Cost, Effectiveness, and Deployment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Technologies for Reducing Fuel Consumption in Compression-Ignition Diesel Engines
3 Technologies for Reducing Fuel Consumption in Compression-Ignition Diesel Engines
Pages 97-128
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 97... ...
The diesel CAFE rulemaking. The next section discusses the available thermo ynamic cycle is shown on a P-V diagram and com d technologies for reducing fuel consumption, carbon dioxide, pared with the Otto cycle representation of the SI engine in and criteria emissions in advanced diesel engines.
|
From page 98... ...
Diesel lenges of reducing diesel emissions to meet future requireproduces 10,180 g of carbon dioxide per gallon when burned, ments while acknowledging the fuel consumption reduction while gasoline produces 8,887 g of carbon dioxide per gallon benefits of diesel engines. The approach to reducing emis(EPA/NHTSA 2012a)
|
From page 99... ...
In this study, Ricardo evaluated the diesel powertrains in combination with other NRC Phase 1 Study non-diesel fuel consumption reduction technologies, which The NRC Phase 1 study used the EPA full system simula- were only applied to the diesel vehicles and not to the tion carried out by Ricardo, Inc. in 2008 to assess the fuel baseline gasoline vehicles.
|
From page 100... ...
. R02853 CAFEII 3.1.eps TABLE 3.1 Estimated Fuel Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Reductions for Diesel Engines Relative to Gasoline Engines Ricardo Full System Simulation Results Based on EPA (2008)
|
From page 101... ...
The EPA certification fuel economy (two-cycle combined Table 3.3 shows the effectiveness of today's diesel CAFE) data of comparable current vehicles with gasoline vehicles compared to their gasoline versions as having an and diesel engines were used to determine the reduction average of 20 percent reduction in fuel consumption and in fuel consumption provided by the diesel vehicles.
|
From page 102... ...
. Relative to the between downsizing and reduction in fuel consumption for Tier 2 Bin 2 standard, the PM standard has been lowered the diesel vehicles.
|
From page 103... ...
Since this in pumping work increases fuel consumption. In addition, pass-through would not be acceptable, before the catalyst is there is a second fuel consumption penalty caused by the completely filled the NSC must be regenerated to purge the additional fuel required to regenerate the filter by oxidizing adsorbed NOx and free the sites to adsorb additional NOx.
|
From page 104... ...
The incremental cost for the EGR system results DIESEL ENGINE AND DIESEL VEHICLE COST DATA from the addition of two-stage turbocharging to the advanced diesel engines. Friction reductions were achieved with a Costs from NRC Phase 1 2011 Report dual-pressure oil pump and a non-recirculating low-pressure In the absence of teardown cost studies for current diesel fuel pump.
|
From page 105... ...
Average Direct Manufacturing Cost (2008 dollars) I4 V6 V8 Conversion to diesel 2,393 3,174 3,595 Conversion to advanced diesela Downsizing 50 75 75 Two-stage turbocharger 375 375 0 Dual-pressure oil pump 5 6 6 Non-recirculating low-pressure fuel pump 10 12 12 EGR system enhancement 95 95 High-pressure (>2,000 bar)
|
From page 106... ...
The GDP multiplier was applied costs for the 2017-2025 CAFE standards at Tier 2 Bin 2 to the advanced diesel engine cost for 2009 (2008 dollars) emission standards with the direct manufacturing costs for shown in Table 3.6 to bring these cost up to the 2010 dolthe 2012-2016 CAFE standards at Tier 2 Bin 5 emissions lar level.
|
From page 107... ...
These advanced diesel costs were derived from NHTSA's OTHER COSTS ESTIMATES estimates for meeting Tier 2 Bin 2 emission standards. As shown in Table 3.4, the Tier 3 emissions standards, which The committee reviewed other sources of cost estimates were enacted after the final CAFE rule was issued, have for diesel emission reduction technologies and compared essentially the same NMOG + NOx emission requirements them with the cost estimates developed in this report.
|
From page 108... ...
This complete accounting of costs is partly diesel engine were previously reviewed in the NRC Phase 1 responsible for the committee's higher cost estimates for the report or the EPA/NHTSA Technical Support Document. diesel engines relative to NHTSA's estimates.
|
From page 109... ...
