throbber
SIMULTANEOUS Cf}NT‘R()L OF NOX AND PM
`
`FROM DIESEL ENGINES
`
`Mr M K Khair.
`
`Southwest Research Institute,
`
`-. USA
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`96EN008
`
`in North America, particulate matter omission limits were imposed on l‘lcavy—Duty Diesel
`‘Engines in l988. Since then. the NO! and particulate tnzttt-or tradc~ofl cltamcteristic became the
`Achilles heel of heavy-duty diesel engines. Most NO,‘ reduction nicasuros invariably lead to higher
`particulate matter emissions.
`In 1998. NO,‘ emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines will not be
`allowed to exceed 4.0 gm/bhp-'nr while particulate matter will still be regulated at 0.1 gIbl1p~hr.
`Post» I998 N03‘./PM emissions standards are expected to be drastically tighter. Ultra-Low Emission
`Vehicle (ULEV) standards are proposing a combined NOX and HC standard not to exceed 2.5
`g/bl1p~hr with particulate matter regulated at 0.10 g/blip» hr.
`
`This paper also considers the impact of exhaust gas rocirculzstion on particulate matter
`composition.
`in addition, the potential of combining both exhaust gas recirculation and passive trap
`aftcertrcatmcnt is demonstrated as a potential solution for simultaneous control of these two emissions
`species.
`
`lN'l'ROD-UCTION
`
`The diesel angina inns long been the most cncrgy efficient power plant for transportation.
`Moreover, dicsclfi emit extremely low levels of hydrocarbon and carbon rnonoxidc that do not
`require aftcnretntrncnt to comply with current and projected standardis. However. it is admittedly
`difficult for this power plant to simultaneously meet NOK und particulate. matter projected standards.
`Traditionally, tlcsign changes aimed at reducing one of those two exhaust gas species. have led to
`an iucrcase in the other. This physiizal characteristic. which is l-tr-own as t\‘Ox/Pitt trad-coff remains
`the subject of an intense research effort.
`
`As mentioned in the. abstract. future emissions standards are proposing extremely low NO:
`and p2tl'llCul£.t1t.' mztttcr limits. A nzasonablc objective for NO,‘ control is 2.0 glblip-hr (2.7glkWli\.
`in order to !l'lC»t'.‘.l the N0‘ +« HC limits of 2.5g/bhp-hr (3.49,/‘l:\‘v‘ht proposed in the Statement of
`Principles (SOP) agreed to by the North An-icrican Engine Manufacturers.
`
`TECHNOLOGIES FOR LOW N03 IN l)l’F.SEL ENGINES - A REVIEW
`
`Many teclinologie.-5 for NO“. reduction have been considered over the last two decadcs. Sonic.
`of these technologies are:
`
`Pilot injection and irriection rate shaping
`lntako charge air cooling
`Injection timing retard
`Water omulsionlinjection
`E1’-;l’I'.‘1|lSl aftertreatrnont
`
`lixliuust gas rccinsulation
`
`BASF-2002.001
`
`

`
`Some other technologies were adopted for their impact on PM reduction rather than NO: reduction.
`However. it should be noted that reducing PM provided engineers more freedom in controlling NOX
`than would otherwise have been possible. For instance, increasing injection pressure led to reducing
`PM through better mixing and higher air utilization.
`in the meantime, higher injection pressure,
`reduced ignition delay and allowed engineers additional injection timing retard leading to lower NOx
`emissions as well.
`
`EFFECT OF PILOT INJECTION AND i.NJECTION RATE SHAPING
`
`Researchers at Nagasaki University have shown that pilot injection reduced ignition delay
`by 50 percent from that of the conventional injection systcms.m This ignitiondelay reduction
`allowed more injection timing retard with good combustion stability. Significant reductions in flame
`temperature. NO‘, and fuel consumption were also reported by the same researchers. These
`irnpmvcntcnts were attributed to a slower rate of combustion pressure rise resulting in better
`mechanical efficiency and lower cooling loss. Their work, however, documented an increase in
`smoke emissions and pointed to the need for flexible control of pilot injection timing and quantity
`as a function of engine speed and load. Similar results were reported earlier by researchers from
`the ACE institute C0,, Ltd. and JARI, Inc. in iapanm These researchers achieved 35 percent NO‘
`reduction and 60-80 percent smoke mduction sirnttltaneously without fuel consumption penalty.
