emission control technology for light-duty vehicles … · emission control technology for...

26
EMISSION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES John J. Mooney Engelhard Corporation AVECC 2001 Asian Vehicle Emission Control Conference Jan. 30 – Feb 1, 2001 Bangkok, Thailand 2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 1 2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 2 OUTLINE v U.S. Emission Control Plan A Success Story – With More to Be Done v Light-Duty Vehicle Emission Control System v Catalyst Performance Mechanisms v Heat Transfer and Mass Transfer Regimes v Catalyst Deactivation Mechanisms v Unleaded Gasoline With Low Sulfur Content v New Catalyst Substrates v U.S. and Euro Emission Standards, Test Cycle and Test Set-Ups v Closing Remarks

Upload: dangcong

Post on 04-Jul-2018

222 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

EMISSION CONTROL TECHNOLOGYFOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

John J. MooneyEngelhard Corporation

AVECC 2001Asian Vehicle Emission Control Conference

Jan. 30 – Feb 1, 2001Bangkok, Thailand

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 1

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 2

OUTLINE

v U.S. Emission Control Plan• A Success Story – With More to Be Done

v Light-Duty Vehicle Emission Control System

v Catalyst Performance Mechanisms

v Heat Transfer and Mass Transfer Regimes

v Catalyst Deactivation Mechanisms

v Unleaded Gasoline With Low Sulfur Content

v New Catalyst Substrates

v U.S. and Euro Emission Standards, Test Cycleand Test Set-Ups

v Closing Remarks

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 3

EMISSION CONTROL PLANS HAVE CAUSED U.S. AIR POLLUTION TO DECLINE

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

CO (-29%)

NOx(+17%)

VOC(-43%)

SO2(-40%)

PM10(-77%)

Mill

ion

To

ns

1970 1999

0

50

100

150

200

250

Th

ou

san

d T

on

s

v Carbon Monoxide (CO)

v Lead (Pb)

v Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

v Ozone (O3) - Formed by Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

v Particular Matter (PM)

v Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

Six Principal Air Pollutants Tracked Nationally

Pb(-98%)

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 4

WITHOUT AN EMISSION CONTROL PLAN U.S. AIR POLLUTION WOULD HAVE GROWN INSTEAD OF DECLINE

U.S. Gross Domestic Product Increased 147%. Vehicle Miles Traveled Increased 140%

U.S. Population Increased 33%

Aggregate Emissions Decreased 31% (Six Principal Pollutants)

1970 19991980 1990

Comparison of Growth Areas and Emission Trends

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 5

UNDERSTANDING EMISSION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY PROVIDES THE BASIS FOR ASIAN COUNTRIES

FUTURE EMISSION CONTROL PLAN

v Exhaust Emission Controls for Passenger Car and Light-Duty Vehicles

v How Control Systems Work

v What Can Be Accomplished by the Control System

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 6

NEAR ZERO EMISSIONS REQUIRE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 7

THE AIR/FUEL MIXTURE HAS A PRIMARYEFFECT ON BASE ENGINE EMISSIONS

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Em

issi

on

s, m

ol %

3200

2800

2400

2000

1600

1200

800

400

0

Em

ission

s, pp

m

CO2

NO

CO O2

StoichiometricA/F

HCH2

10 12 14 16 18 20A/F Mass Ratio

1.4

Fuel Equivalence Ratio1.31.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 8

BASIC COMPONENTS OF THETWC CLOSED-LOOP FUEL METERING SYSTEM

EngineEngine

Fuel Tank

Electronic Control Unit Electric Fuel Pump Bosch LH Jetronic

TWC Catalyst

TemperatureSensor

Throttle-PositionSwitch

Fuel MeteringInjection Valve

Oxygen(Lambda)Sensor

Fuel-PressureRegulator

Air

Idle Actuator

Hot-Wire MassAir-Flow Meter

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 9

SCHEMATIC FOR THELAMBDA

CLOSED-LOOP CONTROL

The Closed-Loop Fuel Metering System Maintains the Air/Fuelto the Stoichiometric Mixture

Air Ratio λλ

Vo

ltag

e U

λλ

0,6 0

200

400

600

800

mV

0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6

Air Meter

Gasoline

Fuel Metering

EngineEngine

ElectronicElectronicControlControlUnit (ECU) Unit (ECU)