Tier 3 standards and the California LEV III standards Vibration Damper and Clutch will tend to increase aftertreatment volumes and platinum group metal usage. The prospects of replacing urea injection Diesel engines have higher firing torque pulse amplitude systems with a lower cost ammonia system also appear to than gasoline engines, so they need more sophisticated torbe minimal.
|
From page 110... ...
The diesel engine costs $2,860 may not be the case with downsized diesel engines) the in more than the same truck with the V8 Hemi engine, creased weight could affect the design of the brakes and tires which is a $1,900 premium over the standard V6 and possibly structural and suspension components.
|
From page 111... ...
CAFE compliance. The cost effectiveness values of various fuel consumption reduction technologies, defined as the incremental cost per percent reduction in fuel consumption Diesel Product Offerings ($/% FC)
|
From page 112... ...
Some of the research programs/projects p otential to improve brake thermal efficiency and reduce are related to reducing criteria emissions, but others are fuel consumption in diesel engines. The direction for diesel focused on reducing fuel consumption.
|
From page 113... ...
TECHNOLOGIES FOR REDUCING FUEL CONSUMPTION IN COMPRESSION-IGNITION DIESEL ENGINES 113 FIGURE 3.2 HCCI combustion regime with lean equivalence ratios and low temperatures for low NO x and PM emissions. SOURCE: Figure courtesy of Prof.
|
From page 114... ...
, where gasoline is injected by PFI and diesel mixtures in conventional diesel engines is predominantly fuel is directly injected, as shown in Figure 3.4. Both fuels responsible for the higher emissions.
|
From page 115... ...
Ricardo estimated that operation in a naturally aspirated gasoline engine. However, this improve- n arrow speed range could reduce fuel consumption by 2 perment is significantly less that the 29.0 to 30.5 percent esti- cent to 4 percent after optimizing combustion for the narrower mated by NHTSA for a conventional advanced diesel engine speed range (Ricardo Inc.
|
From page 116... ...
to 5 percent reduction in fuel consumption on the highway Since diesel engines have higher friction levels than cycle. Turbocharger friction reduction may provide less than spark-ignition engines, additional reductions in friction may 1 percent additional reduction in fuel consumption.
|
From page 117... ...
The benefits, the committee estimated that CLCC could provide engine air-fuel ratio was periodically set to run rich, so that up to 2.5 percent reduction in fuel consumption at a 2025 cost the NOx in the adsorption layer would react with hydrogen of $58 to $87. Research on HCCI and RCCI, discussed in the obtained from the exhaust gas to produce ammonia.
|
From page 118... ...
Similarly, Diesel engines are heavier than gasoline engines because variable exhaust valve timing may be applied to provide they are designed to withstand significantly higher peak com higher expansion ratios, particularly for the lighter load bustion pressures than gasoline engines. In the past, diesel conditions of the dominant CAFE test cycles.
|
From page 119... ...
However, the combustion system Improved EGR Coolers is also being investigated in diesel engines as a means to achieve lower fuel consumption with lower emissions. Additional reductions in NOx emissions and improved performance can be realized with lower EGR temperatures achieved through more effective EGR coolers.
|
From page 120... ...
bustion control and fuel quality sensing using fuel injectors or glow plugs with built-in pressure sensors; fuel injection Finding 3.2 The EPA certification fuel economy (uncorrected systems capable of 2,500-3,000 bar injection pressures; imCAFE) data for comparable current vehicles with gasoline and proved aftertreatment systems such as SCR catalyst applied diesel engines showed that diesel engines provided an average to the DPF; low- and high-pressure exhaust gas recirculation of 20 percent reduction in fuel consumption, which is lower (EGR)
|
From page 121... ...
Performance of an Organic Rankine Cycle Waste Heat Recovery Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 through 2014. EPA System for Light Duty Diesel Engines.
|
From page 122... ...
2011. Assessment of Fuel Economy f amily; fuel consumption reduced by up to 10%, Euro 6 compliant, Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles.
|
From page 123... ...