`They have achieved these results by combining pilot injection with high injection pressures.
`
`Pilot or staged injection research and development results indicated that an optimum injection
`strategy would be a slow injection rat: (small pilot) for N01 control. The latter portion of the
`injection would be characterized with it fast injection rate for particulate control where most of the
`fuel would be injected at the highest combustion temperature near TDC. Work by researchers at
`the University of Wisconsin, Madisottm, using multiple injections (more than two). generally
`supported the above conclusions. Figures la and lb were adapted from rcfcrcncem to illustrate the
`effects of low injection rate on NO,‘ reduction and the adverse impact of higher rates after the bulk
`of the fuel had released its heat. respectively.
`
`EFFl£C'l' OF INTAKE CHARGE AIR COOLING
`
`Most if not all published data agree that for high specificpout ut diesel engines (high BMEP).
`there is a beneficial effect for lower temperature charge air.“*5'
`’ Many engine niattufacturers
`replaced their water-jacket with air-to-air intercooled systems.(4’7’ For a typical North American
`7.5 liter turbocharged diesel engine a fuel consumption improvement of 2.49 percent was seen when
`intake charge air tetnpcruture was reduced from 2()0”F to 120°? (93"C to 49'C).m Meanwhile, a
`N0,‘ reduction of 17.5 percent was reported at the same injection titning.m Figure 2 was adapted
`from reference 7 and gives the effect of rated speed intake manifold temperature on EPA he;-.vy—duty
`transient test NOX emissions.
`
`EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING RETARD
`
`The effect of retarding injection timing on NO‘ emission in diesel engines has been well
`docu:1tented.i5'5'7) Retarding injection tinting by 8-10’ crank angle was found to help most heavy-
`duty DI diesel engines to meet the 1991 NOX standards of 5.0g/bhp-hr (6.8glkWh) from their pre-
`l99l calibrations of 940.5 g/bhp—hr (l4.3g/kWh). Adverse NOX emission behavior was noted
`however where injection timing was extended beyond this margin.“‘) This plicnonienon was
`attributed to an increase in the premixed fuel fraction due to a significant increase in ignition delay.
`Figure 3 which was adapted from reference 7. ties the influence of both injection timing retard and
`
`BASF-2002.002
`
`

`
`u-4
`
`
`
`
`
`H02".Emluninm.anrwh “.,..._...2__
`
`
`
`PMEmlnlonn,glkwh
`
`3
`
`O 3.!
`
`2|
`
`.
`
`.
`7.!
`
`,_..___._._.- ‘.-.......q._.._:
`Ia7‘12.fl
`‘IE 11.5 €621.12.‘-27.5 W
`
`9
`3!
`
`1:0 M W 46
`
`4&5 04.5
`
`54
`
`i4..'. 74.5
`
`Fae! ta:-cc-d mo: lc agnmon, ‘fin
`Flynn.» Ia. Rcmloushlap Behwon NO: and Fuel lnioczod
`who u «gauge a: In K.-cum 4.36
`
`Fool Burned Ana 1.u:AHRfl Pent. 5.
`Figure: 1b, Romlomhlp Buwun PU md Fun! Injlclod
`M" ’*1 lac:-mm H»: uuooa ‘In:
`
`10
`
`G
`
`5'
`
`51
`§1
`.2
`EW
`
`UoX2 ia *
`
`5’9
`5‘
`3I
`
`5
`
`'4.
`
`Hahn: 8pudILm4 Charge Mr Tvnspwuun. C
`
`12
`:4
`V
`gnhcmn “mg”... 9.‘, mm;
`
`g‘ r
`g
`_
`H--= ".:'.-.°.*:-~=...,¢..,*=-'~;-"_...*.~.:.-:..'..:w°"*"'
`
`Flguru 1. combmod zfbci of Guam: Mr Tbmpcniun
`...4..*..n.....m.
