Search Results

The particulate emissions of two brake systems were characterized in a dilution tunnel optimized for PM10 measurements. The larger of them employed a fixed caliper (FXC) and the smaller one a floating caliper (FLC). Both used ECE brake pads of the same lining formulation. Measured properties included gravimetric PM2.5 and PM10, Particle Number (PN) concentrations of both untreated and thermally treated (according to exhaust PN regulation) particles using Condensation Particle Counters (CPCs) having 23 and 10 nm cut-off sizes, and an Optical Particle Sizer (OPS). The brakes were tested over a section (trip-10) novel test cycle developed from the database of the Worldwide harmonized Light-Duty vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP). A series of trip-10 tests were performed starting from unconditioned pads, to characterize the evolution of emissions until their stabilization. Selected tests were also performed over a short version of the Los Angeles City Cycle.

The measurement of the particle number (PN) concentration of non-volatile particles ≻23 nm was introduced in the light-duty vehicles regulation; the heavy-duty regulation followed. Based on the findings of the Particle Measurement Program (PMP), heavy-duty inter-laboratory exercise, the PN concentration measurement can be conducted either from the full dilution tunnel with constant volume sampling (CVS) or from the partial flow dilution system (PFDS). However, there are no other studies that investigate whether the PN results from the two systems are equivalent. In addition, even the PMP study never investigated the uncertainty that is introduced at the final result from the extraction of a flow by a PN system from the PFDS. In this work we investigate the uncertainty for the three possible cases, i.e., considering a constant extracted flow from the PFDS, sending a signal with 1 Hz frequency to the PFDS, or feeding back the extracted flow to the PFDS.

In the next 20 years the share of small electric vehicles (SEVs) will increase especially in urban areas. SEVs show distinctive design differences compared to traditional vehicles. Thus the consequences of impacts of SEVs with vulnerable road users (VRUs) and other vehicles will be different from traditional collisions. No assessment concerning vehicle safety is defined for vehicles within European L7e category currently. Focus of the elaborated methodology is to define appropriate test scenarios for this vehicle category to be used within a virtual tool chain. A virtual tool chain has to be defined for the realization of a guideline of virtual certification. The derivation and development of new test conditions for SEVs are described and are the main focus of this work. As key methodology a prospective methodical analysis under consideration of future aspects like pre-crash safety systems is applied.

As a result of the ever-increasing application of cyber-physical components in the automotive industry, cybersecurity has become an urgent topic. Adapting technologies and communication protocols like Ethernet and WiFi in connected vehicles yields many attack scenarios. Consequently, ISO/SAE 21434 and UN R155 (2021) define a standard and regulatory framework for automotive cybersecurity, Both documents follow a risk management-based approach and require a threat modeling methodology for risk analysis and identification. Such a threat modeling methodology must conform to the Threat Analysis and Risk Assessment (TARA) framework of ISO/SAE 21434. Conversely, existing threat modeling methods enumerate isolated threats disregarding the vehicle’s design and connections. Consequently, they neglect the role of attack paths from a vehicle’s interfaces to its assets.

Real world operating scenarios have a major influence on emissions and fuel consumption. To reduce climate-relevant and environmentally harmful gaseous emissions and the exploitation of fossil resources, deep understanding concerning the real drive behavior of mobile sources is needed because emissions and fuel consumption of e.g. passenger cars, operated in real world conditions, considerably differ from the officially published values which are valid for specific test cycles only [1]. Due to legislative regulations by the European Commission a methodology to measure real drive emissions RDE is well approved for heavy duty vehicles and automotive applications but may not be adapted similar to two-wheeler-applications. This is due to several issues when using the state of the art portable emission measurement system PEMS that will be discussed.