Trends in Engine Regulations and Technologies - · PDF fileTrends in Engine Regulations and...

Trends in Engine Regulations and Technologies

Tim [email protected]

UMTRIJuly 19, 2017

mailto:[email protected]

Environmental Technologies © Corning Incorporated 2

Summary• Regulations

• US, EU, and China regulations are compared– US goes tighter on gaseous emissions, EU and China on particulates. China is

developing their own protocols and limit values. Chinese HD: EU-VI in 2020, then changes later

• Engine technologies • Numerous, quite different LD engine technologies are in various stages of

development. Several are implementing at 10-15% reductions versus GDI. • Stop-start systems will dominate, and 48v HEV is coming• Engine technology moving to mode-based approach using EGR, VVT, and VCR

• Emerging technologies show promise for ~25% reductions.• Compression ignition

• HEVs can be added at up to 25% reductions. Future direction is xEV• US HD closing gap with EU this year and will have lower FC. Electrification gaining

interest

Regulations


Criteria pollutant and GHG reductions are challenging the auto industry. Different regs in the key markets adds to the complexity.


China and EU have conflicting regs versus US. For cold start: Well mixed charges are needed for PM/PN reduction, but stratified charges are needed for NMOG+NOx reductions. No harmonization.

Conflicting requirements:

• PM comes from cold engine surfaces and poorly vaporized fuel

• PM is best mitigated by having a homogenous mixture of fuel and air

• NMOG+NOx comes from a cold catalyst• NMOG+NOx is best

mitigated by having a stratified mixture for very late spark timing

GM, CARB symposium 9-16


New Euro 6 LDD NOx is creeping up ahead of the RDE implementation date. Best LDDs equivalent to gasoline.

Emissions Analytics, BIS RDE Conf 4-17

• Average EF now ~7 • Rising since 2015, back almost to

Euro 5 peaks• Despite prospect of Real Driving

Emissions• Growing variability• Use of thermal management and hot

re-start strategies?• Beating first phase of RDE in 2017?

• Average Euro 6 diesel 13 times average gasoline car

• But cleanest diesels (5% percentile) are as clean as the average gasoline

• Has been the case for almost 2 years

• Not being able to discriminate within Euro 6 is significant market failure

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

14/09/2011 01/04/2012 18/10/2012 06/05/2013 22/11/2013 10/06/2014 27/12/2014 15/07/2015 31/01/2016 18/08/2016 06/03/2017

Real

-wor

ld N

Ox (

g/km

)

Top 10% E6 LDD

Top 5% E6 LDD

Avg E6 LDD

Avg E6 gasoline


About 50% NMHC+NOx reductions from US LDDs are needed to meet the new Tier 3 requirements of 30 mg/mi NMHC+NOx. Running about 90% cycle average deNOx now, need 95%.

Bosch SAE Congress 2016

Note: Euro 6 levels are 144 mg/km NMHC and 128 mg/km NOx

30 mg/km or 38% of Euro 6


Gasoline COmg/km

THCmg/km

NMHCmg/km

NOxmg/km

N2Omg/km

PMmg/km

PN#/km

Engines RDE CF Durabilitykm

CN 6a 700 100 68 60 20 4.5Before 2020/7: 6.0x1012

After 2020/7: 6.0x1011

AllTT

COP IUC(1)

2020/7: Monitor2023/7:

2.1, to be adjusted(2)

in 2022

160K

CN 6b 500 50 35 35 20 3.0 All 200K

China 6 Regulations

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

All vehicles, sales & registration (CN 6a)

All vehicles, sales & registration (CN 6b)

TT: type test; COP: compliance of production; IUC: in-use compliance(1) OEMs need to run RDE at TT & IUC. Regulator can check RDE for COP & IUC. (2) Likely adjusted to a value that only system with GPF can pass. CF for PN & NOx only. Necessary to measure & record CO during RDE test.