`
`BASF-2002.003
`
`

`
`EFFECT OF WATER EMULSION AND WATER INJECTION
`
`This subject was researched by SOl!'le(S'9) including the authors of SAE Paper 920464. While
`this work was conducted, understandably. at one engine speed it showed good promise for
`substantial N0‘, and smoke reduction with a minimum impact on fuel consumption. This work also
`advocated low compression ratios which. together with water emulsion. extend the ignition delay
`but avoid the excessive increases in heat release by increasing the fuel fraction burned during the
`constant volume portion of the cycle.
`in general. lower combustion pressures were observed as
`well. Results obtained with emulsified fuel at various injection timings and compression ratios gave
`the NO,‘-peak combustion temperature relationship shown in Figure 4.
`1,200
`
`
`
`MostEmlastona.ppm
`
`Mun Putt In-Cylinder Gas Temperature. Dog. 0
`
`Figure 4. Effect of Water Emulsion on Not: Emissions
`at Various Timing and Compression Flallos
`
`EFFECT OF EXHAUST GAS AF'I'ERTREATMEN'I‘
`
`In spite of these design changes the basic NO,‘/PM tradeoff remained. Therefore. further
`NO; reductions. without
`increasing PM emissions,
`required new ttftertrezttmt-.nt
`techttologies.
`Normally. using a NO‘ decomposition catalyst in diesel exhaust environment would be preferable.
`However, diesel exhaust
`is typically oxygen-rich and characteristically low on HC and CO.
`Researchers‘-10'} "12’ quickly realized that NO‘ decomposition in the oztidanbricli and retluctant-lean
`environment was a formidable task. Even though the search for a NOX decomposition catalyst for
`diesel exhaust continues, current emphasis is on systems that rely on supplementing entltaust
`hydroc:trbons.(”) This selective catalytic. reduction SCR) method is commercially applied in
`stationary installation using ammonia as it ruductantfl“) Some work was carried out to adopt the
`use of ammonia in the mobile fleetum, but the impracticality of an on—bourd ammonia tank and the
`potential of reductant leakage were found to be detrimental. Therefore, experimentation using diesel
`fuel appeared to be favored over other reductants such as ammonia or urea”3'”). even though it
`may not produce the highest possible N0‘ conversion.
`
`ically given peak NO‘ conversion
`type catalysts such as Pt have t
`Precious metal
`cfficicncics at exhaust temperature levels of 200-250‘ C.“ ’ Base metal zeolitc catalysts on the
`
`BASF-2002.004
`
`

`
`and base metal catalysts. supplemental hydrocarbon is added in varying amounts of supplemental
`fuel-to~N(') ratio (F/I‘-JO). While good NOX conversion ratios were reported using bench tests and
`simulated stcady—statc. conditions, performance of these catalysts with real diesel exhaust gas yielded
`disappointingly low conversions (less than 15 percent) in EPA transient testing.(”" Dcceleration
`modes enjoy the highest NO‘ conversions‘ while acceleration modes suffer the lowest conversion
`r:rtios.“6’ This disclosure may point
`to the need for sophisticated and flexible control of the
`supplemental hydrocarbon. Published work related to this subject indicates that precious metal NO,‘
`reduction catalysis have a conversion
`of 30 to 50 percent at approximately 225’C, while metal
`Zttoliu: catalysts give the sauna NGX cuiwersion at 350~400'C. The most appealing results were
`obtained when supplemental HC (diesel fuel) was injected about 6 inches {_ 15.25 cm) upstream of
`the catalytic converter. Although high conversion rates were possible at steady-state engine
`conditions associated with the narrow exhaust temperatures mentioned earlier, the overall EPA
`heavy-duty transient emission test resulted in about l5 percent NO reduction, 25 percent particulate
`matter iniprnveiiierit, and 3 percent fuel consumption increasedléfi
`
`The rernalnder of this paper will be devoted to EGR and particulate trap technology for the
`simultaneous redttrtion of NO): and particulate matter. Exhaust gas recirculation is certainly not it
`new technology for gasoline or light-duty diesel cnginesm) However, its application in heavy-duty
`diesels ta-as not required. With the prospect of lighter NO; limits (2.0 glbhp-hr or 2.7gfkWh,l,
`engine malltlfélClllTCl’S_ are currently testing and developing sophistictued EGR systems for NOK
`control in dirccbinjected heavy-duty diesel eiigines.’-ml
`
`EFFECT OF ISXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION ON NOX AND PM EMISSIONS
`
`it has been shown that EGR is it very etfective method for NC)‘ redu_ction.“7’ Two
`principles are believed to control the rate of NO! reduction when using EGR. The firs! premise is
`that of reducing peak combustion temperatures where EGR acts as it heat siril:_‘w’ In this case, the
`heat absorbed by EGR is thought to be directly proportional to the product of EGR flowrate, the
`specific heat at constant pressure, and the temperature differential. Therefore, the absorbed heat (Q)
`can be expressed as follows:
`
`Q-,«1n"XpL_p)<(_A!)
