contract No. DE-AC36-99GO10337 with the U.S. Department of Energy (the “DOE”). The United States Government (the “Government”) retains and the publisher, by accepting the work for publication, acknowledges that the Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for Government purposes.
Neither MRI, the DOE, the Government, nor any other agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe any privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of the authors and/or presenters expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of MRI, the DOE, the Government, or any agency thereof.
Project Overview
• One of several projects evaluating biodiesel future engine and emission control systems
• Collaboration between the National Biodiesel Board (NBB) and NREL (DOE) under a cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA)
• Evaluate the impact of biodiesel fuel blends on emission control system performance
• Includes two emission control systems and two fuel blends on a light-duty platform– NAC/DPF and SCR/DPF systems– 5% and 20 % biodiesel blends
• Optimization and performance over time– CFD Modeling of SCR
• Engine teardown, oil dilution analysis, catalyst analysis• Project duration approximately 2+ years
Fuel Comparison
12.5912.92Hydrogen (wt%)
2.742.28
Kinematic Viscosity at 40°C [mm2/sec]
2.37
85.04
43.2
0.853
B20
0.00Oxygen (wt%)
87.08Carbon (wt%)
42.0Cetane Number
0.846Density (kg/dm3)
ULSDBase Fuel
Hardware Overview – SCR System
Hardware Overview – NOx Adsorber System
Dual wall pipe
DOC/NAC
DPF
Engine Out
Test Cell Set-up – NOx Adsorber System
Hardware Overview – Test Vehicle Hardware
Hardware Overview – Test Engine Hardware
Po
wer
[kW
]
102030405060708090
100110120
Torq
ue [
Nm
]
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
BM
EP
[bar]
468
10121416182022
Sm
oke [
FS
N]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Speed [rpm]
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Engine Power 113 kW @ 4000 rpm
Peak torque 360 Nm @ 2000 rpm
Max engine speed 4700 rpm
Max. BMEP 21 bar
Number & Arrangement of Cylinders
4 cylinder inline
Firing order 1 - 3 - 4 - 2
Valve train 4 Valve DOHC
Displacement 2.15 L
Bore to stroke ratio 1.0034
Compression Ratio 18
Fuel injection system2nd Generation Common-
Rail DI
Engine-out Emission Optimization
Base Euro 4 CalibrationNEDC > 0.25 g/km NOx (0.4 g/mi)
FTP75 < 0.7 g/mi NOx
Replacement of stock ECU
with development unit
including RP capabilities
Access to all engine/combustion parameters:
Begin of injection, Pilot + Post injections, Rail-
pressure, Boost pressure, EGR, Throttle, Swirl
Steady-state optimization
in 14 operating points
Average reduction of all emissions
over 50%
Transient optimization
in test cell and vehicle
Average reduction of all emissions
over 50%
Implementation of emission
control devices
Engine-out Emission Optimization
NOx emissions comparison in 14 calibration modes
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
650
0.00
1000
1.80
1200
3.02
1425
1.61
1615
3.07
1750
6.30
2000
4.00
2060
6.40
2300
4.05
2050
1.46
2250
8.16
2650
6.69
1450
4.59
1750
4.59
Engine speed [rpm] / BMEP [bar]
NO
x [
pp
m]
Base calibration
Optimized calibration
Engine-out Emission Optimization
Smoke emissions in 14 calibration modes
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
650
0.00
1000
1.80
1200
3.02
1425
1.61
1615
3.07
1750
6.30
2000
4.00
2060
6.40
2300
4.05
2050
1.46
2250
8.16
2650
6.69
1450
4.59
1750
4.59
Engine speed [rpm] / BMEP [bar]
Sm
oke [F
SN
]
Base calibration
Optimized calibration
Emissions ResultsNAC System
PM [mg/mile]
0123456789
1011
NOx [g/mile]
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
120,000 mileStandard
50,000 mileStandard
Cold LA4 Hot LA4 Composite FTP 75
NMHC [g/mile]
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
CO [g/mile]
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5
120,000 mileStandard50,000 mile
Standard
Test Results – Vehicle Emission Tests (at the U.S. EPA)
Test Results – Vehicle Emission Tests (at the U.S. EPA)
PM [mg/mile]
0123456789
1011
NOx [g/mile]
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
120,000 mileStandard
50,000 mileStandard
Composite ULSD Composite B20 Composite B5
NMHC [g/mile]
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
CO [g/mile]
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5
120,000 mileStandard50,000 mile
Standard
Test Results – Vehicle Emission Tests (at the U.S. EPA)
Veh
icle
Speed [
mph]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
B20 = 11%ULSD = 10%
B20 = 46%ULSD = 45%
B20 = 43%ULSD = 45%
Acc
um
ula
ted N
Ox
[g]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5 Engine Out - B20 Tail Pipe Out - B20 Engine Out - ULSD Tail Pipe - ULSD