CN

6a/

6b

Gas

/PM

PNR

DE

RDE compliant

6x1012 #/km 6x1011 #/km

Final CFsMonitoring


China 6 Compliance ProgramICCT, March 2017

(1) Type testing

(2) Conformity of Production

(3) In-use surveillance

OEMs responsible for type testing and implementation of COP plan Regulatory authority focuses on verification tests and in-use compliance


China 6 Test Details required after 7/’20This table is simplified, highlighted some key components

Type Test Conformity of Production In-service Compliance

Who

ManufacturerConduct test at certified

lab& submit test reports

ManufacturerPerform sampling COP test and report COP guarantee

plan

Regulatory agencyMaintains authority to conduct verification tests on part or all

of the listed tests

ManufacturerIUCP (In-use Confirmatory

Program)

Regulatory agency

IUVP (In-use Verification)

Type

IGas emissions, PM & PN on WLTC after cold start at normal amb. T

OEMs need to submit a plan to ensure COP, and can skip

type II/V tests

Pass/fail based on 3 vehicles from test family. Pass if: (a) Emissions from each < 1.1 x Limit, (b) Average emissions < Limit

Once a yr.

Low, medium and high-mileage

vehicles once in 8yrs

All type tests subject to verification

II RDE

< 2023: Monitor only> 2023: CF implementedo One vehicle from above 3 randomly tested for RDEo If fail, then other 2 vehicles tested and both must pass

III Crankcase Details not listed here

IV Evaporative Details not listed here

V Durability

o One vehicle from above 3 randomly tested for type V testo If fail, then other 2 vehicles tested and both must pass

Not required

VI Gas emissions after cold start at low amb. T Details not listed here Not required

VII Refueling evap. emissions Details not listed here Same as I – IV


China and CARB have the only two meaningful EV mandates. 2025: ~20% in China, and ~8% in California and S177 states

• Quotas proposed by the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology would require electric cars to account for 8 percent of new-car sales by 2018, and 12 percent by 2020.

• MIIT looking at automotive long term roadmap– Energy security and promoting industry– NEV (PHEV and BEV) mandate after credits (proposed)

• 7% in 2020, 20% in 2025, 40% in 2030– Mandate will give Chinese OEMs opportunity to leapfrog established players on NEV

Estimate of total ZEV sales to meet CARB and the “177 States” ZEV mandate

~8% of CARB sales in 2025 will need to be ZEVs (2% of US)

CARB ACC Review, 1/17


China VI Heavy-Duty Regulations (Proposal)Proposal released for public comments in Oct. 2016 by MEP

Timing 2020-2021 nationwide. Major cities may implement earlier (early 2018)

Covers HDD, NG, LPG engines & vehicles − Gasoline engines will be covered by separate regulation

Emission Limits

PM, PN, NOx similar to Euro VI. NTE requirement; 1700 m altitude requirement

Durability Similar to Euro VI. 700k for heaviest vehicles, similar to US 2010 limitMin. warranty for heaviest vehicle weight class:5yrs/160K km, similar to US

- Emissions warranty & recall will be enforced

Testing & Certification

1. Vehicle-based certification for COP, IUC− Eliminates “dual map” calibrations for emissions cert. & real world fuel economy− PEMS to be used for real-world compliance; no PN PEMS; 50-100% load

2. Vehicle-based emissions & FC testing using chassis dyno− Cost savings – same test for emissions and fuel consumption− Reference vehicle test cycle (C-WTVC) defined− Production & in-use vehicles could be tested over “any reasonable drive cycles”

− Eliminates removing engine from in-use vehicle and testing on dyno

Fuel S < 10ppm, available nationwide in 2018

OBD Euro VI EOBD


In discussion for China VI-b

• Maximum engine-out NOx– Back-up to urea tampering

• PEMS might include instantaneous NOx (ppm) plus integrated (g/km)– Instantaneous NOx limit for all vehicle specific powers (0-15 kW/tonne) – 500 ppm 90th percentile– Will help set limits for remote testing

• PEMS PN limit CF=2; 10-100% payload• 2400 m emissions requirement• OBD monitoring of vanadia temperature, 550C max.

Possible technology impacts of China 6b regs: High altitude requirement will limit vanadia SCR catalyst. Maximum engine-out NOx limits will require EGR. Remote OBD will be onerous but could be effective if coupled with remote sensing in-use testing.


Regulations drive technology.