`
`(I)
`
`The second and more important principle by which EGR reduces N0‘ emissions; is displacing some
`of the oxygen induced with the fresh air charge.
`in It simplified way, thermal N01 is formed an a
`function of t“_~_. O3, combustion temperature. and residence time in an environment of high NOX
`fortnatioc, modilirsd by the dissociation of NO and N03, i.e.
`‘iljf’
`= K, (N1, 0,) v x1(N0,No,)
`
`(2)
`
`where K, and K1 are reaction rate cotistzutts that are strong functions of cornbustiott temperature.
`Controlling any of the basic variables (N2, 02, Twmh. and t‘) would control
`the rate of NO‘
`formation. Therefore, reducing the fresh charge air oxygen constant by means of EGR reduces NO;
`formation through reducing one of the four factors contributing to NO‘ formation.
`In addition, it
`can be concluded that EGR cooling would increase the temperature differential term in Equation- I.
`thus increasing the EGR heat absorbing capacity and further reducing NO‘.
`
`One of the negative consequences of using EGR is its adverse influence on particulate
`matter. A test conducted on a Series 60 1 1 L turbocharged and intercooled Detroit Diesel engine
`where EGR was systematiczilly increased from Level A through D (given in Figure 5) shows the
`corresponding total particulate matter emission increase during a series of EPA heavy-duty transient
`
`BASF-2002.005
`
`

`
`constant and concluded that the insoluble fraction (mostly carbonaceous) of the particulate increased
`as EGR rates increased from A to D. Oxidation type catalytic converters were designed to reduce
`particulate SOF and, unfortunately, do not curb the insoluble fraction (mostly carbonaceous matter).
`The only available aftcnreatment alternative for the insoluble fraction became the diesel particulate
`filter (DPF) commonly known as diesel particulate trap.
`
`
`
`EMISSIONS.qfhhp-hr
`
`A
`
`B
`
`C
`
`v DIRECTION or mcnensen can D
`
`FIGURE 5. EFFECT OF EGR ON PAFITICULATE COMPOSITION
`
`Particulate trap systems were extensively investigated in the 1970's. They are characterized
`with wzillflow trap clement designs which force the exhaust to flow through their porous walls and
`deposit
`its solid matter on the walls of the filter elemcntfzm Soot and other solid matter
`accumulated on the filter surface are periodically incinerated to maintain good engine performance
`and fuel economy by holding down backprcssure. An important feature of such actively regenerated
`traps was their complex regeneration system and their sophisticated controls. These features were
`also associated with high cost and the entire trap system had low reliability. which led a major
`North American manufacturer to abandon it in 1993.
`
`Extensive development work was carried out in the last five years on catalyzed trap systems
`with good and encouraging resu1is.m‘22’23'24) Some preferred adding the catalyst on the surface of
`the trap while others introduced the catalyst with the fuel.(25) The introduction of catalyzed fuel
`and the intimate mingling of the catalytic material with the accumulated soot
`in the tra
`led to
`lowering the ignition tetnpcrature of carbon from 600°C to 500.400 or even below 300°C.‘ 33 This
`phenomenon made tmp self-regeneration (passive regeneration) systems possible.
