Topics in Catalysis

, Volume 60, Issue 3–5, pp 348–354 | Cite as

Characterization of Particulate Matter and the Capture Efficiency in Open Metal Substrates

  • J. SjöblomEmail author
  • H. Ström
  • A. Darnell
Original Paper


The capture efficiency (CE) of particulate matter in a novel metal substrate was evaluated using an exhaust gas after treatment system rig. The CE was measured for different temperatures, flows and channel lengths. The trends of CE showed the expected behavior as the CE increased for higher temperatures, lower velocities or longer channel lengths. The experimental results were compared against theoretical calculations of different types in order to visualize and interpret the observed CE in the novel metal substrate. Computational fluid dynamics simulations investigations indicated that inertial mechanisms on particle deposition were active in the metal substrate. It was also demonstrated that the channel length was the most significant factor for increased CE.


EATS PM capture Engine test bench Open metal substrate 



All technical staff at the division of combustion is deeply acknowledged and especially Dr. Saavo Girja for running the engine. Nilcon AB is greatly acknowledged for supply of the metal substrates and experimental equipment and workshop support. The Region Västra Götaland (FoU-kort Avancerat, SFS 2008:762) is acknowledged for financial support.


  1. 1.
    WHO (2014) Burden of disease from Ambient Air Pollution for 2012. World Health Organization. Accessed 29 Jan 2015
  2. 2.
    Caiazzo F, Ashok A, Waitz IA, Yim SHL, Barrett SRH (2013) Air pollution and early deaths in the United States. Part I: quantifying the impact of major sectors in 2005. Atmos Environ 79:198–208. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.05.081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    WMA (2014) WMA statement on the prevention of air pollution due to vehicle emissions. World Medical Association, DurbanGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sjöblom J, Ström H (2013) Capture of automotive particulate matter in open substrates. Ind Eng Chem Res 52(25):8373–8385. doi: 10.1021/ie4004333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choi S, Oh K-C, Lee C-B (2014) The effects of filter porosity and flow conditions on soot deposition/oxidation and pressure drop in particulate filters. Energy 77:327–337. doi: 10.1016/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sjöblom J (2013) Bridging the gap between lab scale and full scale catalysis experimentation. Top Catal 56(1–8):287–292. doi: 10.1007/s11244-013-9968-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson JE, Kittelson DB (1996) Deposition, diffusion and adsorption in the diesel oxidation catalyst. Appl Catal B 10(1–3):117–137. doi: 10.1016/0926-3373(96)00027-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tronconi E, Forzatti P (1992) Adequacy of lumped parameter models for SCR reactors with monolith structure. AIChE J 38(2):201–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holmgren A, Andersson B (1998) Mass transfer in monolith catalysts-CO oxidation experiments and simulations. Chem Eng Sci 53(13):2285–2298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ström H, Sasic S, Andersson B (2010) Design of automotive flow-through catalysts with optimized soot trapping capability. Chem Eng J 165(3):934–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ström H, Sasic S, Andersson B (2011) Effects of the turbulent-to-laminar transition in monolithic reactors for automotive pollution control. Ind Eng Chem Res 50(6):3194–3205. doi: 10.1021/ie102291t CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied MechanicsChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden
  2. 2.Nilcon Engineering ABKålleredSweden

Personalised recommendations