This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
OBD Limit Part Creation Using DFSS Methodology: NMHC Catalyst Emissions Control System
Technical Paper
2022-01-0553
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
In the light duty diesel segment, the need persists for an advanced control system to monitor the health of an aftertreatment system throughout a vehicle’s life in order to maintain compliance with ever tightening emissions levels. In on-board diagnostics (OBD), every diagnostic is validated during development stages to detect when a system under monitoring of that diagnostic has failed. This necessitates the need to create parts which represent a failure that would be observed on the vehicle. These failed parts, referred to as limit or threshold parts, are developed through a limit part creation process. Although there are commonalities amongst Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), each OEM has their own detection logic which will require a unique and specific limit part. Various methods exist for creating these limit parts, and each method produces a different combination of ability to detect the failure and its associated tailpipe emissions.
Historically for the OBD group within FCA, the Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) limit part has been created by a combination of reducing the catalyst volume and aging. To fully understand the effect of various combinations of volume reduction and aging of DOC and Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) on the tailpipe emissions and its corresponding OBD diagnostic, a Design of Experiments (DOE) approach was implemented as part of a Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) project. This DOE laid out an array of 18 parts, and these parts were tested under two unique urban and highway test cycles and evaluated under the criteria of detectability and tailpipe emissions.
When evaluating the results, it became clear which limit parts were the appropriate choices that would work on a specific vehicle application. This method removes the trial and error approach for identifying an emissions control system limit part, and by replacing it with a statistically-based methodology, it significantly reduces the number of iterations needed during the development of OBD diagnostics.
Recommended Content
Authors
Citation
Linihan, M. and Ahari, H., "OBD Limit Part Creation Using DFSS Methodology: NMHC Catalyst Emissions Control System," SAE Technical Paper 2022-01-0553, 2022, https://doi.org/10.4271/2022-01-0553.Also In
References
- OBD2 Compliance Validation SAE Technical Paper, 1993-25-0434 1993 10.4271/1993-25-0434
- State of California Air Resources Board Aug. 23, 2012
- Nanjundaswamy , H.K. , Deussen , J. , Van Sickle , R. , Tomazic , D. et al. OBD Diagnostic Strategies for LEVIII Exhaust Gas Aftertreatment Concepts SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1040 2015 doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-1040
- Nanjundaswamy , H.K. , Deussen , J. , Van Sickle , R. , Tomazic , D. et al. OBD Diagnostic Strategies for LEVIII Exhaust Gas Aftertreatment Concepts SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1040 2015 doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-1040
- Mc Grane , L. , Douglas , R. , Irwin , K. , Pedlow , A. et. al. Creation of OBD Limit Motorcycle Catalysts Using Different Ageing Methods SAE Technical paper 2021-01-0598 2021 doi.org/10.4271/2021-1-0598
- Ahari , H. , Mates , A. , Linihan , M. , Wilson , J.P. et al. A Case Study in DOC OBD Limit Parts Performance and Detection SAE Technical Paper 2021-01-0438 2021 10.4271/2021-01-0438
- van Nieuwstadt , M. , Upadhyay , D. , and Yuan , F. Diagnostics for Diesel Oxidation Catalysts SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-3602 2005 doi.org/10.4271/2005-01-3602
- Bhuyan , D.R. , Netapalli , S. , Dev , S. , and Srinivasan , S. Design For Six Sigma (DFSS) for Optimization of Stamping Simulation Parameters to Improve Springback Prediction SAE Technical Paper, 2015-01-0582 2015 doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0582
- White , J. , Zhang , W. , Likich , M. , and Lynch , M. A Study on Robust Air Induction Snorkel Volume Velocity Prediction Using DFSS Approach SAE Technical Paper, 2016-01-0480 2016 10.4271/2016-01-0480
- Alwerfalli , D. and Lash , T. Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) as a Proactive Business Process Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Istanbul, Turkey July 3, 2012
- Hsu , J. , Kunihiro , A. , Yasin , A. , Nagumo , H. et al. Development of a Robust Design Approach for Occupant Protection Performance in Frontal Impact using Design For Six Sigma SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0992 2007 doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0992
- Sharma , N. and Ragsdell , K. Quality Loss Function - Common Methodology for Nominal-The-Best, Smaller-The-Better, and Larger-The-Better Cases SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0797 2007 doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0797
- Biondo , W. and Griffin , J. Improving a Vehicle Theft Deterrent System's Communication Using Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0800 2007 doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0800
- Ahari , H. , Smith , M. , Zammit , M. , and Walker , B. Adapting Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) Methodology for Diesel Lean NOx Trap (LNT) Catalyst Screening SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0953 2016 doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0953
- Fugihara , M. and de Normanet d’Audenhove , A. Lean Six Sigma System: Integration and Validation through Modeling and Simulation SAE Technical Paper 2008-36-0251 2008 doi.org/10.4271/2008-36-0251
- Ramadas , S. , Prasanth Suseelan , S. , Paramadhayalan , T. , Annamalai , A. et al. Optimization of Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) on Passenger Cars to Improve Emission Robustness SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1013 2015 doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-1013