Cummins, Integer Conf 10-16


CARB HD low-NOx program is proceeding

• Testing continuing at SwRI to show feasibility– Engine-aged system in process– Vocational cycle testing is starting

• Looking at implementation in 2023-25• CARB needs to get an EPA waiver to enforce the regulation• EPA is waiting for direction, but so far is “proceeding”

Engines


Engine technologies being advanced across a broad spectrum

Technology CO2Benefit*

Challenges Status / Penetration

Implications for emissions

Hybridization 15 – 25% Managing emissions during engine starts ~ 2%

Lower cold-start emissionspossible. High emissions w/ engine-on transients & RDE

Atkinson cycle(+VVT) 3 – 10% ↓ peak power & torque Primarily in

hybrids

Adv. start-stop 2 – 5% Consumer acceptanceParticulates at re-start? 28% by 2025 Conventional

Dynamic cyl. deactivation(+ VVL) 2 – 10% Noise & vibration 25% in 2025 Reduced idle emissions

Faster heat up for DPF regen

Lean-burn gasoline 10 – 20% NOx, pSCR controls Implemented NOx control

Variable compression ratio 10 – 15% Hardware complexity Implemented Early light-off, reduced particulates

2-stroke opp. piston Diesel 20-30% Engineering Conventional DPF+SCR

GDCI Low ex. T – cat. light-off Development High HC ( pre-turbo cat., HC trap

Dedicated-EGR 10 – 15% Stability at high dilution Development Low NOxHC traps needed

Pre-chamber combustion 15 – 20% Complexity (2 chambers), particulates Development Low NOx, HC, but particulates

GPF

LTC (HCCI, RCCI) Operating load rangeComplexity – dual fuels Development Very low emissionsD

EVEL

OPI

NG

MAT

UR

E

*Compared to GDI engines


0

20

40

60

80

100%

VW

ICE:

Stop/Start

Electric7

Toyota

ICE

5

BMW

2 2

CN OEMs

ICE

ICE: Stop/Start

Hybrid-Mild

Hybrid-Full

26

Honda

3

PSA

2

ICE

ICE:

Stop/Start

7

Volvo

1

HMC

ICE

5

FCA

ICE

4

GM

ICE

5

Ford

ICE

5

Others

ICE

ICE: Stop/Start

Hybrid-Mild

Hybrid-Full

18Total =

91.9

Daimler Renault/Nissan

Despite the aggressive BEV initiatives announced by some OEMs, hybrids and ICE Stop/Start are expected to dominate

BEV/HEV Adoption by OEM in 2025

M Vehicles*

Source: IHS Powertrain FCST, Feb’17

Note: * Market includes NA/EU/CH/JP/KR.• Stop/Start becomes the de-facto standard for ICEs by 2025

• Toyota to lead full hybridization with Honda, HMC, Volvo, GM and Ford following

• BMW and Daimler expected to pursue mild hybridization most aggressively

• VW is expected to lead the BEV segment with close to half a million BEVs in 2025


ICCT Technology – Cost analysis for 2025 CO2 targetsPass. Cars: ~ $1000 over 2015 level

VVL, Dyn. Cyl. Deac.

Mild-hybrid (48V)

CO2 Reduction

Engine friction, Weight red., transmission, accessories

Stop-start

GDI, EGR, Atkinson

Incr

emen

tal V

ehic

le C

ost (

2015

$)

$16 / (%-CO2)

$33 / (%-CO2)

$75 / (%-CO2)

$200 / (%-CO2)

ICCT, March 2017

Reference: 4-cyl. In-line, 3500 lbs

X: Cost consumer will pay for 5 yr pay back period on trading up every 5 yrs. 12k miles/yr, $3/gal, 25% OEM margin

XX

X

BEV: 75% CO2 reduction for $5750PHEV: -70% for same cost


Mild hybridization is a relatively cheap way to get incremental CO2 reductions. Diesel and PEV are similar (except EU)

Mid-range ICCT numbers

$80/%

$50/%

$80/%$76/% $57/% EU

(tailpipe=0)


Mazda is targeting 25% improvement in ICE fuel efficiency for well-to-wheel CO2 equivalence with EVs

Downsizing(3.7L V6 2.0L I4) Reduced pumping losses

& engine friction by 30% each

High CR and knock mitigationScavenging @ low rpm/high load and EGR @ high

rpm/high load

Mazda, Adv. Clean Cars Symposium, 2016


GDI vehicle shows higher particulate emissions when run in hybrid mode – emissions during engine restarts IFPEN, SAE 2016-01-2283

Particle emissions of GDI compared in conventional vs. hybrid operation (hardware-in-loop)

Vehicles: B-segment, Euro 5b, 4-cylGDI: 1.6L w/ TWC , Diesel: 1.5L TC w/ DOC/DPF/EGRElectrical engine assumptions Power 50 kW, Battery energy storage 1.3 kWh

Conc.