CatalyticConverter

LambdaOxygenSensor

ExhaustGas

THE AIR-FUELINFLUENCES THE

LAMBDA SENSORSVOLTAGE SIGNAL

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 10

THE OXYGEN SENSOR CONTROLS THEAIR/FUEL MIXTURE TO AN AVERAGE MIXTURE

Sensor Voltage, 500 mv Set Point, 1600 RPMGood Cylinder to Cylinder Fuel Distribution

1 Sec.1000

0

500

Sen

sor

Po

ten

tial

(mv)

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 11

THE TWC CATALYST AFFECTS AVERAGEEMISSION REDUCTIONS

Conversion of ( ) NOx, ( ) CO, and ( ) Hydrocarbons for a TWC as aFunction of the Air/Fuel A/F) Ratio. The Shaded Area Shows the A/F RatioWindow Where the TWC Catalyst Functions at 80% Efficiency at 400°C.

StoichiometricA/F/Ratio

14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.90

20

40

60

80

100

A/F Ratio

Cat

alys

t E

ffic

ien

cy, %

LeanRich

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 12

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 13

SINGLE-POINT FUEL INJECTION (TBI)

1 Fuel, 2 Air, 3 Throttle Valve, 4 Intake Manifold, 5 Injector, 6 Engine.

2

3

4

1 5

6

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 14

MULTIPOINT FUEL INJECTION

1 Fuel, 2 Air, 3 Throttle Valve, 4 Intake Manifold, 5 Injectors, 6 Engine.

2

3

4

1

5

6

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 15

THE QUALITY OF THE CLOSED-LOOP SYSTEM IS VERY IMPORTANT TO CATALYST FUNCTION

A. Closed Loop ±0.3 A/F@ 1.5 Hz

(Multi-Point Fuel Injection)

Performance of Any TWC Catalyst Is Improved as a FunctionPerformance of Any TWC Catalyst Is Improved as a Functionof Fuel Metering Control (of Fuel Metering Control (±±A/F and Frequency).A/F and Frequency).

*Simulated Utilizing Frequency Generator

C. Closed Loop ±1.0 A/F@ 1.0 Hz*

(Closed-Loop Carburetor)

Rem

ova

l Eff

icie

ncy

(%

)

NOx

0

20

40

60

80

100

Air-Fuel Ratio14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9

HC

CO

14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9

B. Closed Loop ±0.5 A/F@ 1.0 Hz*

(Single-Point Fuel Injection)

Rem

ova

l Eff

icie

ncy

(%

)

NOx

0

20

40

60

80

100

Air-Fuel Ratio

HC

CO

Rem

ova

l Eff

icie

ncy

(%

)

NOx

0

20

40

60

80

100

Air-Fuel Ratio14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9

HC

CO

Reference: SAE Paper.

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 16

METHOD OF OPERATION OF THE SINGLE-BEDTHREE-WAY CATALYTIC CONVERTER

1 Catalyst Layer Containing Platinum and Rhodium,

2 Ceramic or Metal Substrate.

1

2

Chemical Reactions:

2 CO + O2 2 CO2

2 C2H6 + 7 O2 4 CO2 + 6 H2O

2 NO + 2 CO N2 + 2 CO2

HC + CO + NO 2

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 17

ActivatedCatalyst

Layer

Substrate

Reductants

HCCOH2

Oxidants

NOx

O2

Pd SitesRh Sites

Competitive Reactions:

HC, CO, H2 + O2 CO2 + H2O

NO + Reductant N2 + CO2, H2O

Diffusion

Reaction Rates Are Dissimilar. If Oxygen Consumes the Reaction Rates Are Dissimilar. If Oxygen Consumes the ReductantReductant, There Is Less Available for NO Reduction., There Is Less Available for NO Reduction.

Sensor Voltage, 500 mv Set Point, 1600 RPMGood Cylinder to Cylinder Fuel Distribution

1 Sec.1000

0

500

Sen

sor

Po

ten

tial

(mv

)PALLADIUM AND RHODIUM FUNCTIONS INTERACT

IN SINGLE LAYERED TWC CATALYSTS

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 18

PALLADIUM AND RHODIUM FUNCTIONS SEPARATED IN DOUBLE LAYERED TWC CATALYSTS

ActivatedRh Layer

ActivatedPd Layer

Substrate

Reductants

HCCOH2

Oxidants

NOx

O2

Pd SitesRh Sites

Competitive Reactions:

HC, CO, H2 + O2 CO2 + H2O

NO + Reductant N2 + CO2, H2O

Diffusion

A Separate A Separate Rh Rh Layer Promotes the InteractionLayer Promotes the Interactionof NO With the of NO With the ReductantReductant..

