Search Results

This paper determines the impact of ambient temperature on energy consumption of a variety of vehicles in the laboratory. Several conventional vehicles, several hybrid electric vehicles, a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle and a battery electric vehicle were tested for fuel and energy consumption under test cell conditions of 20°F, 72°F and 95°F with 850 W/m₂ of emulated radiant solar energy on the UDDS, HWFET and US06 drive cycles. At 20°F, the energy consumption increase compared to 72°F ranges from 2% to 100%. The largest increases in energy consumption occur during a cold start, when the powertrain losses are highest, but once the powertrains reach their operating temperatures, the energy consumption increases are decreased. At 95°F, the energy consumption increase ranges from 2% to 70%, and these increases are due to the extra energy required to run the air-conditioning system to maintain 72°F cabin temperatures.

The recovery of braking energy through regenerative braking is a key enabler for the improved efficiency of Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Plug-in Hybrid Electric, and Battery Electric Vehicles (HEV, PHEV, BEV). However, this energy is often treated in a simplified fashion, frequently using an overall regeneration efficiency term, ξrg [1], which is then applied to the total available braking energy of a given drive-cycle. In addition to the ability to recapture braking energy typically lost during vehicle deceleration, hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles also allow for reduced or zero engine fueling during vehicle decelerations. While regenerative braking is often discussed as an enabler for improved fuel economy, reduced fueling is also an important component of a hybrid vehicle's ability to improve overall fuel economy.

Research in plug in vehicles (PHEV and BEV) has of course been ongoing for decades, however now that these vehicles are finally being produced for a mass market an intense focus over the last few years has been given to proper evaluation techniques and standard information to effectively convey efficiency information to potential consumers. The first challenge is the development of suitable test procedures. Thanks to many contributions from SAE members, these test procedures have been developed for PHEVs (SAE J1711 now available) and are under development for BEVs (SAE J1634 available later this year). A bigger challenge, however, is taking the outputs of these test results and dealing with the issue of off-board electrical energy consumption in the context of decades-long consumer understanding of MPG as the chief figure of merit for vehicle efficiency.

As one of the U.S Department of Energy's (DOE's) vehicle systems benchmarking partners, Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) has tested many plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) conversions and purpose-built prototype vehicles. The procedures for testing follow draft SAE J1711 and California Air Resources Board (CARB) test concepts and calculation methods. This paper explains the testing procedures and calculates important parameters. It describes some parameters, such as cycle charge-depleting range, actual charge-depleting range, electric range fraction, equivalent all-electric range, and utility factor-weighted fuel economy.

SunDiesel fuel is a biomass-to-liquid (BTL) fuel that may have certain attributes different from conventional diesel. In this investigation, 100% SunDiesel was tested both in a Mercedes A-Class (MY1999) diesel vehicle and a single-cylinder heavy-duty compression-ignition direct-injection engine. The SunDiesel's emissions and fuel consumption were significantly better than conventional diesel fuel, especially in nitrogen oxides (NOx) reduction. In the vehicle U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Test Procedure 75 (FTP-75), and New European Drive Cycle (NEDC) tests, the carbon dioxide emissions on a mile basis (g/mile) from SunDiesel fuel were almost 10% lower than the conventional diesel fuel. Similarly, in the single-cylinder engine steady-state tests, the reductions in brake specific NOx, carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM) are equally significant. Combustion analysis, though not conclusive, indicates that there are differences deserving further research.

As vehicle technology progresses to new levels of sophistication, so too, vehicle test methods must evolve. This is true for analytical testing in a laboratory and for on-road vehicle testing. Every year since 1993, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) sponsors have organized a series of competitions featuring advanced hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) technology to develop and promote DOE goals in fuel savings and alternative fuel usage. The competition has evolved over many years and has included many alternative fuels feeding the prime mover (including hydrogen fuel cells). EcoCAR turned its focus to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and it was quickly realized that to keep using on-road testing methods to evaluate fuel and electricity consumption, a new method needed to be developed that would properly weight depleting operation with the sustaining operation, using the established Utility Factor (UF) method.

To restrain the environmental and energy problems caused by oil consumption and improve fuel economy of heavy-duty commercial vehicles, China started developing relevant standards from 2008. This paper introduces the background and development of China's national standard “Fuel consumption test methods for heavy-duty commercial vehicles”, and mainly describes the test method schemes, driving cycle and weighting factors for calculating average fuel consumption of various vehicle categories. The standard applies to heavy-duty vehicles with the maximum design gross mass greater than 3500 kg, including semi-trailer tractors, common trucks, dump trucks, city buses and common buses. The standard adopts the C-WTVC driving cycle which is adjusted on the basis of the World Transient Vehicle Cycle[1, 2] and specifies weighting factors of urban, rural and motorway segments for different vehicle categories.

