Advertisement

MTZ industrial

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 62–70 | Cite as

Aftertreatment in a Pre-turbocharger Position: Size and Fuel Consumption Advantage for Tier 4

  • Claus Brüstle
  • Dean Tomazic
  • Michael Franke
Research Large-Bore Diesel Engines

As the 2014 implementation of EPA Tier 4 fast approaches in the USA, manufacturers of large bore diesel engines face a dilemma. The stringent limits set by Tier 4 legislation require large, heavy and expensive emissions control systems but severe constraints on installation space, weight and cost exist for these systems. A viable solution is to place catalysts and filters upstream of the turbocharger.

1 Introduction

Based on robust metal catalyst substrates, benefits can be realised by the application of exhaust aftertreatment technologies ahead of the turbocharger turbine on large-bore diesel engines. The higher temperatures upstream of the turbocharger yield faster light-off of the catalysts, leading to a reduction in pollutants at lower engine power levels. The higher pressures and the higher temperatures make the catalyst system more efficient and allow significant downsizing potential. Placing the flow restriction associated with the aftertreatment system up-stream of the...

Keywords

Selective Catalytic Reduction Flow Restriction Diesel Particulate Filter Specific Fuel Consumption Selective Catalytic Reduction Catalyst 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. [1]
    Dieselnet.com Emissions Standards, United States, Non-Road Engines http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/nonroad.php
  2. [2]
    Vantuono, W.: How motive power boosts productivity Railway Age, May 2011, p 17–24, New York, 2011Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Brüstle, C., et al.: Katalysatortechnologie für zukünftige Abgasgrenzwerte, 15. Wiener Motorensymposium, Wien, 1994Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Subramaniam, M. et al.: Feasibility Assessment for a Pre-turbine After-Treatment System with a 1D Modeling Approach, SAE World Congress 2009, Detroit, 2009Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Osborne, M., et al.: Exhaust Emissions from a 2,850 kW EMD SD60 Locomotive Equipped with a Diesel Oxidation Catalyst Joint Rail Conference & Internal Combustion Engine, Spring Technical Conference, Colorado, 2007Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Zellbeck, H., et al.: Ein Vollkatalysatorsystem vor Abgasturbolader; Auslegung, Berechnung und Untersuchungen am Motorprüfstand, 14. Aufladetechnische Konferenz, Dresden, 2010Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Codan, E., et al.: IMO III Emission Regulation: Impact on the Turbocharging System, CIMAC Congress 2010, Bergen, 2010Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Althoefer, K., et al.: Metallkatalysatoren — Bauteil- und Schadensanalyse im Fokus innovativer Designentwicklung, VDI Wuerzburg, 2007Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Kramer, J., et al.: Development And Practical Experience Of A 2010 Compliant HD Diesel Engine And Aftertreatment System, 20th Aachen Colloquium “Automobile and Engine Technology”, Aachen, 2011Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Rice, M., et al.: NOX Aftertreatment for Passenger Cars and Heavy Duty Truck Applications for EU 6 and EUVI/US2010 Legislation, SAE World Congress 2009, Detroit, 2009Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Subramaniam, M., et al.: Pre-turbine Aftertreatment Position for Large Bore Diesel Engines — Compact & Cost-Effective Aftertreatment with a Fuel Consumption Advantage, SAE World Congress 2011, Detroit, 2011Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Blanchet, S., et al.: Implementation of the Effectiveness-NTU Methodology for Catalytic Converter Design, SAE World Congress 1998, Detroit, 1998Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claus Brüstle
    • 1
  • Dean Tomazic
    • 2
  • Michael Franke
    • 2
  1. 1.Emitec, Inc.Rochester HillsUSA
  2. 2.FEV, Inc.Auburn HillsUSA

Personalised recommendations