Sensor Voltage, 500 mv Set Point, 1600 RPMGood Cylinder to Cylinder Fuel Distribution

1 Sec.1000

0

500

Sen

sor

Po

ten

tial

(mv)

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 19

BASE METALS ASSIST BY STORINGAND RELEASING OXYGEN

Lean – Too Much Oxygen

Rich – Insufficient Oxygen

Cerium Oxides (Ceria)

CeCe22OO33 Captures Excess OCaptures Excess O22 That Would Escape the Tailpipe That Would Escape the Tailpipe and Saves it for CO Oxidation When in Short Supply.and Saves it for CO Oxidation When in Short Supply.

The Act of OThe Act of O22 Storage Enhances NO Reduction.Storage Enhances NO Reduction.

LeanLean Ce2O3 + 1/2 O2 (2) CeO2

(+3) (+4)

RichRich (2) CeO2 + CO CO2 + Ce2O3

(+4) (+3)

Sensor Voltage, 500 mv Set Point, 1600 RPMGood Cylinder to Cylinder Fuel Distribution

1 Sec.1000

0

500

Sen

sor

Po

ten

tial

(m

v)

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 20

N2

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXXClean Rh Surface (3.0 x 1021 Catalyst Sites [Pd + Rh] per Liter)

NO Molecules Attracted to Rh – Electron Bond Stretch

N Atoms and O Atoms Share Electron Bond With Rh

N Atoms Combine and Desorb as N2 Molecules

Oxygen Atoms Remain

CO Molecules React With Oxygen Atoms to Form CO2

CO2 Desorbs Leaving a Clean Rh Surface

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

THREE-WAY CATALYST REACTION MECHANISM

CO Is “Friend” and “Foe”. Here “Friend” CO Is “Friend” and “Foe”. Here “Friend” Reductant Reductant CO CO Removes the O That Is Stuck on Removes the O That Is Stuck on Rh Rh Surface.Surface.

NO NORh

CO

N-ORh

O

Rh

ON N

Rh

O O

CO CO

CO2 CO2

N-O

XXXXXXX

Rh

O O

XXXXXXX

Rh

O O

XXXXXXX

Rh

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 21

Pt SURFACE PROVIDES THE MEETING PLACE FOR OXIDATION REACTANTS

Excess “Foe” CO Is Oxidized to COExcess “Foe” CO Is Oxidized to CO22..

Clean Pt Surface1.O2 O2

CO

O2 Molecule Attracted – Electron Bond Stretch2.O-O

O Atoms Share Electron With Pt3.

O O

CO2 Desorbs, Leaving a Clean Pt SurfaceCO2 CO2

5.

CO Reacts With O Atoms to Form CO24.

O OCO CO

XXXXXXX

Pt

XXXXXXX

Pt

XXXXXXX

Pt

XXXXXXX

Pt

XXXXXXX

Pt

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 22

THE THREE-WAY CATALYTIC CONVERTER:HIGH PERFORMANCE IN CLOSE-COUPLED AND

UNDERFLOOR APPLICATIONS

v Catalyst Layer Open Porous Structure With Support Materials of High Thermal Stability

v Integrated HC AdsorptionFunctions

v Mounting Materials WithImproved Durability

v High Cell Density Ceramicor Metallic Substrates

v Insulation for Heat Management

Source: MECA

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 23

HEAT TRANSFER, CATALYST ACTIVITY ANDMASS TRANSFER MECHANISMS DOMINATE

DURING DIFFERENT CONDITIONS

v Regime 1 – Heat-Up of Catalyst/Substrate –Mechanism: Heat Transfer

v Regime 2 – Ignition and Light-Off of Catalyst Layer –Mechanism: Specific Catalyst Activity

v Regime 3 – Catalyst Intermediate Hot Performance –Mechanism: Feeder Pore Restriction

v Regime 4 – Catalyst Hot Performance –Mechanism: Mass Transfer Limited

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 24

CONVERSION vs TEMPERATURE

Mass Transfer

Pore Diffusion

Chemical Reactionor Kinetic Control

Conversion

Temperature

Heat Transfer

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 25

REGIME 1 – HEAT TRANSFER FACTORS

v Exhaust Gas:

• Mass Flow and Temperature

v Catalyst/Substrate:

• Thermal Mass/Volume

• Surface Area/Volume

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 26

REGIME 2 – CATALYST IGNITION ANDLIGHT-OFF FACTORS

v Catalyst Activity

• Reaction Rate Is Controlling Mechanism

v Exhaust Gas Temperature

v Chemical Energy: Exothermic Reaction

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 27

REGIME 3 – INTERMEDIATEHOT PERFORMANCE FACTORS

v Not Seen in New Catalysts

v Important for Aged Catalyst Performance, Due to:

• Accumulation of Debris, or Oil Ash

• High Temperature Exposure

– Sintering Causing Smaller Pore Diameter

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 28

REGIME 4 – HOT PERFORMANCE FACTORS

v Reaction Rate Is Very Fast on Catalyst Surface

v Limiting Factor Is the Mass Transfer to the Surface

v Mass Transfer Unit – 90% Conversion

v Developing Laminar Flow

v High Substrate Cell Density – ImprovesDiffusion Path

Mass Transfer Limited Catalyst Performance

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 29

ENGINE DESIGN FACTORS ASSISTCATALYST PERFORMANCE

v Less Chokev Lean Cold Startv More Efficient Combustionv Higher Exhaust Temperature – Quicker Catalyst/Substrate Heat-Up

Variable Valve Timing

v Manifoldv Thin-Wall Insulated Exhaust Pipe to Catalyst

Low Exhaust System Thermal Mass

v Honda Observer System – Trims Each Cylinder Air/Fuelv Multi-Point Sequentialv Multi-Pointv Single-Point

Advanced Fuel Metering Systems in Order of Declining Catalyst Performance

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 30

CATALYST DEACTIVATION MECHANISMS

v Catalyst Layer Particle Sinteringv Precious Metal Catalyst Sintering

Thermal: Above 850°C to 1050°C

v Leadv Manganesev Phosphorous

Poisons:

v Engine Debrisv Oil Ash: Zn, P, Ca

Masking Agents:

v Sulfur Compounds

Inhibitors:

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 31

SINTERING OF THE CATALYTIC SPECIES

High SurfaceArea Support

Sintered PreciousMetal Site

Dispersed Precious Metal Site

Ceramic Wall of Monolith

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 32

SINTERING OF THE SUPPORT MATERIAL

Sintering of Alumina Support

Sintering of Precious Metal

Ceramic Wall of Monolith

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 33

SELECTIVE AND NON-SELECTIVE POISONING

Coating of Catalyst Surface

Selective Poisoning of Catalyst Site

Plugging of Catalyst Pores

Ceramic Wall of Monolith

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 34

EFFECT OF DEACTIVATION ON CATALYST LIGHT-OFF

Loss of Active Sites = Sintering of Sites and SupportPore Diffusion = Smaller Effective PoresMasking = Some Surface Sites Covered and Pores Blocked

Fresh Catalyst

Loss ofActive

Sites

Pore Diffusion

Masking

60050040030020010000

20

40

60

80

100

Pore Diffusion

Co

nve

rsio

n (

%)

Temperature (°C)

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 35

UNLEADED GASOLINE ISAN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY

v Thailand Did it – Carefully, Actually Over-Carefully

v China Did it – Started Beijing 6/1/96 – Then City by City - Now the Whole Country Has Unleaded and No Leaded Gasoline

v India Is Doing it – Started in Delhi 7/1/99 – Now Converting City by City Until the Whole Country Is Unleaded

v Do Not Fall for the ‘Red Herring’ Argument Called ‘Valve Wear Recession’. Or the ‘Benzene’ Wooly Argument. There Is a Whole Better Story.

See – MECA White Paper – ‘Ban Leaded Gasoline’. Why Have TwoDistribution Systems? Just Switch. Big $ Savings.

Airborne Lead Inhibits Children’s Mental Development. Airborne Lead Inhibits Children’s Mental Development. Asian Countries Cannot Afford This Detriment.Asian Countries Cannot Afford This Detriment.

