Topics in Catalysis

, Volume 60, Issue 3–5, pp 204–208 | Cite as

Particulate Filter Substrates with SCR-Functionality Manufactured by Co-extrusion of Ceramic Substrate and SCR Active Material

Original Paper

Abstract

An alternative method to integrate the SCR functionality in diesel particulate filters has been investigated. In contrast to coated filters, SCR active materials like Cu exchanged silico-alumino-phosphates (Cu-SAPO) and acidic CeO2/ZrO2 were added directly to the slip and were coextruded with silicon carbide matrix and silicon dioxide glass; the latter serving to bond the SCR active material with the matrix. Due to silicon dioxide glass addition, the extruded honeycomb samples can be hardened at 900 °C. Preliminary investigations proved the stability of the SCR active material at this temperature range. In this work, parameters like slip composition, grain size of the powders and hardening conditions were varied. Measured differential pressures indicated that the manufactured samples have open pores with porosities between 41 and 54 %, making them suitable for particulate filter application. The porosity was controlled by varying the grain sizes of the powder materials as well by the hardening conditions like temperature and time. Initially, the silicon dioxide glass enclosed the SCR active materials and reduced BET surface area, yielding in poor NOx-conversion. By an improved two-step slip preparation method, the BET surface area and the NOx-conversion was increased. A NOx-conversion of about 70 % at a feed ratio of 1.5 was achieved at 300 °C in simulated exhaust. We consider this approach worth for being further investigated and improved.

Keywords

Particulate filter Extrusion SCR Heterogeneous catalysis CRF Honeycomb 

References

  1. 1.
    Mollenhauer K, Tschöke H (2010) Handbook of diesel engines. Springer Science & Business Media, New York, pp 427–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liebeck M, Schuler A, Votsmeier M, Drochner A, Vogel H (2013) Top Catal 56:210–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grossale A, Nova I, Tronconi E, Chatterjee D, Weibel M (2009) Top Catal 52:1837–1841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deutschmann O, Grunwaldt J-D (2013) Chemie Ingenieur Technik 85:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schuler A, Votsmeier M, Kiwic P, Gieshoff J, Hauptmann W, Drochner A, Vogel H (2009) Chem Eng J 154:333–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johnson T (2014) SAE Technical paper, 2014-01-1491Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benjamin SF, Roberts CA (2014) SAE Technical paper, 2014-01-2819Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ballinger T, Cox J, Konduru M, De D, Manning W, Andersen P (2009) SAE Technical paper, 2009-01-0910Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harth K (2012) MTZ 73(9):650–654Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Verdier S, Crinière G, Larcher O, Rohart E, Feeley M, Bradshaw H, Harris D, Butler C (2007) SAE Technical paper, 2007-01-0238Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Verdier S, Rohart E, Bradshaw H, Harris D (2008) SAE Technical paper, 2008-01-1022Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rohart E, Kröcher O, Casapu M, Marques R, Harris D, Jones C (2011) SAE Technical paper, 2011-01-1327Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Volkswagen AGBaunatalGermany
  2. 2.Department of Functional Materials, Bayreuth Engine Research Center (BERC)University of BayreuthBayreuthGermany

Personalised recommendations