TECHNOLOGIES FOR REDUCING FUEL CONSUMPTION IN COMPRESSION-IGNITION DIESEL ENGINES 123 ANNEX TABLE 3A.1 NRC Committee's Estimated Fuel Consumption Reduction Effectiveness of Diesel Engine Technologies Midsize Car I4 Large Car V6 Large Light DOHC DOHC Truck V8 OHV Diesel Engine Technologies Abbreviation Most Likely Most Likely Most Likely Relative To NHTSA Technologies Advanced Diesel ADSL 29.4 30.5 29.0 Baseline Other Technologies Low Pressure EGR LPEGR 3.5 3.5 3.5 ADSL Closed Loop Combustion Control CLCC 2.5 2.5 2.5 ADSL Injection Pressures Increased to 2,500 to 3,000 bar INJ 2.5 2.5 2.5 ADSL Downspeeding with Increased Boost Pressure DS 2.5 2.5 2.5 ADSL Friction Reduction FR 2.5 2.5 2.5 ADSL Waste Heat Recovery WHR 2.5 2.5 2.5 ADSL TABLE 3A.2a NRC Committee's Estimated 2017 MY Direct Manufacturing Costs of Diesel Engine Technologies Midsize Car I4 Large Car V6 Large Light DOHC DOHC Truck V8 OHV Diesel Engine Technologies Abbreviation Most Likely Most Likely Most Likely Relative To NHTSA Technologies Advanced Diesel ADSL 3,023 3,565 3,795 Baseline Other Technologies Low Pressure EGR LPEGR 133 166 166 ADSL Closed Loop Combustion Control CLCC 68 102 102 ADSL Injection Pressures Increased to 2,500 to 3,000 bar INJ 24 26 26 ADSL Downspeeding with Increased Boost Pressure DS 28 28 28 ADSL Friction Reduction FR 64 96 96 ADSL Waste Heat Recovery WHR N/A N/A N/A
|
From page 124... ...
124 COST, EFFECTIVENESS, AND DEPLOYMENT OF FUEL ECONOMY TECHNOLOGIES FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES TABLE 3A.2b NRC Committee's Estimated 2020 MY Direct Manufacturing Costs of Diesel Engine Technologies Midsize Car I4 Large Car V6 Large Light DOHC DOHC Truck V8 OHV Diesel Engine Technologies Abbreviation Most Likely Most Likely Most Likely Relative To NHTSA Technologies Advanced Diesel ADSL 2,845 3,356 3,571 Baseline Other Technologies Low Pressure EGR LPEGR 125 157 157 ADSL Closed Loop Combustion Control CLCC 64 96 96 ADSL Injection Pressures Increased to 2,500 to 3,000 bar INJ 23 25 25 ADSL Downspeeding with Increased Boost Pressure DS 26 26 26 ADSL Friction Reduction FR 60 91 91 ADSL Waste Heat Recovery WHR N/A N/A N/A TABLE 3A.2c NRC Committee's Estimated 2025 MY Direct Manufacturing Costs of Diesel Engine Technologies Midsize Car I4 Large Car V6 Large Light DOHC DOHC Truck V8 OHV Diesel Engine Technologies Abbreviation Most Likely Most Likely Most Likely Relative To NHTSA Technologies Advanced Diesel ADSL 2,572 3,034 3,228 Baseline Other Technologies Low Pressure EGR LPEGR 113 141 141 ADSL Closed Loop Combustion Control CLCC 58 87 87 ADSL Injection Pressures Increased to 2,500 to 3,000 bar INJ 20 22 22 ADSL Downspeeding with Increased Boost Pressure DS 24 24 24 ADSL Friction Reduction FR 54 82 82 ADSL Waste Heat Recovery WHR 700 805 1,050 ADSL
|
From page 125... ...
