Search Results

Quantifying Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) emissions and fuel consumption is a difficult problem for a number of different reasons: 1) HEVs can be configured in significantly different ways (e.g., series or parallel); 2) the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) can consist of a wide variety of engines, fuel types, and sizes; and 3) the APU can be operated very differently depending on the energy management system strategy and the type of driving that is performed (e.g., city vs. highway driving). With the future increase of HEV penetration in the vehicle fleet, there is an important need for government agencies and manufacturers to determine HEV emissions and fuel consumption. In this paper, several critical issues associated with HEV emissions and fuel consumption are identified and analyzed, using a sophisticated set of HEV and emission simulation modeling tools.

This paper analyzes fuel economy benefits of direct hydrogen and gasoline reformer fuel cell vehicles, with special focus on cold-start impacts on these fuel cell based vehicles. Comparing several existing influential studies reveals that the most probable estimates from these studies differ greatly on the implied benefits of both types of fuel cell vehicles at the tank-to-wheel level (vehicle-powertrain efficiency and/or specific power), leading to great uncertainties in estimating well-to-wheel fuel energy and/or greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction potentials. This paper first addresses methodological issues to influence the outcome of these analyses. With one exception, we find that these studies consistently ignore cold-start and warm-up issues, which play important roles in determining both energy penalties and start-up time of fuel cell vehicles. To better understand cold-start and warm-up behavior, this paper examines approaches and results based on two available U.S.

This paper describes the integration of a Modal Energy and Emissions Model (MEEM) into a hybrid-electric vehicle simulation model, the PNGV System Analytic Toolkits (PSAT). PSAT is a forward-looking computer simulation model for advanced-technology vehicles. MEEM is a vehicle fuel-consumption and emissions model developed by one of the authors for internal-combustion-engine (ICE) -powered vehicles. MEEM engine simulation module uses a power-demand physical model based on a parameterized analytical representation of engine fuel and emissions production. One major advantage of MEEM is that it does not rely on steady-state engine maps, which are usually not available for most production vehicles; rather, it depends on a list of engine parameters that are calibrated based on regular vehicle dynamometer testing. The integrated PSAT-MEEM model can be used effectively to predict fuel consumption and emissions of various ICE-powered vehicles with both conventional and hybrid power trains.

This paper assesses the potential for car and light truck fuel economy improvements by 2010-15. We examine a range of refinements to body systems and powertrain, reflecting current best practice as well as emerging technologies such as advanced engine and transmission, lightweight materials, integrated starter-generators, and hybrid drive. Engine options are restricted to those already known to meet upcoming California emissions standards. Our approach is to apply a state-of-art vehicle system simulation model to assess vehicle fuel economy gains and performance levels. We select a set of baseline vehicles representing five major classes - Small and Standard Cars, Pickup Trucks, SUVs and Minivans - and analyze design changes likely to be commercially viable within the coming decade. Results vary by vehicle type.

Fuel consumption per revolution is approximately a linear function of work output per revolution, for power levels less than about two-thirds of the power at wide-open throttle. Thus where N is engine speed, Pf is fuel energy rate (kW), and Pb is power output (kW). The approximation is relatively good for engine speeds typical of regulatory driving cycles. The parameters α and b are studied using engine measurements conducted in the late 1970s. The parameter values are rather uniform, with averages α = 0.29V, where a is in kJ/rev and V is displacement in liters, and b = 2.45 (dimonsionless). Engine maps for more modern engines show, that the parameter a has declined. Several applications are discussed: especially simulation of vehicle fuel use, and creation of a figure of merit for fuel use by engines.

In this paper, an analytical model is developed to estimate the impact of reducing engine assembly mass (the term engine assembly refers to the moving components of the engine system, including crankshafts, valve train, pistons, and connecting rods) on engine friction and vehicle fuel economy. The relative changes in frictional mean effective pressure and fuel economy are proportional to the relative change in assembly mass. These changes increase rapidly as engine speed increases. Based on the model, a 25% reduction in engine assembly mass results in a 2% fuel economy improvement for a typical mid-size passenger car over the EPA Urban and Highway Driving Cycles.

The effects of hybridization on heavy-duty vehicles are not well understood. Heavy vehicles represent a broader range of applications than light-duty vehicles, resulting in a wide variety of chassis and engine combinations, as well as diverse driving conditions. Thus, the strategies, incremental costs, and energy/emission benefits associated with hybridizing heavy vehicles could differ significantly from those for passenger cars. Using a modal energy and emissions model, we quantify the potential energy savings of hybridizing commercial Class 3-7 heavy vehicles, analyze hybrid configuration scenarios, and estimate the associated investment cost and payback time.

Recent advances in fuel-cell technology and low-emission, direct-injection spark-ignition and diesel engines for vehicles could significantly change the transportation vehicle power plant landscape in the next decade or so. This paper is a scoping study that compares total fuel cycle options for providing power to personal transport vehicles. The key question asked is, “How much of the energy from the fuel feedstock is available for motive power?” Emissions of selected criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases are qualitatively discussed. This analysis illustrates the differences among options; it is not intended to be exhaustive. Cases considered are hydrogen fuel from methane and from iso-octane in generic proton-exchange membrane (PEM) fuel-cell vehicles, methane and iso-octane in spark-ignition (SI) engine vehicles, and diesel fuel (from methane or petroleum) in direct-injection (DI) diesel engine vehicles.