The Cost/Effective Policy Is to Switch the Entire Country to 100% Unleaded

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 36

FUEL SULFUR LEVEL AFFECTS CATALYST NOx PERFORMANCE

0.35

0

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0 600100 200 300 400 500

All 21 Vehicles by Mass Average

All 21 Vehicles by Ln-Ln Average

NOx (Similar Effect for HC,CO)

Fuel Sulfur Level, ppm S

Gra

ms

Per

Mile

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 37

GASOLINE SULFUR STANDARDS FOR REFINERS, IMPORTERS, AND INDIVIDUAL REFINERS

Compliance as of: 2004 2005 2006+

Refinery Average, ppm -- 30 30

Corporate Pool Average, ppm 120 90 --

Per-Gallon Cap, ppm 300 300 80

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 38

SUMMARY OF EUROPEAN UNIONFUEL SPECIFICATIONS

Petrol

2000

2005

RVP summer kpa

Aromatics% v/v

Benzene% v/v

Sulfurppm

Oxygen% m/m

Olefins% v/v

DieselPolyaromatics

% v/vSulfurppm

CetaneNumber

Density15° kg/m3

--Distillation

95% °C

60

--

42

35

1

--

150

50

18

--

2.7

--

2000

2005

11

--

350

50

51 (Min)

--

845

--

360

--

--

--

Germany Push for 10-ppm Low-Sulfur Gasoline and Diesel Fuel by 1/1/2003.

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 39

NEW CERAMIC AND METALLICSUBSTRATE DESIGNS

v Ceramic Systems• Ultra-High Cell Densities (600-1200 cpsi) With Thinner Walls• Contoured Shapes for Endcone Utilization• Hexagonal Cell Structures• Improved High Temperature Mounting

v Metallic Systems• Ultra-High Cell Densities (600-1000 cpsi) With Thinner Walls• Turbulent Flow Paths for Improved Gas Contact• Conical Shapes for Endcone Utilization

Enhanced Emission Control PerformanceEnhanced Emission Control Performance

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 40

ADVANCED CERAMIC SUBSTRATE

3 mil/600 cpsi, 2 mil/900 cpsiCatalytic Performance Improvement by High Geometric Surface Area (GSA) and Low Heat Capacity

6 mil/400 cpsi 4 mil/400 cpsi

3 mil/600 cpsi 2 mil/900 cpsi

Source: NGK

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 41

Relative Geometric Surface Area (GSA) or Bulk Density

Source: MECA

HIGHER GEOMETRIC AREA COUPLED WITHLOWER WEIGHT PROVIDES EMISSION

PERFORMANCE BENEFITS

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

400/6.5 400/4.3 600/3.5 900/2.4 1200/2.0Cell Density in cpsi, Wall Thickness in mils

Bulk Density

GSA

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 42

TWC CATALYSTS ARE DURABLE EVEN UNDER EXTREME USE CONDITIONS

100

95

90

85

80

75Co

nve

rsio

n E

ffic

ien

cy (

%)

0 20.000 40.000 60.000 80.000 100.000 120.000 140.000 160.000

Distance (km)

CO Pt/Rh

HC Pt/Rh

NOx Pt/Rh

Displacement: 4.2 L (290 hp)Catalyst Specifications: Volume = 3.8 LPM-Loading = 105 g/ft3; PM Ratio = Pt/Pd/Rh 1/14/1

50 g/ft3; PM-Ratio = Pt/Rh 5/1European Testcycle Evaluation (MVEG-Cycle)

NOx

CO

HC

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 43

Significant Reduction in Toxic HC EmissionsSignificant Reduction in Toxic HC Emissions

0.0

4.0

8.012.0

16.0

20.0

24.028.0

32.036.0

'83-'85Fleet

'89 Fleet Tier 1Fleet

Adv.Tech.Fleet

MECAAdv. Fleet

1,3-Butadiene

Acetaldehyde

Formaldehyde

Benzene

FT

P E

mis

sio

ns,

mg

/mi

36.6

14.4

6.7 5.22.0

Auto/Oil Data (SAE paper 952509)

All Fleet Data Use CA Phase II RFG*

*X - 140 ppm S Gasoline

TOXIC EMISSIONS ARE EFFICENTLY REDUCED BY HIGH PERFORMANCE EMISSION SYSTEMS

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 44

v Emission Control System-Based Fuel Injection Metering and Closed-Loop Control With Oxygen Sensor. Advanced TWC (Three-Way Catalytic Converter) Designs

v Provenv Durable, Relatively Trouble Freev US EPA Standards

• National Low Emissions Vehicle Standards• US Tier 1 and 2

v California LEV 1 and 2 Standardsv European Union Standards

• Phase 2, 3 and 4

FULLY DEVELOPED EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR PASSENGER CAR

AND LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

PC and LDV Emission Control - High Levels of Achievement

Asian Countries Can Take Advantage of the Fully Asian Countries Can Take Advantage of the Fully Developed Low Polluting Vehicles by Adopting Developed Low Polluting Vehicles by Adopting Emission Standards and Unleaded Gasoline.Emission Standards and Unleaded Gasoline.

