Search Results

Technology change can yield some combination of changes in fuel economy, performance, size, or other characteristics that influence the fleetwide fuel consumption. Thus, engineering progress can be manifest in multiple ways, reflected in the view that technical efficiency may improve even when fuel economy does not. This analysis quantifies underlying technical efficiency gains that reflect trade-offs between fuel economy and other attributes of light vehicles. Prior analyses yielded estimates of technical efficiency trends ranging from 1% per year to nearly 4% per year. Few analyses revealed consistent trends; most identify periods when progress was made at different rates. Using fleetwide (aggregate) data for U.S. light vehicles, exploratory data analysis and correlation techniques were applied to examine trends in energy-related variables. Individual trends for all variables are uneven over time.

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 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.

This paper assesses the technical potential, costs and benefits of improving the fuel economy of light-duty trucks over the next five to ten years in the United States using conventional technologies. We offer an in-depth analysis of several technology packages based on a detailed vehicle system modeling approach. Results are provided for fuel economy, cost, oil savings and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. We examine a range of refinements to body, powertrain and electrical systems, reflecting current best practice and emerging technologies such as lightweight materials, high-efficiency IC engines, integrated starter-generator, 42 volt electrical system and advanced transmission. In this paper, multiple technological pathways are identified to significantly improve fleet average light-duty-truck fuel economy to 27.0 MPG or higher with net savings to consumers.

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.