Combination of Pseudobrookite Oxide and Low Loading of PGM as High Sulfur-Resistant Catalyst for Diesel Oxidation Applications

Abstract

Sulfur-resistant synergized platinum group metals (SPGM) catalysts with significant oxidation capabilities are disclosed. Catalytic layers of SPGM catalyst samples are prepared using conventional synthesis techniques to build a washcoat layer completely or substantially free of PGM material. The SPGM catalyst includes a washcoat layer comprising YMn.sub.2O.sub.5 (pseudobrookite) and an overcoat layer including a Pt/Pd composition with total PGM loading of at or below 5.0 g/ft.sup.3. Resistance to sulfur poisoning and catalytic stability is observed under 5.2 gS/L condition to assess significant improvements in NO oxidation, and HC and CO conversions.

Claims

1. A catalytic composition comprising: a platinum group metal and YMn.sub.2O.sub.5.

2. The composition of claim 1, wherein the YMn.sub.2O.sub.5 has a pseudobrookite structure.

3. A catalytic composition suitable for diesel oxidation catalysts applications, comprising: a platinum group metal and at least one pseudobrookite structured compound.

4. The composition of claim 3, wherein the pseudobrookite structured compound has a general formula of AB.sub.2O.sub.5.

5. The composition of claim 3, wherein the pseudobrookite structured compound is selected from the group consisting of silver, manganese, yttrium, lanthanum, cerium, iron, praseodymium, neodymium, strontium, cadmium, cobalt, scandium, copper, and niobium.

6. The composition of claim 3, wherein the platinum group metal is selected from the group consisting of platinum, palladium, ruthenium, iridium, rhodium, and combinations thereof.

7. A catalyst system, comprising: at least one substrate; at least one washcoat comprising a pseudobrookite structured compound; and at least one overcoat comprising a platinum group metal.

8. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the pseudobrookite structured compound has a general formula of AB.sub.2O.sub.5.

9. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the pseudobrookite structured compound is selected from the group consisting of silver, manganese, yttrium, lanthanum, cerium, iron, praseodymium, neodymium, strontium, cadmium, cobalt, scandium, copper, and niobium.

10. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the platinum group metal is selected from the group consisting of platinum, palladium, ruthenium, iridium, rhodium, and combinations thereof.

11. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the pseudobrookite structured compound is on a ZrO.sub.2 support oxide.

12. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the platinum group metal is applied on the washcoat at 5.0 g/ft.sup.3.

13. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the conversion of CO is about 100% under sulfation of 5.2 g/L.

14. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the conversion of NO is about 50% under sulfation of 5.2 g/L.

15. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the conversion of HC is about 88% under sulfation of 5.2 g/L.

16. The catalyst system of claim 7, wherein the conversion of NO is about 60% at about 340° C.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0014] The present disclosure can be better understood by referring to the following figures. The components in the figures are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being place upon illustrating the principles of the disclosure. In the figures, reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the different views.

[0015] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation illustrating a catalyst structure used for SPGM catalyst samples, according to an embodiment.

[0016] FIG. 2 is a graphical representation illustrating a diagram of steps of a DOC test methodology to assess the catalyst activity and resistance to sulfur of SPGM catalyst samples, according to an embodiment.

[0017] FIG. 3 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO conversion LO for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

[0018] FIG. 4 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO conversion LO for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

[0019] FIG. 5 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO, CO and THC conversion stability for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0020] The present disclosure is here described in detail with reference to embodiments illustrated in the drawings, which form a part here. Other embodiments may be used and/or other changes may be made without departing from the spirit or scope of the present disclosure. The illustrative embodiments described in the detailed description are not meant to be limiting of the subject matter presented here.

Definitions

[0021] As used here, the following terms have the following definitions:

[0022] “Catalyst” refers to one or more materials that may be of use in the conversion of one or more other materials.

[0023] “washcoat” refers to at least one coating including at least one oxide solid that may be deposited on a substrate.

[0024] “Substrate” refers to any material of any shape or configuration that yields a sufficient surface area for depositing a washcoat and/or overcoat.

[0025] “Overcoat” refers to at least one coating that may be deposited on at least one washcoat or impregnation layer.