Part

icle

dia

. (nm

)

Conventional

Hybrid

Time (s) – NEDC cycle

Particulate filters are effective in reducing PN below limit for both diesel and GDI

Further optimization possible for both hybrid operation as well as GPFs

Cold start and transients dominate PN emissions, WLTC leads to higher emissions (than NEDC) due to increased transients

In hybrid mode, particle emissions observed during sharp transients during engine restarts

PN (#

/km

)

Euro6c

PN ↑ 4.6X in hybrid mode


Variable compression ratio technology commercialized10 – 15% FC improvement

Nissan: “Multi-link” system~ 10% improved fuel economy

Nissan, Adv. Clean Cars Symposium, 2016 Advantages(1) Improved fuel economy

- CR varies across engine map and expands optimum BSFC window

- Reduced piston friction during combustion stroke

(2) Lower cold start emissions- Lower CR during cold start = lower HC due to

smaller S/V, and higher exh. T for cat. heat-up- Lower CR during cold start = lower fuel

impingement on piston surface = reduced particulates

MTZ, April 2017


GDCI* engine advanced targeting US Tier 3-Bin30 targetsHigh fuel economy, low CO, NOx but HC still challengeDelphi, 2016 DOE AMR, SAE 2017 LD Symposium

Engine 1.8L, CR ~ 15:1

Fuel RON91 gasoline

Injection 400 bar GDI

Combustion Partially premixed, no spark plugs

After-treatment Only ox. cat, low-P EGR, exh. rebreathing at low loads

*Gasoline direct injection compression ignition

Low-T combustion ~150 – 300 °C colder exhaust

Reference L4 engine

GDCI

Vehicle Speed

Exha

ust T

empe

ratu

re

(deg

C)

BSFC @ 211–214 g/kWh over wide load range

Target: 200 g/kWh

BSF

C (g

/kW

h)

BMEP (kPa)

Gen3 After-treatment: HC trap, pre-turbo cat., passive GPF for off-cycle, SCR


Optimized dedicated-EGR engine achieves < 200 g/kWh and shows path to LEV-III emissionsD-EGR: Benefit of H2/CO reformate + EGR SWRI, 2016 HKPTC

BSFC < 200 g/kWh@ 1500 – 3500 rpm

Vehicle Testing (Buick Regal)

Ref. D-EGR

Fuel econ.City/Hwy (mpg)

24.5 / 43.6

27.7 / 47.6

NOx, FTP-75 (mg/mi) 0.013 0.002

HC, FTP-75 (mg/mi) 0.029 0.029

85% ↓

Optimized Engine PFI fast burn, low friction engineE0 gas, B/S ratio < 0.85, High CR ~ 13.6:1

9 – 13% ↑

Improvement possible with HC traps

35% fuel enrichment ≈ Increasing ON by 8 AK

Enables use of low octane fuel with lower

wells-to-wheel CO2


45% BTE on ~2.5 liter stoich gasoline engine. CR~17, S/B=1.5, MPI and DI, late IVC, 30% EGR, two-stage boost, strong ignition.

Model results. 45% BTE is possible at CR~17, 2.5 bar boost, and 30% EGR. Minimum-advance for Best Torque (MBT) used; 2000 RPM

S/B=1.5 gives CR=17 at same S/V ratio

Late IVC gives effective CR=12.5 with similar phasing as current engines but maintaining CR=17 expansion. 20% EGR, 2000 RPM

S/B=1.5 balances pumping and friction loss at CR=13.5. 2000 rpm, IMEP=720 kPa, MBT

Optimized 1-cyl engine

Swirl and spark are optimized

Multi-cylinder results

Honda, SAE 2015-01-1263


Some real-world fuel efficiency data shows gasoline closing gap with diesel. Downsizing increases RDE vs. cert gap. EU diesel RDE gap vs. cert increasing, worse than gasoline. HEV RDE better than US cert.

EU real world gasoline closing gap with LDD (2015: 12% FC difference). Downsizing increases EU RDE vs. cert MPG gap.