Tem
pera
ture
[°C
]
050
100150200250300350400450500
Time [s]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
B20 - Temperature upstream LNT ULSD - Temperature upstream LNT
Test Results – Durability Testing
750
700
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Duration completed
Durability Cycle
Duration
Time [hr]
311
28
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Number of DPF
regeneration
completed
Number of
Desulfurization
completed
= 107%
750
700
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Duration completed
Durability Cycle
Duration
Time [hr]
311
28
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Number of DPF
regeneration
completed
Number of
Desulfurization
completed
= 107%
503
468
471
460
628
612
651
625
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
OP1 Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
OP1 Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
OP2 Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
OP2 Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
DPF Regen Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
DPF Regen Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
DeSOx Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
DeSOx Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
Temperature [deg C]
750
700
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Duration completed
Durability Cycle
Duration
Time [hr]
311
28
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Number of DPF
regeneration
completed
Number of
Desulfurization
completed
= 107%
750
700
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Duration completed
Durability Cycle
Duration
Time [hr]
311
28
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Number of DPF
regeneration
completed
Number of
Desulfurization
completed
= 107%
503
468
471
460
628
612
651
625
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
OP1 Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
OP1 Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
OP2 Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
OP2 Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
DPF Regen Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
DPF Regen Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
DeSOx Avg Temp in NAC [deg C]
DeSOx Avg Temp in DPF [deg C]
Temperature [deg C]
Test Results – Durability Testing
PM [mg/mile]
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
NOx [g/mile]
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.070 0.080
120,000 mileStandard
50,000 mileStandard
0 hr - FTP 75 composite Intermediate life - FTP 75 composite Full usefull life - FTP 75 composite
NMHC [g/mile]
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
CO [g/mile]
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50
120,000 mileStandard50,000 mile
Standard
Test Results – Durability Testing
Conversion Efficiency [%]
94
96
98
100
102
50 60 70 80 90 100NOx [%]
NM
HC
[%
]
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
50 60 70 80 90 100CO [%]
NM
HC
[%
]
0 hr FTP composite
Intermediate life FTPcomposite
Conversion efficiency target 120,000; 50,000 miles
Test Results – Fuel Economy Impact Vehicle (FTP75)
NO
x [
g/m
ile]
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Ba
se
EU
RO
4
T2
B5
Fe
ed
ga
s
T2
B5
Ta
ilpip
e
0.74
0.34
0.03
0.72
0.31
0.05
B20 ULSD
Fu
el E
co
no
my [
mp
g]
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Ba
se
EU
RO
4
T2
B5
Fe
ed
ga
s
T2
B5
Ta
ilpip
e
35.3
31.8 30.734.8
30.7 30.1
Test Results – Fuel Economy Impact Vehicle (FTP75)
Fu
el E
co
no
my [
mp
g]
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Ba
se
EU
RO
4
T2
B5
Fe
ed
ga
s
T2
B5
Ta
ilpip
e
35.3
31.8
30.7
34.8
30.730.1
B20 ULSD
• Vehicle as well as test cell results indicate an increase in engine out NOx and decrease in PM using Biodiesel blends
• Tail pipe NOx emissions decreed using Biodiesel blends (for the NAC system which was calibrated for B20 operation)
• This NAC system achieved Tier 2 Bin 5 emission levels at simulated full useful life (120k mi)
• NOx adsorber regeneration control remains the same between petroleum based and Biodiesel blended fuel.
• Fuel economy impact using Biodiesel fuel was marginal using an integrated Tier 2 Bin 5 system.
• Durability investigations focusing on Biodiesel effects on engine and aftertreatment system are currently underway for the SCR system.
Summary and Conclusions
Acknowledgments
• DOE Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies, Advance Petroleum Based and Non-Petroleum Based Fuels Activities: Stephen Goguen, Kevin Stork, and Dennis Smith, Technology Managers
• National Biodiesel Board: Steve Howell• MECA: Joe Kubsh and Rasto Brezny• EPA: Charles Schenk