EPA/AA/CTAB/86-01
                        Technical Report
                    Durability Evaluation of
                     Aftermarket Catalysts
                               by
                       Robert I.  Bruetsch
                          John Shelton
                           March 1986
                             NOTICE

Technical Reports do not necessarily represent final EPA de-
cisions or  positions.   They are  intended  to present  technical
analysis  of  issues using  data which  are currently  available.
The purpose in the release of such reports is to  facilitate the
exchange  of  technical  information and to  inform the  public  of
technical developments  which may form the basis for a  final EPA
decision, position or regulatory action.

             U.  S. Environmental.Protection Agency
                  Office of Air and Radiation
                    Office of Mobile Sources
              Emission  Control Technology Division
           Control Technology and Applications Branch
                       2565 Plymouth Road
                   Ann  Arbor,  Michigan  48105

-------
                                           EPA/AA/CTAB/86-01
                        Technical Report
                    Durability Evaluation of
                     Aftermarket Catalysts
                               by
                       Robert I.  Bruetsch
                          John Shelton
                           March 1986
                             NOTICE

Technical Reports do not necessarily represent final EPA de-
cisions or  positions.   They are  intended  to present  technical
analysis  of  issues using  data which  are currently  available.
The purpose in the release of such reports is to  facilitate the
exchange  of  technical  information and to  inform the  public of
technical developments which may form the basis for a  final EPA
decision, position or regulatory action.

             U.  S. Environmental.Protection Agency
                  Office of Air and Radiation
                    Office of Mobile Sources
              Emission Control Technology Division
           Control Technology and Applications Branch
                       2565 Plymouth Road
                   Ann Arbor,  Michigan  48105

-------
 I.   Introduction

     Recently,  aftermarket  catalysts have been  introduced into
 commerce  by several  companies.   These  catalysts  appear  to  be
 different  than OEM  catalysts  in  one or more  design features.
 These  catalysts  are  also  considerably  less  expensive  than
 replacement OEM catalysts.   The purpose of  this project was to
 evaluate the efficiency  of  a group of aftermarket  catalysts  as
 a  function of  accumulated  miles  and to evaluate a  single OEM
 catalyst   at   a  single  mileage   point  (83,161   miles)   for
 comparison.  Nine  aftermarket catalysts were evaluated on one
 vehicle,  which was  provided by EPA.   Catalyst evaluation was
 performed  at  Automotive Testing  Laboratories, Inc.   (ATL)  in
 East  Liberty,  Ohio.   Mileage  was   accumulated   using  other
 vehicles  (five Impalas)  by Hercules, Inc.  of Cumberland,  MD.
 The  catalysts  were evaluated  for  exhaust emissions  conversion
 efficiencies and backpressure  at each test point.   This project
 was  performed  under  Technical Directive No.  6 of  EPA Contract
 No.  68-03-3230.

 II.  Test Vehicle

     The test  vehicle,  which was supplied by EPA,  was used for
 all  emissions  testing  of all ten  catalysts.   The  vehicle  is a
 1980   Oldsmobile  Delta   88  four-door   sedan  with  vehicle
 identification number (VIN)  3Y69YAM169068.   It  is  equipped with
 power  steering and power brakes,  a 305  cubic-inch  engine,and a
 3-speed  automatic  transmission.   Its emission control  system
 includes   air    injection,   oxidation   catalyst,   backpressure
 exhaust  gas recirculation  and  early  fuel  evaporation  (engine
 family 03L4F).

 III. Catalysts Evaluated

     Ten   catalysts   were   tested.    All   ten  are   oxidation
 catalysts  supplied by EPA.   These  include  the OEM catalyst  on
 the  test  vehicle  supplied  by  EPA.    The  other nine  catalysts
 include   three  nominally   identical   catalysts   from   three
 different  aftermarket  catalyst  suppliers.   EPA  labeled  each
 catalyst with  a two-digit code, such as 1-2.   This   means  the
 catalyst  is from  supplier  number  1  (Walker)  and is  catalyst
number 2  of 3  supplied  by  Walker.   Catalyst  3-1  therefore  is
the  first  of  three  Brown catalysts.   Catalysts are  identified
by this  two-digit  code  in  all documentation  of  this  project,
 including   this  report.    The  converter   suppliers   and  the
 catalyst code numbers are as follows:


       Converter/Type	       Code Numbers

     1.    Walker/monolith       1-1,1-2,1-3
     2.    Echlin/pellet         2-1,2-2,2-3
     3.    Brown/monolith        3-1,3-2,3-3

-------
IV.  Test Sequences
     A.
Phase I:
Testing
                              -2-
Baseline Emissions and Evaluation of  Modal
     Catalyst  conversion  efficiency comparisons were  generated
two different ways.  In the  first  method,  conversion efficiency
was calculated  from a single  test using the modal  analyzer to
measure  engine-out and  catalyst-out  emissions.   Bag  data  to
measure  tailpipe  emissions  was  also  generated.   Catalyst-out
emissions,  as  measured with the  modal analyzer, were  compared
to  the  bag  data.   These measures were within  1.1 percent  of
each other  based on a carbon  balance  analysis.   In the  second
method,   conversion efficiency  was calculated from  two  separate
tests; one  run with the  catalyst to yield  tailpipe emissions,
and the  other  run with  a straight  pipe installed   in place of
the catalyst to  yield engine-out emissions.   To  achieve  this
objective, the test sequence shown in Table 1 was used.
       Cycle
1.  FTP
2.  Idle
    (5-min sample)
3.  20 MPH SS
    (5-min sample)
4.  40 MPH SS
    (5-min sample)
5.  60 MPH SS
    (5-min sample)
                 Table 1

          Baseline Test  Sequence

         	Measure	

         HC,  CO,  NOx,  CO2
         catalyst temperature
         (in & out),  backpressure
         (catalyst in &  out)
         HC,  CO,  NOx,  CO2
         catalyst temperature
         (in & out),  backpressure
         (catalyst in & out)

         HC,  CO,  NOx,  CO2
         catalyst temperature
         (in & out),  backpressure
         (catalyst in & out)

         HC,  CO,  NOx,  CO2
         catalyst temperature
         (in & out)  backpressure
         (catalyst in & out)

         HC,  CO,  NOx,  CO2
         catalyst temperature
         (in & out)  backpressure
         (catalyst in & out)
                                 Calculate
                          MPG,  emissions
                          (g/mi) by  bag and
                          for total  test,
                          pressure drop over
                          catalyst

                          Emissions  (g/mim)
                          pressure drop,
                          fuel  consumption
                          (gal/min)

                          Emissions  (g/mi)
                          pressure drop, MPG
                          Emissions  (g/mi)
                          pressure drop,  MPG
                          Emissions  (g/mi),
                          pressure drop,  MPG

-------
     The test  sequence  in  Table l was run three times with  the
the test vehicle  (Delta 88)  using the OEM catlyst  catalyst with
the modal  analyzer.  Each time  the  modal  analyzer  was  used,
engine-out  and tailpipe  emissions were  measured.   The  actual
dynamometer  horsepower  (ADHP)  was increased  to  18.3  and  the
test sequence,  less  the FTP  and idle cycles, was repeated twice
using  the  OEM  catalyst with  the modal  analyzer.   Three  more
test sequences  were then run with the OEM catalyst without  the
modal analyzer.  The OEM catalyst was then removed and the test
sequence  was  repeated  three  more  times  without   the  modal
analyzer.    The   dynamometer  horsepower  settings  were   then
increased and  two more  test  sequences,  less  the FTPs  and idles,
were  then  run without the  modal  analyzer.    This   phase  of
testing is summarized as follows:


  Number of                                        Use Modal
Test Sequences      ETW/ADHP        Catalyst        Analyzer?

    3               4000/12.2         OEM              Yes

2 less FTPs         4000/18.3         OEM              Yes
and idles

    3               4000/12.2         OEM              No

2 less FTPs         4000/18.3         OEM              No
and idles

    3               4000/12.2     Straight Pipe        No

2 less FTPs         4000/18.3     Straight Pipe        No
and idles
     The results  of  these tests  showed  that the modal  testing
is preferable to  the  test  sequences  with  the  straight  pipe.
This  decision was based  on  cost (one FTP  per test with  modal
analyzer versus  two  FTPs per  test;  one with  catalyst and  one
with  straight  pipe)  and  the  fact  that  the  pipe   did  not
accurately represent backpressure caused by a catalyst  thereby
influencing  imputed  catalyst   efficiency.   EPA  evaluated  the
data  and  informed  the  contractor  to  use  the  modal  analysis
method of generating data for subsequent phases of testing.