EU MPG gap real v. cert

US MPG gap real v. cert

Emissions Analytics, Integer Conf 10-16


Transient testing of opposed-piston 2-stroke diesel engine30 – 50% improvement in fuel consumption over conventional gas / diesels

HD-FTP cycle

Achates 4.9L OP

Conventional6.7L MY 2011

Rated P (kW) 205 242

CR 15.4:1 17.3:1

BSFC (g/kW-hr) 217.3 261.4

After-treatment

DOC+DPF+SCRSoot 0.056

NOx 4.3 g/kWhDPF + SCR

17% ↓

Ref: Achates, SAE 2016-01-1019, SAE LD Symp. 2017

Torq

ue (N

m)

Speed (rpm) Speed (rpm)

LD 2.25L Engine2.25L, in-line 3 cyl. (6 piston), 150 kW @

3600 rpm, 500 Nm @ 1600-2100 rpm

LA4 drive cycle CumminsAtlas

Achates2.25L OP

Fuel consumption (L/100 km) 8.81 6.89

NOx (g/km) 0.51 0.29

PM (g/km) 0.08 0.018

28% ↓

42% ↓

74% ↓

Next:LD truck engine development for 2018

- 270 hp, 650 NmCAFE 2025, Tier 3, LEV III, Euro 6Estimated CAFE 37 mpg (combined)

MD 4.9L Engine


Real world fuel consumption values show gasoline HEVs at parity in EU with LDD and far ahead of US LDDs.

www.EmissionsAnalytics.com 12/16

EU gasoline HEV highway fuel economy is close to parity with EU LDDs.

US gasoline HEV combined fuel economy exceeds EU gasoline HEVs and is much better than US LDDs. US LDD penetration will be limited.

http://www.emissionsanalytics.com/


LDD compared to dHEV: -13% CO2 , -20% RDE NOx, -1.3 s 0-100 kph. €1000 upcharge. Room for dHEV cost reduction.

Diesel dHEVWeight, kg 2100 2200Engine, liter-kW 3 - 200 3 – 200Gearbox 8-sp AT 8-sp ATMotor, kW 60Battery, Li-ion 2 kW-hr

HEV dropped CO2 13% on WLTP and engine-out NOx 20% on all cycles

dHEV NOx → Cost reduction:1 stage boosting, Internal + cooled LP EGR, solenoidinjection system, reduced number of sensors, etc.

IAV, MinNOx 6-16


US and EU freight trucks are nearly at parity on fuel consumption. US is improving at 2.5%/yr. EU at 1.7%/yr. Parity ~2021

2.5%/yr

2015: US trucks burned ~5% more fuel than in EU. Considering 1.7%/yr in EU vs. 2.5%/yr in US, 2017 gap is 3%. Parity in ~2021. VECTO, 19.3 t trucks.

Daimler, Integer 6/16

Daimler:• Correct for new test route since 2010

(~ 2l/100km higher FC)• Similar vehicles (4x2, 400–500hp) and test conditions (traffic etc.)• Results of all OEMs considered

ICCT, EC Workshop 6/16


Electric road systems (like catenary) has highest WTW energy efficiency (77%), which can reduce total long term cost vs. diesel.

Cumulative costs 2020-2050 are lowest for electric road system.

Overhead Catenary Projects:• Swedish 2-yr field trial started

mid-2016. Scania truck.• Los Angeles ports testing 3 km

road end 2016. Volvo• Germany looking at test

proposals for 2017-19 tests.

Siemens, Integer, 6/16


Summary• Regulations

• US, EU, and China regulations are compared– US goes tighter on gaseous emissions, EU and China on particulates. China is

developing their own protocols and limit values. Chinese HD: EU-VI in 2020, then changes later

• Engine technologies • Numerous, quite different LD engine technologies are in various stages of

development. Several are implementing at 10-15% reductions versus GDI. • Stop-start systems will dominate, and 48v HEV is coming• Engine technology moving to mode-based approach using EGR, VVT, and VCR

• Emerging technologies show promise for ~25% reductions.• Compression ignition

• HEVs can be added at up to 25% reductions. Future direction is xEV• US HD closing gap with EU this year and will have lower FC. Electrification gaining

interest


CORNING INCORPORATED PROVIDES THIS DOCUMENT FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, AND ANY RISK CONCERNING THIS INFORMATION IS WITH RECIPIENT. SPECIFICALLY, CORNING INCORPORATED MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONCERNING THE INFORMATION, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES THAT THE INFORMATION IS ACCURATE.

Date post:	06-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lamthuy
View:	219 times
Download:	2 times

Trends in Engine Regulations and Technologies - · PDF fileTrends in Engine Regulations and...

Documents