Response Surface Methodology (RSM) techniques are applied to develop brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) maps of a test vehicle over standard drive cycles under various ambient conditions. This technique allows for modeling and predicting fuel consumption of an engine as a function of engine operating conditions. Results will be shown from Federal Test Procedure engine starts of 20°C, and colder conditions of -7°C. Fueling rates under a broad range of engine temperatures are presented. Analysis comparing oil and engine coolant as an input factor of the model is conducted. Analysis comparing the model to experimental datasets, as well as some details into the modeling development, will be presented. Although the methodology was applied to data collected from a vehicle, the same technique could be applied to engines run on dynamometers.

Their high fuel economy is making light-duty vehicles with spark-ignition direct-injection (SIDI) engines attractive. However, the implications for exhaust emissions and the effects of fuel quality on emissions are not clear for this type of engine. A Mitsubishi Legnum with a 1.8-L GDI™ engine was tested on federal test procedure (FTP) and highway fuel economy cycles. The results were compared with those for a production Dodge Neon vehicle with a 2.0-L port fuel-injection (PFI) engine. The Mitsubishi was tested with Indolene, Amoco Premium Ultimate, and a low-sulfur gasoline. The Neon was tested only with Indolene. Both engine-out and tailpipe emissions were measured. Second-by-second emissions and hydrocarbon speciation were also evaluated. The SIDI engine provided up to 24% better fuel economy than the PFI engine on the highway cycle. Tailpipe emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) from the SIDI vehicle using low-sulfur fuel were 40% less than those when using Indolene.

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) have demonstrated the potential to provide significant reduction in fuel use across a wide range of dynamometer test driving cycles. Companies and research organizations are involved in numerous research activities related to PHEVs. One of the current unknowns is the impact of driving behavior and standard test procedure on the true benefits of PHEVs from a worldwide perspective. To address this issue, five different PHEV powertrain configurations (input split, parallel, series, series-output split and series-parallel), implemented on vehicles with different all-electric ranges (AERs), were analyzed on three different standard cycles (i.e., Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule, Highway Fuel Economy Test, and New European Driving Cycle). Component sizes, manufacturing cost, and fuel consumption were analyzed for a midsize car in model year 2020 through the use of vehicle system simulations.

Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) owners have reported significantly lower fuel economy than the published estimates. Under on-road driving conditions, vehicle acceleration, speed, and stop time differ from those on the normalized test procedures. To explain the sensitivity, several vehicles, both conventional and hybrid electric, were tested at Argonne National Laboratory. The tests demonstrated that the fuel economy of Prius MY04 was more sensitive to drive-cycle variations. However, because of the difficulty in instrumenting every component, an in-depth analysis and quantification of the reasons behind the higher sensitivity was not possible. In this paper, we will use validated models of the tested vehicles and reproduce the trends observed during testing. Using PSAT, the FreedomCAR vehicle simulation tool, we will quantify the impact of the main component parameters, including component efficiency and regenerative braking.

Vehicle emissions and fuel economy testing applications rely on accurate sensors to track power flow and measure component efficiencies. A non-intrusive in-vehicle torque sensor has been implemented in a hybrid powertrain to directly measure engine torque. Previously used off-the-shelf torque sensors required additional mechanical space, and so chassis modifications were needed to accommodate the sensor, which potentially limited the vehicle to only dynamometer testing. The challenges in implementing this type of sensor in automotive environments are described in detail, as are sensor capabilities and test results.

Procedures are in place for testing emissions and fuel economy for virtually every type of light-duty vehicle with a single-axle chassis dynamometer, which is why nearly all emissions test facilities use single-axle dynamometers. However, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) employ regenerative braking. Thus, the braking split between the driven and non-driven axles may interact with the calculation of overall efficiency of the vehicle. This paper investigates the regenerative braking systems of a few production HEVs and provides an analysis of their differences in single-axle (2WD) and double-axle (4WD) dynamometer drive modes. The fuel economy results from 2WD and 4WD operation are shown for varied cycles for the 2000 Honda Insight, 2001 Toyota Prius, and the 2004 Toyota Prius. The paper shows that there is no evidence that a bias in testing an HEV exists because of the difference in operating the same hybrid vehicle in the 2WD and 4WD modes.

Reductions in vehicle drive losses are as important to improving fuel economy as increases in powertrain efficiencies. In order to measure vehicle fuel economy, chassis dynamometer testing relies on accurate road load determinations. Road load is currently determined (with some exceptions) using established test track coastdown testing procedures. Because new vehicle technologies and usage cases challenge the accuracy and applicability of these procedures, on-road experiments were conducted using axle torque sensors to address the suitability of the test procedures in determining vehicle road loads in specific cases. