Search Results

As part of the midterm evaluation of the 2022-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Standards, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed simulation models for studying the effectiveness of 48V mild hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) technology for reducing CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles. Simulation and modeling of this technology requires a suitable model of the battery. This article presents the development and validation of a 48V lithium-ion battery model that will be integrated into EPA’s Advanced Light-Duty Powertrain and Hybrid Analysis (ALPHA) vehicle simulation model and that can also be used within Gamma Technologies, LLC (Westmont, IL) GT-DRIVE™ vehicle simulations. The battery model is a standard equivalent circuit model with the two-time constant resistance-capacitance (RC) blocks.

As part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) continuing assessment of advanced light-duty (LD) automotive technologies to support the setting of appropriate national greenhouse gas (GHG) standards and to evaluate the impact of new technologies on in-use emissions, a 2016 Honda Civic with a 4-cylinder 1.5-liter L15B7 turbocharged engine and continuously variable transmission (CVT) was benchmarked. The test method involved installing the engine and its CVT in an engine-dynamometer test cell with the engine wiring harness tethered to its vehicle parked outside the test cell. Engine and transmission torque, fuel flow, key engine temperatures and pressures, and onboard diagnostics (OBD)/Controller Area Network (CAN) bus data were recorded.

The Advanced Light-Duty Powertrain and Hybrid Analysis tool (ALPHA) was created by EPA to evaluate the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions of Light-Duty (LD) vehicles. ALPHA is a physics-based, forward-looking, full vehicle computer simulator capable of analyzing various vehicle types combined with different powertrain technologies. The ALPHA desktop application was developed using MATLAB/Simulink. The ALPHA tool was used to evaluate technology effectiveness and off-cycle technologies such as air-conditioning, electrical load reduction technology and road load reduction technologies of conventional, non-hybrid vehicles for the Midterm Evaluation of the 2017-2025 LD GHG rule by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ).

In 2015 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a new steady-state engine dynamometer test procedure by which heavy-duty engine manufacturers would be required to create engine fuel rate versus engine speed and torque “maps”.[1] These maps would then be used within the agencies' Greenhouse Gas Emission Model (GEM)[2] for full vehicle certification to the agencies' proposed heavy-duty fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards. This paper presents an alternative to the agencies' proposal, where an engine is tested over the same duty cycles simulated in GEM. This paper explains how a range of vehicle configurations could be specified for GEM to generate engine duty cycles that would then be used for engine testing.

In designing a regulatory vehicle simulation program for determining greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and fuel consumption, it is necessary to estimate the performance of technologies, verify compliance with the regulatory standards, and estimate the overall benefits of the program. The agencies (EPA/NHTSA) developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model (GEM) to serve these purposes. GEM is currently being used to certify the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions of the Phase 1 rulemaking for all heavy-duty vehicles in the United States except pickups and vans, which require a chassis dynamometer test for certification. While the version of the GEM used in Phase 1 contains most of the technical and mathematical features needed to run a vehicle simulation, the model lacks sophistication. For example, Phase 1 GEM only models manual transmissions and it does not include engine torque interruption during gear shifting.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to estimate the per-vehicle cost of employing selected advanced efficiency-improving technologies in light-duty motor vehicles. The development of transparent, reliable cost analyses that are accessible to all interested stakeholders has played a crucial role in establishing feasible and cost effective standards to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The FEV team, together with engineering staff from EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, and FEV's subcontractor, Munro & Associates, developed a robust costing methodology based on tearing down, to the piece part level, relevant systems, sub-systems, and assemblies from vehicles ?with and without? the technologies being evaluated.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to estimate the per-vehicle cost of employing selected advanced efficiency-improving technologies in light-duty motor vehicles. The development of transparent, reliable cost analyses that are accessible to all interested stakeholders has played a crucial role in establishing feasible and cost effective standards to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The FEV team, together with engineering staff from EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, and FEV's subcontractor, Munro & Associates, developed a robust costing methodology based on tearing down, to the piece part level, relevant systems, sub-systems, and assemblies from vehicles “with and without” the technologies being evaluated.

