1. The Future of NOx Emission Reduction
By: Jordan Baker, Melissa Martin, Blane Scanlan, Takugo Amy

2. Introduction
There is a growing need for more efficient and less pollutive means of transferring freight:
Stronger and stronger EPA guidelines
Growing understanding of the effects on the environment by pollution
Health costs associated with airborne pollutants
Increasing costs associated with fuel

3. Mission Statement
To find an economically feasible method of reducing N0x emissions for the primary reason of meeting EPA tier 4 requirements and maintaining or surpassing current freight capacity.
With a focus on a positive financial return within a ten year period

4. Decision Matrix
-Identified customers as being citizens of a specific city
-Point Distribution: (Little importance) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, (Most Important)
1) Emissions/Regulatory requirements 5
2) Costs: fuel, infrastructure, etc. 3
3) Freight throughput/capacity 2
4) Public opinion
5) On-time delivery

5. Original Ideas Scale: (bad) 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (good)
Concept
Emissions(x5)
Costs (x3)
Throughput (x2)
Public (x4)
On time (x1)
Total
Decreasing Thickness 6 10 12 5 33
Hybrid Engine 25 52
Steam Model 15 9 2 3 41
Regenerative Braking 16 71
Aftertreatment 20 66
Barges 1 60
Decision: In order to be implemented the concept needed to be a minimum of 60 points.

6. Objective
Reduce smog (Nox) emissions from locomotive engines entering a specific city
Emission levels must be lowered in order to meet both the needs of the people in that specific city and to comply with the 2015 EPA Tier 4 locomotive regulations
While abiding by EPA regulations a ten year financial return must be visible

7. EPA Tier 4 regulations
Locomotive NOx must reduced from 5.5 (g/hp-hr) to 1.3 (g/hp-hr)
Particulate Matter must go from 0.2 (g/hp-hr) to 0.03 (g/hp-hr)

8. Case Study: Pittsburgh, PA
We chose Pittsburgh because of its history with the railroad industry. It produced many of the railways that exist today, and as a result  its railways extend in almost every direction making railroad transportation of materials and people an efficient and profitable industry.

9. Case Study: Pittsburgh, PA
2nd largest inland port in America
21st largest port in America
Largest steel industrial city in America
Roughly 34 million tons of cargo processed per year

10. Case Study: The SD70M-2 SD70M-2SD70M-2SD70M-2SD70M-2
EPA tier 2 compliant and certified
Once was commonly used in Pittsburgh before tier 3 compliance was mandatory
Features an EMD 710 engine (model G3C-T2)SD70M-2
V-16 engine
horsepower engine (3.2 MW)
86,850lbs of breaking effort

11. Systems Diagram (Train)
Diesel fuel DC
Systems Diagram (Train)

12. Concept: Regenerative braking
As a train comes to a halt regenerative braking will cause the electric motors to act as electric generators, giving the train energy that can be stored for later usage
Kinetic energy from the trains initial movement is then converted into electrical energy

13. Prototype 1: Regenerative Braking
Regenerative braking relies entirely on Faraday’s and Lenz’s Law
Faraday’s Law states that “Any change in the magnetic flux through a coil of wire will cause a voltage (emf) to be induced in the coil.”
Through this principle we can determine that if we move a coiled wire through a changing magnetic field it will generate an electrical current. The energy of this current can be harnessed to do work, and as a result, make each gallon of diesel burned yield a greater output.