     B.    Phase 2:  Zero-Mile Testing of Aftertnarket Catalysts

     The first  aftermarket  catalyst was installed on the  test
vehicle without mileage accumulation.  After the  exhaust  system
was checked  and found free  of leaks,  the  contractor  completed
two valid  test  sequences  as shown previously  in Table 1.   The
first  catalyst  was removed  and the  second  aftermarket catalyst

-------
                              -4-

from the  same  manufacturer (Walker) was  installed.   Again  the
exhaust  system was  checked for  leaks.   Two additional  valid
test sequences were  conducted.   This catalyst  was removed  and
the  third  Walker  catalyst was   installed.    Two  valid  test
sequences were then conducted  with this  catalyst.   After  all
three Walker catalysts were tested  at  the zero  mile test point,
the same procedure was performed  on the three Echlin and  Brown
catalysts.   The  vehicle  odometer  readings  were  recorded  when
each catalyst was installed or  removed  and at the  start  of  each
test cycle in  the test  sequence.   Two  test sequences,  less FTPs
and idles, were  run  on one catalyst from each  manufacturer  at
the increased dynamometer horsepower setting (18.3 actual HP).

     The  resulting  summary of  testing  for Phase  2:   Zero-Mile
Testing of Aftermarket  Catalysts,   is shown  in  Table 2.   These
sequences, as  will  be  shown   later,  are exactly the   same  as
those-that were run at the 25K  mileage  point.


                            Table 2

                   Summary of Phase 2 Testing

                                          No.  of Sequences (less
  Catalyst     Catalyst     Number of     FTPs and idles) With
Manufacturer     Number      Sequences       Increased Dyno.  HP

     112                   2
     122                   2
     132                   2
     21             2                   2
     222                   2
     2            32                   2
     31             2                   2
     322                   2
     332                   2


     C.    Phase 3;   Mileage Accumulation  and Testing at Higher
           Mileage Intervals

     The  aftermarket  catalysts,  which  were removed  from  the
test vehicle  in  Phase 2,  were  installed  on  other vehicles  to
accumulate  mileage  on  the catalysts.    The  converters  were
installed on  one of five  nominally identical  1985 Chevrolet
Impalas, equipped with V-8, 5.O-liter/305-CID engines  and 700R4
automatic tranmissions.  Mileage was accumulated over three  of
Hercules'  standard   test  routes.    These  road  routes   are
routinely  used  by   Hercules  for  tire-wear  testing,   and  are
described below.

-------
                              -5-

     l.    Route W-4

     Route W-4  is  characterized as  a  "slow  wear" route.   Its
course  consists  entirely of  dual-lane  interstate  expressways,
about 15 percent in West Virginia and 85 percent in Maryland.

     2.    Route W-10-H

     Route W-10-H is rated for what the tire  industry considers
as  "medium  wear."    It  consists almost entirely of  interstate
expressways,   about  50  percent  in Maryland  and  50  percent  in
West Virginia.   Compared to the slow wear route, this  route's
more extensive  driving  in mountainous  terrain  adds more  turns
and grades to the vehicle's  duty cycle.

     3.    Route M-101

     Route M-101 is a  "high wear"  route developed to  simulate
European driving.   It splits  about 60/40  percent Maryland/West
Virginia  and  includes   250  miles   of  interstate  expressway
driving  and  250 miles  of  mountainous  driving which  includes
hard turns and grades up to  20 percent.

     These   three   different   routes   can   have   potentially
different  effects   on  catalyst  performance.    Prior   to  the
aftermarket  catalyst aging on  these  routes,  an  instrumented
Impala  (one  of  the  cars   used  later  with  the  aftermarket
catalysts) was  used  to profile the  three routes.  Engine rpm
and  the  inlet  and  outlet  temperatures  of   the  vehicle's  OEM
catalysts  were  measured  every  10   seconds.    The   catalyst
temperature results obtained were as follows:


              Average OEM Catalyst  Temperature,  °F

                          Inlet        Outlet

     Route W-4             941           939

     Route W-10-H          965          1008

     Route M-101           945          1004


     Plots  of  the  distributions  of  the catalyst  inlet  and
outlet temperatures are shown in Figures 1 and 2,  respectively.

     The three different  routes  did  not result  in significantly
different   catalyst    temperatures.     The   catalyst    outlet
temperature  distributions  are more  similar  to  each other than
are  the  inlet  temperature   distributions.    Note  that  the
"hardest"  route in terms  of  tire  wear  did  not  produce  the
highest catalyst temperatures.

-------
i
    28
                           -6-
      Figure 1  - Inlet  Temperature  Distributions
                        of Durability  Routes
              TIME AT TEMPERATURE
                      ROUTE W4 (t SHIFT)
26 -
24 -
22 -
20 -
18 -
    12 -

     a -
     6 -
     4
                 ..ll.lll
                          ll—
           290   900   790   1000   1290  1900   1790   2000
                  INLET TEMPERATURE DEGREES (F)
    14
    13
    12 -
    1 1 -
    10 -
     9 -
     8 -
     7 -
     6 -
     S -
     4 -
     3 -
     2 -
     1 -
     0
               TIME AT TEMPERATURE
                     POUTE WtOH (1 SHIFT)
                            ll,
           290   900    790   1000   1290  1900
                  INLET TEMPERATURE DECREES (F)
                                          17SO
                                                :ooo
               TIME AT TEMPERATURE
                     ROUTE Ml 01 (1 SHIFT)


Ul
5
tt
Ul
a.
2
Ul
r-
5
Ul
a
*~
z
Ul
K
U

-------
                      -7-
Figure 2 -  Outlet  Temperature Distributions
                  of Durability Routes

          TIME AT TEMPERATURE
                 ROUTE W4 (1 SHIFT)
4O -
39 •
w
| 30-
oc
jjj 29 •
5 20-
a
p 19 -
z
K 10 -
0.
9 -
0 -

















L.
0 290 900 790 1000 1290 1900 1790 2CC
OUTLET TEMPERATURE DECREES (F)
TIME AT TEMPERATURE
2* -
22 -
20 -
w
3 18 -
5
2 16 -
a.
2 14-
5 12-
Ul
3 10 -
1—
5 8-
2' 6-
hi
a.
2 -
0 -
ROUTE W10H (1 SHIFT)








• _ -..ill








L
0 290 900 790 1000 1290 1900 1790 :"
OUTLET TEMPERATURE DECREES (F)
TIME AT TEMPERATURE
22 -
20 -
u "
a
? 16 -
(t
£ 14-
2
" 12 -
u 10 -
a
£ 8-
0 6 -
It
"" 4 -
2 -
a -
ROUTE M101 (1 SHIFT)










.Lull










1.
       290   900   790  1000  1230  1900

             OUTLET TEMPERATURE DECREES (F)
                                    1790
                                         2000

-------
                              -8-

     The catalysts were removed from the Impalas  for  testing on
the test vehicle  at  the  following mileage points (plus or minus
250 miles):


      4,000 miles
     15,000 miles
     25,000 miles


     The referenced mileage  intervals  are miles  accumulated on
the catalyst, not the  vehicle,  and include miles accumulated on
the  test  vehicle.    Testing  at  the  25,000-mile   point  was
identical to that  done  in  Phase  2:   the  zero-mile  testing.
Testing at the 4,000- and 15,000-mile points was  also identical
to the  testing  in Phase  2,  except that three  converters, l-i,
2-1,  -and 3-1,  accumulated  25,000  miles  without  intermediate
emissions testing.   The  remaining converters  were  removed at
4,000 and  15,000 accumulated  miles  for   emissions  testing  at
ATL's facilities.   A  breakdown  by converter,  vehicle,  mileage
and route is shown in Table 3.

V.   Aged Aftermarket Versus OEM Catalyst  Efficiency Results

     A  log  book  of  vehicle  maintenance   and  malfunctions  was
kept  for  both   the   test   vehicle   and   the  five  durability
vehicles.  However,  no vehicle  was  reported  to have  had  any
incidences of poor driveability  or operational  problems.   There
were also  no reported incidences involving  misfires or  other
combustion problems.

     Converter 1-3  was reported  as  being  clogged with  debris
prior to  15,000-mile  testing.   Further inspection  revealed  a
meltdown  of  substrate  material on  the downstream  end of  the
converter.    The  mileage  accumulation  contractor was  contacted
with regard  to the condition of the  vehicle used for  the 4,000-
to 15,000-mileage increment.   No  problems  were noted  on  the
driver's  comment  sheets  during  this, period,   or   during  a
mechanic's inspection of  the vehicle  at the 15,000-mile  point.
The meltdown was  unusual in that  the damage was at  the  outlet
(downstream)  end of  the converter.  Approximately 25  percent of
the honeycomb  had  broken away  and  was  missing.   The  exposed
ragged ends  had  melted down, but  did not  clog the  converter.
Steady-state measurements indicated  backpressure was  reduced.
The  converter  was  returned  for  the  final  10,000   miles  of
service.   No   problems   were   experienced   with   subseguent
converters installed on this vehicle.

-------
Converter
  #1-2
  #1-3
  #2-1





  #2-2
  #2-3
  #3-1
  #3-2
  #3-3
-9-
Table 3
Schedule of Durability Mileage Accumulation
of Aftermarket Catalytic Converters
Vehicle
TC-361
TC-363
TC-362
TC-369
TC-360
TC-361
TC-362
TC-361
TC-363
TC-362
TC-369
TC-361
TC-360
TC-360
INTERNAL
TC-362
TC-363
TC-362
TC-361
TC-369
INTERNAL
TC-360
TC-369
TC-363
Installed
10-04-85
10-25-85
09-19-85
10-25-85
12-30-85
09-19-85
10-28-85
12-30-85
11-09-85
10-16-85
11-13-85
01-24-86
10-16-85
11-13-85
MATERIAL BROKE
11-13-85
01-07-86
10-21-85
11-26-85
01-24-86
MATERIAL BROKE
10-21-85
12-06-85
01-24-86
Removed
10-25-85
11-08-85
09-28-85
11-13-85
01-12-86
10-02-85
11-13-85
01-20-86
1-06-86
10-21-85
12-06-85
02-13-86
10-21-85
12-09-85
APART . TEST
01-05-86
01-13-86
10-28-85
12-18-85
02-10-86
APART.
10-28-85
01-02-86
02-13-86
Test
Miles
14,000
25,000
COMPLETE
4,000
15,000
25,000
COMPLETE
4,000
15,000
25,000
COMPLETE
25,000
COMPLETE
4,000
15,000
25,000
COMPLETE
Route
W-10-H
W-10-H
M101
W-10-H
W4
M101
W-10-H
W-10-H
W-10-H
W-10-H
M101
W4
4,000 W-10-H
15,000 W4
TERMINATED
19,500
25,000
COMPLETE
4,000
15,000
25,000
COMPLETE
4,000
15,000
25,000
COMPLETE
M101
W-10-H
W-10-H
W-10-H
M101
W-10-H
M101
W4

-------
                              -10-

     Converter   2-3   testing  was   terminated  prior   to  the
15,000-mile  tests  due  to   loss  of  the  converter's  pelleted
catalyst  material.    Further mileage  accumulation  on   2-3  was
canceled and the converter was returned to EPA.

     Ten to  twenty  small fragments  of bead  were noted inside
the  inlet  pipe of converter 2-2  at  the  15,000-mile  test point.
However, this converter completed 25,000 miles  of  aging, though
efficiency dropped substantially.

     Converter 3-2 had  developed  a  crack at the 4,000-mile test
point.  However, no significant deterioration  in efficiency was
noted   through   the    15,000-mile   testing.    Converter   3-2
fractured, however, during  the final  10,000  miles  of  driving.
A  clear  path  was  formed  for   exhaust  gases  to  bypass  the
converter  element.   This represented  approximately  20  percent
of the  surface area of the converter.   All of  the small pieces
of substrate and liner  were removed from the shell.  One piece
larger  than  the  outlet  of  the  converter  remained  at  the
25,000-mile test point.   Three tests were run on  converter  3-2
at the  25,000-test  point,  instead of two, because the first two
cycles of the modal analysis were missing from the first test.

     Summaries  of  the  aged aftermarket  catalyst  HC  and  CO
conversion  efficiencies  compared   to   baseline  OEM  catalyst
efficiencies  are shown in  Tables   4  and  5,  respectively.   A
possible  EPA  regulatory  requirement of  70 percent conversion
efficiency for  both HC  and  CO  can  be compared to  these data.
As can  be  seen in Tables 4  and 5, most  catalysts' efficiencies
are  in  line  with the  possible  EPA  regulatory  requirement with
the  exceptions of  the  previously mentioned problem catalysts,
i.e., Walker  tt3  after  15,000  miles,  Echlin  tt3  after  15,000
miles,  and Brown  #2  after 25,000  miles.   Converter   1-1  was
tested  a third time at 25,000 miles because it  was  so  near  the
70 percent conversion goal for HC.

-------
                         -11-
                        Table 4
    Aftermacket Catalyst HC Conversion Efficiency*
Mileage
Test 81
Converter
Walker 81 87

Walker 82 87
Walker 83 83
Echlin 81 77
Echlin 82 79
Schlin 83 74
Brown 81 83
Brown 82 82

Brown 83 84
Mileage
Summary
Walker Avg.
Min.
Max.
Echlin Avg.
Min.
Max.
Brown Avg .
Min.
Max.
OK
82

.0 85.5

.9 84.5
.9 82.3
.3 76.8
.4 79.5
.9 73.8
.7 82.0
.4 81.9

.4 82.0
OK
85.2
82.3
87.9
77.0
73.8
79.5
82.7
81.9
84.4
4K
81 82

—.— -

81.6 81.5
76.4 74.7
— —
64.2 60.7
64.4 63.4
— —
80.9 79.4

76.9 76.0
4K
78.6
74.7
81.6
63.2
60.7
64.4
78.3
76.0
80.9
15K
81 82

^__ —

75.9 76.3
36.2 36.9
— —
50.5 51.7
25K
81 82
83
66.2 70
69.5
66.5 67
29.7 27
47.8 49
47.9 48



.1

.0
.9
.3
.4
TESTING TERMINATED
— —
69.0 66.9

72.1 71.0
15K
56.3
36.2
76.3
51.1
50.5
51.7
69.8
66.9
72.1
68.6 67
34.2 31
33.3
67.5 62
25K
54.7
27.9
70.1
48.4
47.8
49.3
55.4
31.6
68.6
.8
.6

. 7







OEM  baseline HC  conversion  efficiency =  65.9 percent
83,161 miles.

-------
                         -12-

                        Table  5

    Aftermarket Catalyst CO Conversion Efficiency*
Mileaqe
Test ttl
Converter
Walker ttl 96

Walker K2 97
Walker #3 96
Echlin ttl 87
Echlin tt2 91
Echlin tt3 88
Brown ttl 94
Brown #2 93

Brown tt3 95
Mileage
Summary
Walker Avg.
Min.
Max.
Echlin Avg.
Min.
Max.
Brown Avg.
Min.
Max.
OK
tt2

.3 95.4

.3 94.5
.4 93.4
.9 89.9
.3 92.0
.6 86.4
.8 92.5
.0 93.6

.8 93.5
OK

95.6
93.4
97.3
89.4
86.4
92.0
93.9
92.5
95.8
4K
ttl #2

__

95.2 96.7
94.1 92.0
— —
78.7 74.5
76.9 78.2
— —
94.1 92.2

90.7 90. 1
4K

94.5
92.0
96.7
77.1
74.5
78.7
91.8
90.1
94.1
15K
#1 #2

__

93.4 94.1
48.1 50.6
— —
61.8 62.7
25K
ttl #2
K3
87.9 88
89.8
90.1 89
37.2 35
56.7 58
58.0 56



.5

.6
.0
.3
.9
TESTING TERMINATED
• — . —
86.2 84.0

86.3 86.3
15K

71.6
48.1
94.1
62.2
61.8
62.7
85.7
84.0
86.3
85.1 85
30.2 30
31.9
81.4 79
25K

71.6
35.0
90.1
57.5
56.7
58.3
65.5
30.2
85.2
.2
.9

.4











OEM  baseline CO  conversion  efficiency =  79.0 percent  @
83,161 miles.

-------