`in summary.
`passively regenerated traps are making EGR a more viable NO‘ control method by passively
`reducing excessive insoluble matter resulting from aggressive EGR control strategies.
`
`DEMONSTRATION OF LOW NOXAND PM USING EGR AND PASSIVE TRAP SYSTEM
`
`A demonstration using two hea.vy—duty North American diesel engines was carried out at
`Southwest Research Institute as part of an internal research project. This dcmonstrzition was
`performed using a 5.9 1.. B—series Curnmins and an ll L series 60 Detroit Diesel heavy-duty diesel
`engines. A Coming wallflow EX—80, l0.5-inch diameter x l'2-inch long, cordiciitc trap was used.
`The catalyst was a cerium-based fuel additive supplied by Rhone-Poulcnc.
`inc.
`Extensive
`
`BASF-2002.006
`
`

`
`NO; emissions to between 2.0 and 2.5 gfbhp-hr (2.7 and 3.4 g/kWh) on both engines. Analysis of
`the PM satnple filters assisted in estimating the carbonaceous particulate matter content typical of
`an EPA heavyduty emission transient cycle. A corresponding additive concentration was then
`recommended by the supplier to maintain quit9i—continuotis trap regeneration.
`
`Exhattst gas recirculation was implemented in a high pressure loop (HPL) configuration. A
`scliematic diagram of the HPL EGR system is given in Figure 6, where EGR is taken from a point
`upstream of the turbocharger turbine and introduced into the intake manifold. Results of hot-start
`EPA heavy-duty transient emissions tests and cycle average specific fuel consumption for the Series
`60 and the B-series engines are tabulated in Tables I and 2. respectively. Starting from NO, levels
`of 3.89 and 4.67 g/blip-hr (5.3 and 6.35 glkwh) for the Series 60 and B-series engines, respectively,
`both engines were successful in achieving 2.02 and 2.2‘) g/bhp—hr (2.73 and 3.10 gfkwhl NO‘.
`emissions.
`in both cases, particulate matter engine-out emissions had more than doubled (from
`0.085 to 0.204 g/bhp-hr for the Series 60 and from 0.14 to 0.35 g/bhp-hr for the B Series).
`However. using a trap and cerium—hase.d fuel additive these PM levels were reduced to 0.014 and
`0.06 glbhp-hr (0.02 and D.08g/kWh). respectively. Fuel consumption increased by 4 percent for the
`Series 60 engine and by 5.5 percent for the 13 series engine. Both engines experienced significant
`increases in HC and C0 emissions. Although EGR contributed to this increase, the presence of the
`trap appeared to have added to the problem. This development was especially noticeable in the case
`of the B series cnginc with HC emissions where an older trap already laden with carbonaceous
`mztterial was used without regenerating it prior to the test. For the same reason it appeared that
`NO‘ emissions were exceptionally low as it result. of the increased bnclcpressure which must have
`led to atiditioniil residual {internal} EGR.
`
`'\
`
`reign {I
`
`“ ‘(:9/1 “:2;
`
`{I
`
`.ii
`
`"Figure 5.NoxfPM FtEDUcTtON SYSTEM
`(men PRESSURE LOOP Eon)
`
`TABl.l€.
`
`1. SERIES 60 TRANSIENT EMISSIONS RESULTS
`
`usrc,
`_ wb_ lb/bl: hr M;
`Test Descri ton
`‘O35
`0.09
`1.30
`3.82
`0.085
`
`0.398
`
`0.204
`
`0.403-
`
`BASF-2002.007
`
`

`
`TABLE 2. B SERIES TRANSIENT EMISSIONS RESULTS
`
`Test Date u ti
`
`Baseline
`
`Active HPL EGR
`Active HPL EGR + OX. CAT.
`
`_
`
`0.55
`
`0.331
`0.50
`
`W __
`2.27
`
`4.20
`2.96
`
`-
`
`__h
`4.67
`
`2.53
`2.30
`
`b
`
`M T
`lblb ._ i
`
`0.424
`
`0.421
`
`A
`1.36“
`ctie I-{PL EGR + Tra
`3 ‘ High HC and CO attributed I part to elevated nne backpre ti
`ricted a .
`
`SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATTONS
`
`Engine design changes including impressive advanws in fuel injection systems have already
`made a major positive impact on engine performance and emissions profile. However,
`further improvements required to achieve NO‘ emissions as low as 2.0 g/bhp—hr (2.7 glkwh)
`will require other technologies.
`Using EGR coupled with passively regenerated traps demonstrated that diesel engines have
`the potential of meeting future proposed low NO,‘/PM emissions standards.
`The capability of achieving 2.0./<0.l glbhp-hr (2.7/<0. l4gll«:Wh) NOX/PM was demonstrated
`on two heavy-duty diesel engines.
`With high pressure loop EGR and passively regenerated trap, EPA transient cycle average
`fuel consumption increased by about 5 percent.
`Increases in HC and C0 emissions were experienced especially with the B series engine
`when the trap was loaded with PM.
`It is believed that the penalty in fuel consumption and increases in HC and CO emissions
`could be curbed by properly optimizing the system. System optimization would involve
`further adjustment
`to the EGR schedule and control algorithm, selection of it more
`appropriate fuel additive concentration. and the investigation of a low pressure loop EGR
`system configuration.
`In the low pressure loop EGR design, exhaust from downstream of
`the trap is returned to the turbocharger (compressor) inlet.
`Variable EGR cooling should also be investigated.
`insoluble particulate matter increased with EGR. This increase was mostly carbonaceous
`matter and could be detrimental
`to engine durability especially with HPL EGR
`configurations. Therefore. long term durability of the diesel engine equipped with I-IPL EGR
`should be investigated and potential advantages of the LPL EGR should be assessed.
`
`REFERENCES
`
`Ishida, M._. Chen, Z-L., Luo, G—F., and Ueki, H.. "The Effect of . Pilot Injection on
`Combustion in a Turbocharged D.I. Diesel Engine," SAE Paper 941692, September 12-14,
`1994.
`
`Shuudoh. S.. Mastutori, K.. Tsujimuru. K.. Kobayashi, S., "NOX Reduction from Diesel
`Combustion using Pilot Injection with High Pressure Fuel injection,” SAE Paper 920463,
`February 24-28. 1992.
`Tow, 'I‘., Pierpont, D., Rcitz, R., “Reducing Particulate and NO‘ Emissions by using Multiple
`
`BASF-2002.008
`
`

`
`Kl1air.M.. “Air—to-Air lntcrcooling of the Ford 7.8L Mid-Range Truck Diesel Engine." SAE
`Paper 870534, February 23-27. 1987.
`Gill. A.. "Design Choices for l990's Low Emission Diesel Engines," SAE Paper 380350.
`FCbl'U3l'_V 29-March 4, i988.
`llerzog, P.. Burglar, L., Winltlhofer, E.. Zclcnka, P.. Cartcllieri, W., “NOX Reduction
`Strategies for D1 Diesel Engines," SALE Paper 920-470. February 24-28. 1992.
`Khair, M., “Progress in Diesel Ertginc Emission Control,“ The American Society of
`Mzzchanical ’Enginccn:, Paper 92-ICE-H.
`'l‘suka.h21ra, M.. Yoshimoto, Y., “Reduction of NO‘, Smoke. B-SFC, and Maximum
`Combustion Prcssurt: by Low Compression Ratios in at Diesel Engine Fuclcd by Emulsificd
`Fuel." SAE Paper 92054, February 24-28, l992.
`Melton, R. Jr., Lcstz, 5., Quillian, R. .lI‘., Ratnbic. EX, “Direct Water Injection Cooling for
`Military Engines and Effects on the Diesel Cycle,” SAE Pzrpcr 750l29.
`Sttmiya, 3., Muramatsu, (3.. Mamumura, N., Yoshida, K., Schenck, R., "Catalytic Reduction
`of NO): in Diesel Exhaust." SAE Paper 920853. February 24-28,
`l9‘)2.