14. Engine and Motor

15. Regenerative Braking
Our design will replace the DC motors currently used with AC traction motors and add rectifiers and inverters to the train’s electrical system.
The stopping force of the locomotive will translate into a change in the magnetic flux of the coiled wire present in the electromagnetic motor. The presence of a changing magnetic field within the motor will lead to an induced current in the coiled wire which will then travel to the battery.
Once it reaches the battery, the energy will be stored for later use.
One can expect a 10% reduction if fuel consumption.
Costs: $72,000 per locomotive, $2,520,000 for the entire fleet

16. Regenerative Braking and Fuel Consumption
E=energy recovered= 4,763, Joules + 32,439,045.09x Joules
u=energy density of diesel= 48,000,000 Joules per Kilogram
m=mass of diesel saved= .10 Kg Diesel + .68x Kg Diesel
Density of Diesel = .832 Kilograms per liter
1 liter= .264 gallons
Gallons of Diesel saved (perfect efficiency)= ( x) gallons
Efficiency of regen breaks (freight) = 10%
Gallons saved (reality)= ( x) gallons
KE= (½)mv2
m=mass of locomotive and x number of cargo filled mineral cars = (42,000 lbs tons) = Kg x Kg
v=velocity of locomotive=50 miles per hour= Kilometers per hour = meters per hour=
22.36 meters per second
1 ton=2000 lbs
1kg=2.204 lbs
1mile= 1.61 km
KE= 4,763, Joules + 32,439,045.09x Joules

17. Prototype 2: Barges
Pittsburgh is the second largest inland port in the United States
Some cargo doesn’t need to be transported as quickly as others
Minerals can be transported slower than things like mail packages.
Barges are cheaper and more environmentally friendly than locomotives.
Transporting 1 ton of Cargo, on average:
Barges: 514 miles to the gallon, release lbs/(ton-mile) of NOx
Locomotives: 470 miles to the gallon, release lbs/(ton-mile) of NOx

18. Systems Diagram (Boats)

19. Savings Calculations
Traveling 500 miles, carrying all of pittsburgh's mineral needs in a day, a barge would lower fuel use and NOx emissions by:
Fuel: gallons/ton: Thus gallons saved a gallon = $ saved per day, $498,593 a year.
NOx: 6.5 pounds/ton: 390,000lbs NOx saved a day.

20. Prototype 3 AfterTreatment
Cummins aftertreatment
Cummins Particulate Filter – uses wall-flow substrates to capture exhaust gas and remove PM or soot particles
Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) Dosing Valve – allows a fine mist of Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) to be sprayed into the hot exhaust stream
Decomposition Reactor – converts DEF to ammonia through hydrolysis
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Catalyst – Significantly reduces NOx to near-zero levels by converting it into harmless nitrogen gas and water vapor (90-100%of total NOx )
Single High Capacity Electronic Control Module (ECM) – a single ECM manages the engine and aftertreatment system for optimum performance and fuel economy

21. Prototype 3 (aftertreatment models)

22. Conclusion: (Final Prototype)

24. Final Costs:
Sell 15 mineral locomotives (3 trains): $1.5 million each = $22.5 million
Cost of aftertreatment unit: $100,000 x 35 locomotives = $3.5 million
Cost of DEF: $75, per year
Cost of Construction per barge: $225,000 x (40 barges)= $9 million
Cost of Implementing regenerative braking = $2,520,000
Savings to using barges = $498,593 per year
Savings due to regenerative braking = 10% reduction in fuel use = $5,824,468.08
Total (initial): [($22,500,000) - ($3,500,000 + $9,000,000 + $2,520,000)] = $7,480,000
Total over 10 years: [$7,480,000 - ($75, * 10) + ($498,593 * 10) + ($5,824,468 * 10)] = $69,952,264.3

25. So did our locomotives meet Tier 4?
Yes we did!
NOx went from 5.5 g/hp-hr to g/hp-hr (Tier 4 requires 1.3 g/hp-hr)
Particulate Matter went from 0.2 g/hp-hr to g/hp-hr (Tier 4 requires g/hp-hr)

26. Conclusion Tier 4 guidelines met and exceeded
Amount of freight capacity did not change
Minerals will travel slower, but in the end will still meet demand
15 Mineral Locomotives cut
40 barges implemented
Initial profit of $9.748 Million
Returns (over 10 years) are over $70 Million

27. Works Cited

28. QUESTIONS???