3.6L V6 gas A 17 24 19 21.1 33.3 25.3 1102 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 3.0L V6 diesel A 21 28 24 26 21 26.6 39.3 31.2 23 19 1101 2014 GM Cruze 1.8L 4 cyl gas A 22 35 27 28.5 49.1 35.1 480 Chevrolet 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 27 46 33 22 18 34.8 66.3 44.3 26 21 482 2014 Mercedes E350 3.5L V6 gas A 21 30 24 27.7 43.8 33 566 E250 2.1L 4 cyl diesel A 28 45 34 42 29 36.9 64.8 45.8 39 28 564 2014 Mercedes E350 4 3.5L V6 gas A 21 29 24 26 40.7 31 569 matic E250 2.1L 4 cyl diesel A 27 42 32 33 25 35.6 59.6 43.5 40 29 565 BluTec 4 mat continued
|
From page 126... ...
126 COST, EFFECTIVENESS, AND DEPLOYMENT OF FUEL ECONOMY TECHNOLOGIES FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES TABLE 3A.3 Continued EPA Label MPG CAFE MPG Year Manufacturer Model Engine Tran City Hwy Comb %FE %FC City Hwy Com %FE %FC Line 2014 Mercedes ML350 4 3.5L V6 gas A 17 22 19 21.9 31.1 25.3 1126 matic ML350 3.0L V6 diesel A 20 28 23 21 17 25.2 38.8 29.9 18 15 1127 BluTec 4ma 2014 Mercedes GL350 4 4.7L V8 gas A 14 19 16 17.3 26.2 20.4 1122 matic GL350 3.0L V6 diesel A 19 26 22 38 27 24 36.3 28.3 39 28 1121 BluTec 4ma 2014 Mercedes GLK350 4 3.5L V6 gas A 19 25 21 23.3 34.7 27.3 1006 matic GLK250 2.1L I4 diesel A 24 33 28 33 25 31.1 46.9 36.8 35 26 1005 BluTec 4m 2014 Porche Cayenne 3.6L 6 cyl gas A 17 23 20 21.6 32.9 25.5 1133 Cayenne 3.0L 6 cyl diesel A 20 29 23 15 13 24.1 41 29.6 16 14 1135 Diesel 2014 VW Beetle 2.0L 4 cyl gas M 23 31 26 27.8 43.9 33.3 217 Convertible 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 28 41 32 23 19 36.1 58 43.5 31 23 216 2.0L 4 cyl gas A 23 29 25 28.9 40.8 33.2 215 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 28 37 31 24 19 36.4 51.9 42.1 27 24 214 2014 VW Beetle 2.0L 4 cyl gas A 24 30 26 29.2 42.3 33.9 382 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 29 39 32 23 19 37.3 58 43.5 29 23 381 2014 VW Beetle 2.0L 4 cyl gas M 23 31 26 27.8 43.8 33.3 384 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 28 41 32 23 19 36.1 58 43.5 29 23 383 2014 VW Golf 2.0L 4 cyl gas A 24 32 27 29.6 42.9 34.4 393 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 30 42 34 26 21 39.1 59.3 46.2 34 26 390 2.0L 4 cyl gas M 21 31 25 25.7 40.9 30.9 394 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 30 42 34 36 27 38.7 59.8 46 49 33 391 2014 VW Jetta 2.0L 4 cyl gas A 24 32 27 29.6 44.5 34.8 398 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 30 42 34 26 21 39.1 59.3 46.2 33 24 397 2.0L 4 cyl gas M 23 33 26 28.3 45.2 34 402 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 30 42 34 31 24 38.7 59.8 46 35 26 401 2014 VW Passat 2.5L 5 cyl gas A 22 31 25 27.1 40.8 31.9 607 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 30 40 34 36 27 37.9 56.8 44.6 40 28 605 1.8L 4 cyl gas A 24 34 28 30.2 48 36.2 603 2.0L 4 cyl diesel A 30 40 34 21 18 37.9 56.8 44.6 23 19 605 2.5L 5 cyl gas M 22 32 26 26.1 42.8 31.7 608 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 31 43 35 35 26 38.2 62.3 46.4 46 31 606 1.8L 4 cyl gas M 24 35 28 30.3 48.2 36.3 604 2.0L 4 cyl diesel M 31 43 35 25 20 38.3 62.3 46.4 28 21 606 continued
|
From page 127... ...
. Chrysler RAM 1500 3.6L 6 cyl gas A 17 25 20 21.4 34.5 25.6 804*
|
From page 128... ...
2008. Variable Costs of Fuel Economy Technologies.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.