`Hcimrich. M., Dcvincy. M.. "Lean NO“ Catalyst Evztluation and Characterization," SAE
`Paper 930736, March 1-5, 1993.
`Fcclcy. J.. Dccba. M.. Fartztuto, R.. "Abatement of NOX from Diesel Engines: Status and
`Technical Challenges," SAE Paper 950747, February 27-March 2. 1995.
`Naltuhim, T.. Tsujimurtt K., Kakcgawrt. T, Aikzt. K., Takiguclti, M.. Ikcda, M.. lcliiltam, S..
`“Catalytic Engine" “NOX Reduction of Diesel Engines with New Concept Onboard Ammonia
`Synthesis System," SAE Paper 920-469, February 24—28, 1992.
`Ludcrs, M.. Backus, R.. Huthwohl. G., Kctchcr. D.. Horroclt.-t, R.. Hurley, P... Hammcrle. R.,
`“An Urea Lean NO: Catalyst System for Light Duty Dicstcl Vehicles.” SAE Paper 952493.
`October 16-19, 1995.
`Kawtmanti, M.. Iluriutzlti, M., Lox. E., Leyrcr, J.. Psaras, (3., “Advanced Catalyst Studies of
`Diesel NO,‘ Reduction for On-Highway Trucks," SAE Paper 9501 54, February 27~Matrt:h 2,
`i995.
`‘
`
`Kharas. K, Thais. 1.. "Pert‘onnancc Demonstration of a Precious Metal Lean NOX Catalysts
`in Native 'Dit:scl F.xhntist," SAE Paper ‘J50’/'5l, February 27-Mztrcli 2, 1995.
`Amstutz. A.. “lnlluc::ct:. of Cotnmllcd EGR on Diesel Emissions,“ Switzerland Paper.
`Namsawa, K., Otiaka. M., Koikc. N. Tsukatnoto, ‘x’., Yosltidu. I(., “An EGR Control Methotl
`for Heavy-i)txty Diesel ENGINES tmtier '['.'2ttt.sicnt Operations," SAE Paper 900-4-34, Fchruary
`26-March 2,
`lS!<_‘I0.
`
`Nccdltam. 1., Doyle, D., Nicol. A., "The Low NO,‘ Truck I:'.nginu_.“ SAI3 Paper 9lO73t\
`Felirttary ?.5AMar-:l'.t l, I991.
`Johttson. 3.. Eagle)‘.
`Ciratz, L.. Lcddy. D., "A Review of Diesel Particulate Control
`Technology and Effects on Emissions," SAE Paper (Title Sheet).
`Lcmairc, 1., Khair, M.. "Effect of Cerium Fuel Additive on the Einissions tfitaractcnstics of
`a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine,” SAE Paper 942067, October l7-20. 1994.
`Demcnthon, 1., Martin. B.. Richards, P4’ Rush, M., Williams, 1)., Bcrgonzini, L., Motclli, P.,
`“Novel Atitlitivt: for Particulate Trap Regeneration," SAE Paper 952355. 1995.
`llammcrlc, R.. Kctchar. D.. Horrocks. R., Lcppt-.rhol'l} CL, Huthwohl, G., Lucrs, B..
`“Emissions from Diesel Vehicles with and without Loan NOE and Oxidation Catalyst: and
`Particulate: Traps," SAE Paper 952391. 1995.
`Run. V.. Ciltztnclt. H._. Htirrnclnz, R.. “Dit:scl Particulate. Control System for Ford l.lil. Sicrrrt
`Ttll‘l.10-DlCSCl to Matt! 1997/3003 Pttrticulatc Stztndztrtls."
`
`I-1., B3I1l1B. P.. Lcmttire. 1.. "Quztsi-Continuous Particle Trap
`Lcpperltoff, G.. Lutlcrtt,
`RCgCDCl"dll€Il'| by Cerium Adtlitivc:t_.” SAP. Paper 950369, February 27-March 2, 1995.
`
`BASF-2002.009

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket