DEVElOPMENT

Exhaust Aftertreatment

SCR-only Concept for

Heavy-duty Euro VI Applications
To meet Euro VI emission targets for heavy-duty applications, truck manufacturers concentrate on Exhaust
Gas Recirculation (EGR) and its combination with urea-based Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). TNO
developed a concept that opens the route for an alternative solution which relies on SCR as the main
technology for NOx abatement. This concept offers potential fuel benefits in combination with low impact on
engine design and cooling equipment. Together with Haldor Topse, Yara and Grundfos, TNO examined the
achievable NOx emission reduction on an engine dynamometer.

58

MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

1 Introduction
Heavy-duty truck and engine manufacturers face enormous challenges to find
a fuel and cost-efficient solution to meet
the more and more stringent emission
targets. Euro VI NOx and Particulate Matter (PM) limits of 0.4 and 0.01g/kWh, respectively, have been set for the European
Stationary Cycle (ESC) and European
Transient Cycle (ETC). Besides these tighten
ing emission limits, a new test cycle
(World Harmonized Test Cycle, WHTC) in
combination with a cold start procedure
will be introduced for Euro VI legislation.
Based on correlation factors with ETC,
the actual WHTC emission targets will be
specified in the near future. Irrespective
of the test cycle and corresponding limits, further developments of emission reduction technologies are required to
meet these new requirements.

2 Possible Concepts for Euro VI

Figure 1 summarizes possible routes to
meet European and US emission targets
for heavy-duty applications. With the introduction of Euro IV and Euro V emission legislation, the vast majority of truck
manufacturers opted for urea-based SCR
technology. To avoid the need for an additional reagent, a few manufacturers applied EGR in combination with a Diesel
Particulate Filter (DPF). In North America,
all 2007 model year heavy-duty engines
were equipped with EGR and DPF systems.
This choice was partly driven by concerns
about the availability of urea reagent for
SCR solutions.
To meet post-2010 emission targets,
some parties pursue the development of
an EGR-only engine solution. This concept relies on high EGR rates: up to 40%
at full load. To maintain the desired incylinder air-fuel ratio, high boost pressures are required that go beyond the
capabilities of single-stage turbo charging. The elevated boost and peak fire
pressures strongly affect the mechanical
design of the engine. Furthermore, the
high rates of exhaust gas diverted back to
the engine pose demanding requirements
on the cooling equipment: increased
cooling capacity and advanced EGR cooling will be required [1]. High pressure
common rail fuel injection equipment is

used to partly compensate for the offset

in PM emission due to the increased EGR
rates, but still the PM reduction will be
demanding for the DPF system.
With growing concerns about CO2
emission, energy security and rising fuel
prices, fuel efficiency becomes more and
more a crucial factor. In that respect, current data indicate that an EGR-only approach is not likely to be the favourable
solution. The combination of EGR, DPF
and SCR technology is a well accepted
choice for US 2010 applications, and will
be an evident option for Euro VI. This
route towards post-2010 emission targets
can be seen as a further development of
US 2007 engine platforms through addition of SCR deNOx technology. The added
SCR after treatment system opens opportunities to improve the fuel economy
with respect to US 2007 engines. The engine can be calibrated for higher NOx and
low fuel consumption, by changing the
EGR rate and fuel injection. In fact, there
is a possibility that if sufficiently high
conversion efficiency can be achieved
under all conditions the best solution
could be a SCR-only concept that does
not require EGR to lower raw NOx emissions. Such a concept would combine an
inexpensive engine design with relatively high fuel economy and relatively low
PM emissions. The latter will also reduce
the requirements for PM after treatment.
In this article, the potential of this alternative SCR focused concept to meet Euro
VI requirements is presented.

The Authors
Ir. Robert Cloudt
is Research Engineer at
the Diesel Emission
Control Group of TNO
Automotive in Helmond
(Netherlands).

Prof. Dr. Ir. Rik Baert

is Senior Research
Scientist at the Diesel
Emission Control Group
of TNO Automotive in
Helmond (Netherlands).

Dr. Ir. Frank Willems

is Senior Research Engineer and responsible
for Powertrain Control
Developments at TNO
Automotive in Helmond
(Netherlands).

Ing. Marco Vergouwe

is Manager of the
Diesel Emission
Control Group of TNO
Automotive in Helmond
(Netherlands).

Figure 1: Overview of emission reduction technologies for heavy-duty applications in Europe and US
MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

59

development

Exhaust Aftertreatment

Figure 2: Artist impression of close-coupled SCR concept

Figure 3: Proposed after treatment configuration based on close-coupled SCR catalyst concept

3 Close-coupled SCR Concept

A feasible SCR-only Euro VI solution requires very high NOx conversion in the
order of 95%. Furthermore, high NOx
conversion is challenged by cold start
and low temperature conditions in transient test cycles, like the WHTC. A concept that improves NOx conversion under
these conditions is the close-coupled SCR
concept [2]. It is based on the addition of
a small volume SCR catalyst that benefits

Figure 4: SCR ammonia storage control structure

60

MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

from rapid heat up and high temperatures through placement close to the turbine outlet. Figure 2 shows an artist impression of this concept. A second larger
SCR catalyst is placed downstream and
will reduce the larger part of the NOx
emissions.
The technology is essentially based on
a Euro IV SCR-based engine platform
which is optimized for fuel economy. Addition of a close-coupled SCR catalyst improves SCR NOx conversion efficiency,

potentially to the levels required to meet

Euro VI limits.
The envisioned setup is portrayed in
Figure 3. Full body corrugated Vanadium
based catalysts are selected for the closecoupled and downstream SCR catalyst.
This type of catalyst is chosen because of
its relatively low price, tolerance for fuel
quality and performance at low temperature and in absence of NO2. Due to costs
and packaging considerations, urea is
only dosed at a single point upstream of
the close-coupled SCR (cc-SCR) catalyst.
The ammonia slip of the close-coupled
SCR is used as reagent in the downstream
SCR catalyst. Reliable urea injection is
provided through a compact air assisted
dosing system. A particulate filter with
upstream Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC)
is installed for PM reduction. The filter is
regenerated by oxidation of injected fuel
on the DOC. It is noted that compared to
an EGR engine, engine-out PM emission
levels can be considerably lower. Consequently, regeneration frequency, corresponding fuel penalty and DPF precious
metal loading can be reduced. A DPF can
be avoided when PM reduction can be accomplished by engine measures.

4 Experimental Demonstration
of the Close-coupled SCR Concept
The necessary NOx conversions required
to meet Euro VI standards have been demonstrated on a 6.7litre 165kW engine
with a standard non-optimized Euro IV
engine calibration. The engine-out NOx
emissions are 10.9g/kWh over a ETC cycle.
A 17.1 litre Vanadium SCR catalyst lowers
the NOx emission below the 3.5g/kWh
Euro IV level. A 5 litre close-coupled SCR
(cc-SCR) catalyst is added to the standard
Euro IV configuration to improve NOx
conversion.
A urea dosing strategy has been developed for the system with close-coupled
SCR catalyst. The new model-based control strategy relies on control of the total
ammonia storage of the integrated SCR
system, Figure 4. Ammonia storage control has proven to yield optimal trade-off
between NOx conversion and tailpipe
NH3 slip under steady-state and transient
conditions [3]. To estimate the ammonia
storage, an in-house developed SCR model is used that is capable of real-time im-

Figure 5: WHTC SCR model fit

plementation on an automotive type

ECU. This model is first calibrated for the
close-coupled and downstream SCR catalyst using a dedicated engine dynamo
meter test procedure [4].
Figure 5 illustrates the model fit for the
downstream SCR catalyst on the cold
start WHTC cycle. The accuracy is well
suited for use in an ammonia storage
control strategy. The two SCR models
running on the controller serve as a virtual sensor for on-line estimation of the
NH3 storage on the cc-SCR and down-

Figure 6: Demonstration of NH3 storage control

stream SCR catalyst. Figure 6 demonstrates

how the urea dosing is controlled to
track the temperature dependent NH3
storage setpoint.
Figure 7 shows the resulting NOx conversion and temperature traces during
the cold start and hot WHTC cycle. Thermal management has been applied to
improve close-coupled SCR heat up. In
the cold start WHTC the cc-SCR catalyst
reduces the NOx concentrations from
11.6g/kWh to 3.8g/kWh. The second SCR
catalyst brings the NOx emission down to

1.2g/kWh. The hot part of the WHTC test

is tested after a 10 minute soak period.
For this part of the test the cumulative
tailpipe NOx emission curve can be kept
virtually flat, culminating in 0.58g/kWh.
It is worth mentioning that in these experiments also a 0.40g/kWh weighted
cold/hot WHTC cycle result could be obtained. This resulted however in a too
high ammonia slip.
During the WHTC cycle, the urea consumption was measured to be 8% of the
fuel consumption on a volume basis. It
was found that the close-coupled catalyst
has little effect on the fuel consumption:
at the C100 ESC mode, the measured fuel
penalty corresponding to an increased
backpressure is less than 0.1%.
Given the measured NOx conversion,
an engine-out NOx emission budget can
be set up for an SCR-only Euro VI solution. This emission budget is presented
in Table 1 for an ambitious scenario with
WHTC limits equal to ETC emission limits.

5 Discussion
The close-coupled SCR concept allows a
strategy with an engine optimized for fuel
economy, whereas emission compliance
is completely realised through exhaust
gas after treatment. The engine-out NOx
emission target level of about 7g/kWh
can be realized simply by retarding the
injection process. The corresponding engine design is compact and straight-forward and injection system and turbo
charging requirements are minimal. This
concept is compared with alternative
Euro VI concepts for the important long
haul truck applications. These trucks typically have an engine with a displacement
in the order of 12 to13litre and a maximum power rating of 370kW The principal characteristics of the different concepts are summarized in Table 2.
The second concept is similar to the
mainstream US 2010 configuration: a
DPF for PM reduction followed by a Zeolite SCR system which together with EGR
ensures low NOx emission. The engineout NOx emissions is expected to be in the
range of 2.5g/kWh. Experience [5] has
shown that such levels can be realized
with moderate rates of cooled EGR, varying from 15% at full load until 30% at
lower loads. The corresponding engine is
MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

61

Exhaust Aftertreatment

development

more complex because of the added EGR

system with its control valves and cooling
circuit. Because of the moderate EGR levels, single-stage turbo charging suffices. A
Variable Geometry Turbocharger (VGT) is
used to control the EGR rate.
The third concept considered avoids
the use of NOx after treatment. The implicit very low engine-out NOx levels are
achieved by a combination of high
amounts of cooled EGR and fuelling stra
tegies that result in a large portion of the
injected fuel being mixed to lean air-fuel
ratio levels prior to the start of combustion. This is typically realized by early
injection of (part of ) the fuel and by a
reduction in effective compression ratio.
At high engine loads, the compression
ratio can be further reduced through
Variable Valve Actuation (VVA) technol
ogy. At the same time, overall air-fuel ratios should remain high enough to avoid
excessive particulate formation. This requires very high boost pressures that go
beyond the capacity of single-stage turbocharging. Intercooling and after-cooling
is required to limit intake manifold and
compressor exit temperatures. This, and
the need to cool high EGR flows, considerably increases the complexity of the
cooling system as well as the requested
cooling power.

Figure 7:
NOx reduction cold
start and hot
WHTC

NOx
Engine-out

cc-SCR
reduction

SCR
reduction

NOx
tailpipe

weight

NOx
cycle
result

Cold-start
WHTC

7.4 g/kWh

67%

68%

0.78 g/kWh

x 1/10

0.08 g/kWh

Hot WHTC

7.4 g/kWh

70%

84%

0.36 g/kWh

x 9/10

0.32 g/kWh
0.40 g/kWh

Table 1: WHTC NOx emission budget

Table 2: Principal characteristics of different Euro VI engine concepts for a 13l 370kW class engine
1
SCR-only

2
SCR+EGR

3
EGR-only

Turbo charging

Single stage
Air-to-air charge cooler

Single stage,
Aftercooled
Variable turbo geometry

Two stage
Intercooled
Aftercooled
Variable turbo geometry

Valve timing

Conventional

Conventional

Variable valve timing

Fuel injection equipment

Pump-line-nozzle
Low pressure (<2000 bar)

Pump-line-nozzle
High pressure (~2500 bar)

Common rail
High pressure (>2500 bar)

Piston

Conventional

Conventional

New dedicated design

NOx aftertreatment

(Vanadium) SCR + cc-SCR

Zeolite SCR

None

PM aftertreatment

DPF

DPF

DPF

EGR [%]

15 30

40 60

Cooling power [kW]

220

260

410

Exhaust gas temperature

Design complexity

Engine Packaging

Fuel quality sensitivity

Service intervals, Oil degradation

Challenges

Low temperature exhaust

gas aftertreatment

Low temperature exhaust

gas aftertreatment

Transient control
Cold start

Estimated additional costs to OEM*

3300

5200

5400
) relative to Euro IV engine with EGR or SCR costs excluded

62

MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

nents). Initial total cost of ownership levels would be higher especially for the
EGR-only concept, since it requires the
largest amount of new engine components.

6 Conclusion

Figure 8: Predicted brake specific fuel consumption and urea consumption converted to fuel
consumption on a cost equivalent basis (urea solution price assumed 45% of of diesel price)

Clearly, the EGR-only concept requires

the highest additional development effort (both from the engine manufacturer
and from its suppliers). In particular, this
concept requires substantial efforts to
guarantee robust control solutions that
compensate for the sensitivity of the
combustion process to fuel quality variation and small changes in trapped gas
pressure, temperature and composition.
To deal with these issues, the use of incylinder sensors for closed-loop combustion control has been suggested. How
ever, it is not expected that this sensor
technology will be applied in the first
generation of Euro VI compliant engines.
In terms of complexity and development
effort, the SCR-based concept clearly
comes out best, closely followed by the
SCR+EGR concept.
Ultimately, the total cost of ownership
will decide which concept will be most
successful. Figure 8 shows a fuel and urea
consumption comparison for the three
concepts. A Euro IV SCR-type engine with
a brake specific fuel consumption of
198g/kWh was taken as a reference. It is
generally conceived that Euro VI emission requirements cause a fuel penalty of
3.5 to 5% relative to the Euro IV baseline
[6], based on an approach with a combination of EGR and SCR technology. Based
on measured trade-offs, the fuel penalty
of the concept without NOx after treatment is estimated on the order of 7%
relative to the Euro IV baseline. The SCR
approach with close-coupled SCR requires virtually no adjustments to the
Euro IV engine. It is expected though,
that the recalibration of the engine to a

7g/kWh NOx level, thermal management

and the added close-coupled SCR backpressure can result in a mild fuel penalty
of 1 to 2%. The urea consumption for
such a platform will be 7% of the fuel
consumption (on a volume basis). The
urea consumption of EGR+SCR concept
is rather low due to the low engine-out
NOx emission: 2% of the fuel consumption.
The comparison shows that the SCRbased concept is competitive to the
EGR+SCR concept with respect to operation costs. Of course, the results of the
comparison are dependent on the urea
diesel price ratio. Conservative estimates of the additional costs to the engine manufacturer are presented in Table 2. These estimates are based confidential information and discussions
with suppliers and engine manufacturers. These costs are relative to Euro IV engine platform with costs of EGR or SCR
systems excluded. The SCR based concept
prevails when it comes to base engine
and development costs, and CO2 emission. This last aspect would become very
relevant should CO2 reduction incentives, for instance in terms of tax benefits, be implemented in the near future
in Europe.
Taking into account development
costs, OEM profit margins and fleet owner capital expenditure costs, the SCR-only
concept comes out very well. It should be
pointed out further that initially cost differences will be higher than mentioned
in Table 2 (the component prices mentioned assume large production numbers of the different new engine compo-

A new SCR-only approach for a heavyduty Euro VI platform has been presented. It relies on the application of a closecoupled SCR catalyst. Based on the presented engine dynamometer results, it is
concluded that this approach is a promising alternative to the currently studied
EGR-only and EGR+SCR based concepts.
The main benefits of this SCR-only solution are the low development costs, low
costs of ownership, and low CO2 emissions. In terms of operating costs, the
SCR concept is competitive with the efficient EGR+SCR strategy.

References

[1] Edwards, S.; Eitel, J.; Pantow, E.; Lutz, R.;

Dreisbach, R.; Glensvig, M.: Emissionskonzepte
und Khlsysteme fr Euro 6 bei schweren Nutz
fahrzeugen. In: MTZ 69 (2008), Nr. 9, P. 690-700
[2] Cloudt, R.; Willems, F.; van der Heijden, P.: Cost and
Fuel Efficient SCR-only Solution for post-2010 HD
Emission Standards. SAE paper 2009-01-0915
[3] Willems, F.; Cloudt, R.; van den Eijnden, E.; van
Genderen, M.; Verbeek, R.; de Jager, B.; Boomsma,
W.; van den Heuvel, I.: Is closed-loop SCR control
required to meet future emission targets? SAE
paper 2007-01-1574
[4] Van den Eijnden, E.; Cloudt, R.; Willems, F.; van
der Heijden, P.: Automated model fit tools for SCR
control and OBD development. SAE paper 200901-1285
[5] Baert, R.; Beckman, D.; Veen, A.: Efficient EGR
technology for future HD Diesel engine emission
targets. SAE paper 1999-01-0837
[6] Gense, N.; Riemersma, I.; Such, C.; Ntziachristos,
L.: Euro VI technologies and costs for Heavy Duty
vehicles The expert panels summary of stakeholders responses. TNO report 06.OR.PT.023.2/NG.
(ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/euro_6.pdf)

MTZ 09I2009 Volume 70

63