Beginning in 2007, heavy-duty engine manufacturers in the U.S. have been responsible for verifying the compliance on in-use vehicles with Not-to-Exceed (NTE) standards under the Heavy-Duty In-Use Testing Program (HDIUT). This in-use testing is conducted using Portable Emission Measurement Systems (PEMS) which are installed on the vehicles to measure emissions during real-world operation. A key component of the HDIUT program is the generation of measurement allowances which account for the relative accuracy of PEMS as compared to more conventional, laboratory based measurement techniques. A program to determine these measurement allowances for gaseous emissions was jointly funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and various member companies of the Engine Manufacturer's Association (EMA).

Current SAE practices for evaluating potential improvements in fuel economy on heavy-duty vehicles rely on gravimetric measurements of fuel tanks. However, the recent evolution of portable emissions measurement systems (PEMS) offers an alternative means of evaluating real-world fuel economy that may be faster and more cost effective. This paper provides a direct comparison of these two methods based on a recent EPA study conducted at Southwest Research Institute. More than 228 on-road tests were performed on two pairs of class 8 tractor-trailers according to SAE test procedure J1321 in an assessment of various chassis components designed to reduce drag losses on the vehicle. During these tests, SEMTECH-D™ portable emissions measurement systems from Sensor's, Incorporated were operating in each of the vehicles to evaluate emissions and to provide a redundant measure of fuel economy.

Reducing aerodynamic drag and tire rolling resistance in trucks using cooled EGR engines meeting EPA 2004 emissions standards has been observed to result in increases in fuel economy and decreases in NOx emissions. We report here on tests conducted using vehicles equipped a non-EGR engine meeting EPA 2004 emission standards and an electronically-controlled engine meeting EPA 1998 emissions standards. The effects of trailer fairings and single-wide tires on fuel economy and NOx emissions were tested using SAE test procedure J1321. NOx emissions were measured using a portable emissions monitoring system (PEMS). Fuel consumption was estimated by a carbon balance on PEMS output and by the gravimetric method specified by test procedure J1321. Fuel consumption decreased and fuel economy increased by a maximum of about 10 percent, and NOx emissions decreased by a maximum of 20 percent relative to baseline.

We hypothesize that components designed to improve fuel economy by reducing power requirements should also result in a decrease in emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Fuel economy and NOx emissions of a pair of class 8 tractor-trailers were measured on a test track to evaluate the effects of single wide tires and trailer aerodynamic devices. Fuel economy was measured using a modified version of SAE test procedure J1321. NOx emissions were measured using a portable emissions monitoring system (PEMS). Fuel consumption was estimated by a carbon balance on PEMS output and correlated to fuel meter measurements. Tests were conducted using drive cycles simulating highway operations at 55 mph and 65 mph and suburban stop-and-go traffic. The tests showed a negative correlation (significant at p < 0.05) between fuel economy and NOx emissions. Single wide tires and trailer aerodynamic devices resulted in increased fuel economy and decreased NOx emissions relative to the baseline tests.

The potential discrepancy between the fuel economy shown on new vehicle labels and that achieved by consumers has been receiving increased attention of late. EPA has not modified its labeling procedures since 1985. It is likely possible that driving patterns in the U.S. have changed since that time. One possible modification to the labeling procedures is to incorporate the fuel economy measured over the emission certification tests not currently used in deriving the fuel economy label (i.e., the US06 high speed and aggressive driving test, the SC03 air conditioning test and the cold temperature test). This paper focuses on the US06 cycle and the possible incorporation of aggressive driving into the fuel economy label. As part of its development of the successor to the MOBILE emissions model, the Motor Vehicle Emission Modeling System (MOVES), EPA has developed a physically-based model of emissions and fuel consumption which accounts for different driving patterns.

Due to its high efficiency and superior durability the diesel engine is again becoming a prime candidate for future light-duty vehicle applications within the United States. While in Europe the overall diesel share exceeds 40%, the current diesel share in the U.S. is 1%. Despite the current situation and the very stringent Tier 2 emission standards, efforts are being made to introduce the diesel engine back into the U.S. market. In order to succeed, these vehicles have to comply with emissions standards over a 120,000 miles distance while maintaining their excellent fuel economy. The availability of technologies such as high-pressure common-rail fuel systems, low sulfur diesel fuel, NOx adsorber catalysts (NAC), and diesel particle filters (DPFs) allow the development of powertrain systems that have the potential to comply with the light-duty Tier 2 emission requirements. In support of this, the U.S.