[0026] “Support oxide” refers to porous solid oxides, typically mixed metal oxides, which are used to provide a high surface area which aids in oxygen distribution and exposure of catalysts to reactants such as NO.sub.R, CO, and hydrocarbons.

[0027] “Zero PGM (ZPGM) catalyst” refers to a catalyst completely or substantially free of platinum group metals.

[0028] “Synergized PGM (SPGM) catalyst” refers to a PGM catalyst system which is synergized by a ZPGM compound under different configuration.

[0029] “Catalyst system” refers to any system including a catalyst, such as, a PGM catalyst or a ZPGM catalyst of at least two layers comprising a substrate, a washcoat and/or an overcoat.

[0030] “Diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC)” refers to a device which utilizes a chemical process in order to break down pollutants from a diesel engine or lean burn gasoline engine in the exhaust stream, turning them into less harmful components.

[0031] “Pseudobrookite” refers to a ZPGM catalyst, having an AB.sub.2O.sub.5 structure of material which may be formed by partially substituting element “A” and “B” base metals with suitable non-platinum group metals.

[0032] “Incipient wetness (IW)” refers to the process of adding solution of catalytic material to a dry support oxide powder until all pore volume of support oxide is filled out with solution and mixture goes slightly near saturation point.

[0033] “Metallizing” refers to the process of coating metal on the surface of metallic or non-metallic objects.

[0034] “Conversion” refers to the chemical alteration of at least one material into one or more other materials.

[0035] “Poisoning or catalyst poisoning” refers to the inactivation of a catalyst by virtue of its exposure to lead, phosphorus, or sulfur in an engine exhaust.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0036] The present disclosure is directed to a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) system configuration. The DOC configuration includes a 2-layer catalyst having a washcoat (WC) layer of Zero-PGM (ZPGM) catalyst and an overcoat (OC) layer. The overcoat (OC) layer is a low loading PGM catalyst. This 2-layer catalyst improves the conversion rate of NO.sub.x, HC, and CO contained with the exhaust gases emitted from the diesel engine.

Configuration, Material Composition, and Preparation of SPGM Catalyst Systems

[0037] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation illustrating a catalyst structure used for SPGM catalyst samples that includes a supported pseudobrookite structure implemented as a ZPGM composition within a washcoat layer, and an overcoat layer comprising a low loading PGM composition, according to an embodiment. In FIG. 1, SPGM catalyst structure 100 includes WC layer 102, OC layer 104, and substrate 106. WC layer 102 is deposited onto substrate 106 and OC layer 104 is deposited onto WC layer 102. In some embodiments, WC layer 102 is implemented as a ZPGM composition, and an OC layer 104 is implemented as a low PGM composition.

[0038] In some embodiments, SPGM catalyst samples are implemented including WC layer 102 that comprises a pseudobrookite oxide structure of AB.sub.2O.sub.5 deposited on a support oxide. In these embodiments, OC layer 104 is implemented including one or more PGM material compositions deposited on support oxide.

[0039] Example materials suitable to form pseudobrookites with the general formula of AB.sub.2O.sub.5 include, but are not limited to, silver (Ag), manganese (Mn), yttrium (Y), lanthanum (La), cerium (Ce), iron (Fe), praseodymium (Pr), neodymium (Nd), strontium (Sr), cadmium (Cd), cobalt (Co), scandium (Sc), copper (Cu), and niobium (Nb). Suitable support oxides that can be used in WC and OC layers include zirconia (ZrO.sub.2), any doped ZrO.sub.2 including doping such as lanthanide group metals, niobium pentoxide, niobium-zirconia, alumina-type support oxide, titanium dioxide, tin oxide, zeolite, silicon dioxide, or mixtures thereof, amongst others. PGM material compositions include platinum, palladium, ruthenium, iridium, and rhodium, either by themselves, or combinations thereof of different loadings.

[0040] In an example, a ZPGM catalyst used in a WC layer of a SPGM catalyst structure includes YMn.sub.2O pseudobrookite composition deposited on a doped ZrO.sub.2 support oxide.

[0041] In some embodiments, preparation of the WC layer begins with preparation of a Y—Mn solution. In these embodiments, preparation of the Y—Mn solution includes mixing Y nitrate solution with Mn nitrate solution and water to produce a solution at the appropriate molar ratio. In an example, a Y:Mn molar ratio of 1:2 is used.

[0042] In other embodiments, the Y—Mn nitrate solution is added to doped ZrO.sub.2 powder using a conventional incipient wetness (IW) technique forming a Y—Mn/doped ZrO.sub.2 slurry. In these embodiments, the Y—Mn/doped ZrO.sub.2 slurry is dried and calcined at about 750° C. for about 5 hours. Further to these embodiments, the calcined Y—Mn/doped ZrO.sub.2 powder is then ground to fine grain for producing, for example, YMn.sub.2O.sub.5/doped ZrO.sub.2 powder. In an example, YMn.sub.2O.sub.5/doped ZrO.sub.2 powder is subsequently milled with water to produce a slurry. In the example, the slurry is then coated onto a suitable substrate for calcination at about 750° C. for about 5 hours. A substrate coated and calcined in this matter forms a WC layer.

[0043] In some embodiments, the PGM catalyst used in the OC layer includes a PGM solution of platinum (Pt) and palladium (Pd) nitrates deposited on an alumina-type support oxide.

[0044] In an example, the preparation of the OC layer includes milling of doped Al.sub.2O.sub.3 support oxide. In this example, the milled doped Al.sub.2O.sub.3 support oxide is mixed with water to form aqueous slurry. Further to this example, the doped Al.sub.2O.sub.3 support oxide slurry is metallized by a solution of Pt and Pd nitrates with a total loading of PGM within about 5 g/ft.sup.3, preferably about 4.5 g/ft.sup.3 of Pt and about 0.25 g/ft.sup.3 of Pd. Subsequently, the OC layer is deposited onto the WC layer and calcined at about 550° C. for about 4 hours.

[0045] DOC LO and Sulfation Test Methodology

[0046] In some embodiments, a DOC/sulfur test methodology can be applied to SPGM catalyst systems as described in FIG. 1. In these embodiments, the DOC/sulfur test methodology provides confirmation that the disclosed catalyst systems, including a WC layer of ZPGM (YMn.sub.2O.sub.5 pseudobrookite structure) with an OC layer of low PGM for DOC applications, exhibit increased conversion of gaseous pollutants. Further to these embodiments, SPGM catalysts prepared with low amount of PGM added to ZPGM catalyst materials are capable of providing significant improvements in sulfur resistance.

[0047] FIG. 2 is a graphical representation illustrating the steps of a DOC test methodology for assessing SPGM catalyst samples for catalyst activity and resistance to sulfur, according to an embodiment.

[0048] In FIG. 2, DOC test methodology 200 employs a standard gas stream composition administered throughout the following steps: DOC light-off (LO), soaking at isothermal DOC condition, and soaking at isothermal sulfated DOC condition. For these embodiments, DOC test methodology 200 steps are enabled during different time periods selected to assess the catalytic activity and resistance to sulfur of the SPGM catalyst samples. Steps in DOC test methodology 200 are conducted at an isothermal temperature of about 340° C. and space velocity (SV) of about 54,000 h.sup.−1.

[0049] In some embodiments, DOC test methodology 200 begins with DOC LO test 210. The DOC LO test is performed employing a flow reactor with flowing DOC gas composition of about 100 ppm of NO, about 1,500 ppm of CO, about 4% of CO.sub.2, about 4% of H.sub.2O, about 14% of O.sub.2, and about 430 ppmC1 of mixed hydrocarbon, while temperature increases from about 100° C. to about 340° C., at SV of about 54,000 h.sup.−1. Subsequently, at about 340° C., isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220 is conducted for about one hour to stabilize catalyst performance at about 340° C. At the end of this time period, at point 230, testing under soaking at isothermal sulfated DOC condition 240 begins by adding a concentration of about 3 ppm of SO.sub.2 to the gas stream for about 4 hours. At the end of this time period, at point 250, the sulfation process is stopped when the amount of SO.sub.2 passed to catalyst is about 0.9 gS/L (grams of sulfur per liter) of substrate. Subsequently, the flowing gas stream is allowed to cool down to about 100° C., at point 260. After this point, DOC test methodology 200 continues by conducting another cycle of test steps including DOC LO test 210, isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220 for about one hour, and sulfated DOC condition 240, flowing about 3 ppm of SO.sub.2 for about 2 hours in the gas stream, until reaching a total SO.sub.2 passed to catalyst of about 1.3 gS/L of substrate at point 270, when sulfation of the gas stream is stopped. Finally, the catalyst activity of the SPGM catalyst sample is determined by another DOC LO and soaking after a total of about 6 hours of sulfation soaking NO conversion and sulfur resistance are compared at the end of the test for all the DOC conditions (e.g., before and after sulfation, in the test methodology).

[0050] In other embodiments, DOC test methodology 200 begins with DOC LO test 210, which is conducted employing a flow reactor with flowing DOC gas composition of about 100 ppm of NO, about 1,500 ppm of CO, about 4% of CO.sub.2, about 4% of H.sub.2O, about 14% of O.sub.2, and about 430 ppmC1 of mixed hydrocarbon, while temperature increases from about 100° C. to about 340° C., at SV of about 54,000 h.sup.−1. Subsequently, at about 340° C., isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220 is conducted for about one hour to stabilize catalyst performance at about 340° C. At the end of this time period, at point 230, testing under soaking at isothermal sulfated DOC condition 240 begins by adding a concentration of about 5.8 ppm of SO.sub.2 to the gas stream, for about 6 hours. At the end of this time period, at point 250, the sulfation process is stopped when the amount of SO.sub.2 passed to the catalyst is about 2.6 gS/L of substrate. Subsequently, the flowing gas stream is allowed to cool down to about 100° C., at point 260. DOC test methodology 200 continues by conducting another cycle of test steps including DOC LO test 210, isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220 for about one hour, and sulfated DOC condition 240, flowing about 5.8 ppm of SO.sub.2 for about 6 hours in the gas stream, until reaching a total SO.sub.2 passed to catalyst of about 5.2 gS/L of substrate at point 270, when sulfation of the gas stream is stopped. Finally, the catalyst activity of the SPGM catalyst sample is determined by another DOC LO and soaking after a total of about 12 hours of sulfation soaking. NO conversion and sulfur resistance are compared at the end of the test for all the DOC conditions (e.g., before and after sulfation, in the test methodology).

[0051] Catalyst Activity of SPGM System Before and After Sulfation Conditions

[0052] FIG. 3 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO conversion LO for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

[0053] In FIG. 3, three specific conversion curves are detailed as follows: conversion curve 302 illustrates NO conversion LO before sulfation, under DOC LO test 210 and isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220; conversion curve 304 illustrates % NO conversion LO after sulfation under sulfated DOC condition 240 for about 4 hours, SO.sub.2 concentration of about 0.9 gS/L; and conversion curve 306 illustrates % NO conversion after sulfation under sulfated DOC condition 240 for a second period of about 2 hours, (a total sulfation time of about 6 hours), with SO.sub.2 concentration of about 1.3 gS/L.

[0054] In FIG. 3, it can be observed that before sulfation NO oxidation, as illustrated by conversion curve 302, reaches a NO conversion of about 48% at about 252° C. The maximum NO conversion of about 61% is achieved at about 340° C. Further, after sulfation poisoning with about 0.9 gS/L or about 1.3 gS/L, as illustrated by conversion curve 304 and conversion curve 306, a decrease in NO conversion is observed at lower temperature ranges. However, at higher temperature ranges (from about 290° C. to about 340° C.), NO conversion of the sulfated SPGM catalyst is substantially similar to the non-sulfated SPGM catalyst. This level of NO oxidation LO indicates the SPGM catalyst possesses a significant sulfur resistance at higher temperature ranges. Finally, significant sulfur resistance of the SPGM catalyst is confirmed by the stable NO conversion of about 61% at 340° C. after sulfation poisoning with about 0.9 gS/L or about 1.3 gS/L.

[0055] FIG. 4 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO conversion LO for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

[0056] In FIG. 4, three specific conversion curves are detailed as follows: conversion curve 402 illustrates % NO conversion LO before sulfation, under DOC LO test 210 and isothermal soaking under DOC condition 220; conversion curve 404 illustrates % NO conversion LO after sulfation under sulfated DOC condition 240 for about 6 hours, SO.sub.2 concentration of about 2.6 gS/L; and conversion curve 406 illustrates % NO conversion after sulfation under sulfated DOC condition 240 for a second period of about 6 hours, (a total sulfation time of about 12 hours), with SO.sub.2 concentration of about 5.2 gS/L.

[0057] In FIG. 4, it can be observed that before sulfation NO oxidation, as illustrated by conversion curve 402, reaches a NO conversion of about 48% at about 252° C. The maximum NO conversion of about 61% is achieved at about 340° C. Further, after sulfation poisoning with about 2.6 gS/L or 5.2 gS/L, as illustrated by conversion curve 404 and conversion curve 406, respectively, a decrease in NO conversion is observed at lower temperature ranges. However, at higher temperature ranges (from about 290° C. to about 340° C.), NO conversion of the sulfated SPGM catalyst is substantially similar to the non-sulfated SPGM catalyst. This level of NO oxidation LO indicates the SPGM catalyst possesses a significant sulfur resistance at higher temperature ranges. Finally, significant sulfur resistance of the SPGM catalyst is confirmed by the stable NO conversion after sulfation poisoning with about 2.6 gS/L or about 5.2 gS/L.

[0058] The test results of FIGS. 3 and 4 confirm that the disclosed SPGM catalyst systems possess significant catalyst performance efficiency and sulfur resistance.

[0059] Sulfur Resistance of SPGM Catalyst

[0060] FIG. 5 is a graphical representation illustrating results of NO, CO and THC conversion stability for SPGM catalyst samples tested according to the DOC test methodology described in FIG. 2, according to an embodiment.

[0061] In FIG. 5, three specific conversion curves are detailed as follows: conversion curve 502, conversion curve 504, and conversion curve 506 illustrates % CO conversion, % THC conversion, and % NO conversion at about 340° C., respectively, for the entire protocol of the DOC test methodology as described in FIG. 2. Dotted lines 508 and 510, illustrate the total sulfur concentrations passing through the SPGM catalyst system at different times during the sulfation process of the disclosed SPGM catalyst samples. Line 508 illustrates where sulfur concentration is about 2.6 gS/L, and line 510 illustrates where sulfur concentration is about 5.2 gS/L.

[0062] In FIG. 5, it can be observed that at about 340° C. the disclosed SPGM catalyst systems exhibit high percentage of conversion and stable conversion levels of CO and THC. These levels of about 100.0% CO conversion and about 88.0% THC conversion are highly desirable catalytic properties for a SPGM system operating in DOC applications.

[0063] In FIG. 5, it can also be observed from the analysis of conversion curve 506 that during long-term sulfation poisoning of the SPGM catalyst samples at the plurality of sulfur concentrations NO conversion is reduced from about 64.0% to about 57.0% after sulfation poisoning of about 2.6 gS/L for an initial approximate six hour period. Further, analysis of conversion curve 506 indicates that during long-term sulfation poisoning of the SPGM catalyst samples NO conversion is reduced from about 57.0% to about 49.0% after sulfation poisoning of about 5.2 gS/L for an additional approximate six hour period. These results confirm that the disclosed SPGM catalyst systems can provide a significant sulfur-resistant property desirable for DOC applications, at the sulfation of about 2.6 gS/L or about 5.2 S/L.

[0064] The results achieved during testing of the SPGM catalyst samples in the present disclosure confirm that SPGM catalyst systems produced to include a layer of low amount of PGM catalyst material added to a layer of ZPGM catalyst material are capable of providing significant improvements in sulfur resistance. As observed in FIG. 5, the THC and CO conversions of the disclosed SPGM catalysts are significantly stable after long-term sulfation exposure and exhibit a high level of acceptance of NO conversion stability.

[0065] The diesel oxidation properties of the disclosed 2-layer SPGM catalyst systems indicate that under lean conditions the chemical composition is more efficient as compared to conventional DOC systems.

[0066] While various aspects and embodiments have been disclosed, other aspects and embodiments can be contemplated. The various aspects and embodiments disclosed here are for purposes of illustration and are not intended to be limiting, with the true scope and spirit being indicated by the following claims.