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 45

U.S. EPA – TIER 2 EMISSION STANDARD

Tier 2 Light-Duty Full Useful Life Exhaust Emission Standards (grams per mile)

Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles Less Than 10,000 lbs GVW

Bin #

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

NOxNOx

0.60.6

0.30.3

0.200.20

0.150.15

0.100.10

0.07*0.07*

0.040.04

0.030.03

0.020.02

0.000.00

NMOG

0.156/0.230

0.090/0.180

0.125/0.156

0.090

0.090

0.090

0.070

0.055

0.010

0.000

CO

4.2/6.4

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

2.1

2.1

2.1

0.0

HCHO

0.018/0.027

0.018

0.018

0.018

0.018

0.018

0.011

0.011

0.004

0.000

PMPM

0.080.08

0.060.06

0.020.02

0.020.02

0.010.01

0.010.01

0.010.01

0.010.01

0.010.01

0.000.00

Comments

a, b, c, d

a, b, e

b, f

The Above Temporary Bins Expire in 2006 (for LDVs and LLDTs) and 2008 (for HLDTs)

*Corporate average NOx value

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 46

USA FTP-75 TEST CYCLE

Ro

ad S

pee

d v

Cycle Length: 11.115 Miles (Approx. 17.8 km)Cycle Duration: 1877 s + 600 s PauseAverage Speed: 34.1 km/hMaximum Speed: 91.2 km/h

ct s Motor "Off" htkm/h

120

80

40

00 505 1000 1372 1972 2477 s

Test Duration t

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 47

SUPPLEMENTAL FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURES

SC03 Air Conditioning CycleM

PH

Seconds

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Total Duration: 594 sMax. Speed: 54.8 mph

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 48

SUPPLEMENTAL FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURES

US06 High Speed/High Load Cycle

MP

H

SecondsTotal Duration: 600 sMax. Speed: 80.3 mphMax. Acceleration: 8 mph/second

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

90

80

70

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 49

EUROPEAN UNIONTAILPIPE EMISSION LIMITS

1 Modified ECE+EUDC Driving Cycle Deletes First 40 Seconds of Idle Period/Startof Bag Sampling at Engine Crank.

2000

2005

2000

2005

Petrol PassengerCar

Petrol PassengerCar

Diesel PassengerCar

Diesel PassengerCar

2.3

1.0

0.64

0.50

0.20

0.10

--

--

0.15

0.08

0.50

0.25

--

--

0.56

0.30

--

--

0.05

0.025

RevisedECE+EUDC1

RevisedECE+EUDC1

RevisedECE+EUDC1

RevisedECE+EUDC1

Eff.Date

Fuel/Vehicle Type

COg/km

HCg/km

NOxg/km

PMg/km

HC + Nox g/km

Test Cycle

(Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, UK)

Euro III (2000) and Euro IV (2005) Emissions Standards

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 50

ECE/EC TEST CYCLE WITHEXPRESSWAY PHASE

Cycle Length: 11 kmAverage Speed: 32.5 km/hMaximum Speed: 120.0 km/h

Ro

ad S

pee

d v

Test Duration t

km/h

120

100

80

60

40

20

00 200 400 600 800 1000 1220s

2/21/01 1ENG2.ppt 51

TEST SETUPS

a) For US Federal Test (Here with Venturi System)b) For Europe-Test (Here with Rotary-Piston Compressor)1 Brake, 2 Flywheel, 3 Exhaust, 4 Air Filter, 5 Dilution Air, 6 Cooler, 7 Sample Venturi Tube, 8 Gas Temperature,9 Pressure, 10 Venturi Tube, 11 Fan, 12 Sample Bag, 13 Rotary-Piston Blower, 14 To Outlet.

14HCHC

COCO

COCO22

NOxNOx

12

ctctss

htht

141111

1098

7

5

4

3

21

a

HCHC

COCO

COCO22

NOxNOx

12

14

6

9

85

4

3

21

b14

13