Saturn Corporation and its suppliers are partnering with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Design for the Environment (DfE) Program and the University of Tennessee (UT) Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies (CCPCT) in a project to develop a model for life-cycle management (LCM). This paper presents key findings from the first phase of the project, a survey by Saturn of its suppliers to determine their interests and needs for a supply chain LCM project, and identifies framework strategies for successful LCM.

Three alternatives to internal combustion vehicles currently being researched, developed, and commercialized are electric, hybrid electric, and fuel-cell vehicles. A total life-cycle inventory for an alternative vehicle must include factors such as the impacts of car body materials, tires, and paints. However, these issues are shared with gasoline-powered vehicles; the most significant difference between these vehicles is the power source. This paper focuses on the most distinct and challenging aspect of alternative-fuel vehicles, the power sources. The life-cycle impacts of battery systems for electric and hybrid vehicles are assessed. Less data is publicly available on the fuel cell; however, we offer a preliminary discussion of the environmental issues unique to fuel cells. For each of these alternative vehicles, a primary environmental hurdle is the consumption of materials specific to the power sources.

Eleven experienced commercial automotive technicians were recruited and trained to repair IM240 emission failures using a specially developed 30 hour course. The training course emphasized the use of an oscilloscope and a flow chart and wave form strategy to repair vehicles. Each technicians' performance was evaluated based on the repair of three or four in-use Arizona IM240 failures. Pre-training and post-training written tests were also administered. Results from this limited study were encouraging. After the technician training, HC and CO emission levels were reduced by 69% and NOx by 58%. More importantly, most of the technicians learned some new and useful diagnostic and equipment skills which they can immediately apply to their businesses. They also became more motivated to tackle the challenge of repairing vehicles to low transient emissions, and aware of the existence and use of new sophisticated diagnostic tools such as oscilloscopes.

Six in-use vehicles were tested on a baseline gasoline and nine gasoline/ethanol blends to determine the effect of ethanol content in fuels on automotive exhaust emissions and fuel economy. The baseline gasoline was representative of average summer gasoline and served as the base from which the other fuels were blended. For the majority of the vehicles, total hydrocarbon, and carbon monoxide exhaust emissions as well as fuel economy decreased while NOx and acetaldehyde exhaust emissions increased as the ethanol content in the test fuel increased. Formaldehyde and carbon dioxide emissions were relatively unaffected by the addition of ethanol. The emission responses to the increased fuel oxygen levels were consistent with what would be expected from leaning-out the air/fuel ratio for a spark ignition engine. The results are shown graphically and a linear regression is performed utilizing the method of least squares to investigate statistically significant trends in the data.

The Schatz Heat Battery stores excess heat energy from the engine cooling system during vehicle operation. This excess energy may be returned to the coolant upon the ensuing cold start, shortening the engine warm-up period and decreasing cold start related emissions of unburned fuel and carbon monoxide (CO). A Heat Battery was evaluated on a test vehicle to determine its effect on unburned fuel emissions, CO emissions, and fuel economy over the cold start portion (Bag 1) of the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) at 24°C and -7°C ambient conditions. The Heat Battery was mounted in a vehicle fueled alternately with indolene clear (unleaded gasoline) and M85 high methanol blend fuels. Several Heat Battery/coolant flow configurations were evaluated to determine which would result in lowest cold start emissions.

The cyclic and steady-state vehicle emissions, fuel economy, performance, and cold start behavior of an automobile equipped with a direct injection methanol engine are compared with those of three other comparable vehicles. One of the comparable vehicles was powered by a gasoline-fueled engine, and the other two were Diesels. One of the Diesel-powered vehicles was naturally aspirated and the other was turbocharged. All evaluations were made using the same road load horsepower and equivalent test weight. All the evaluations were conducted at low mileage. The emissions of the methanol vehicle are compared to California low emission vehicle standards, and to the emissions of another methanol vehicle.

This paper develops and discusses the 1978-85 time trends in alternative measures of vehicle fuel economy. Nine alternative measures are presented ranging from ton-miles per gallon to menu-weighted performance adjusted miles per gallon. For each alternative measure, trends for important groups of manufacturers are presented. Ail of the trends in alternative measures are compared to the percent improvement implied by the original 1978 and 1985 passenger car average fuel economy standards (AFES).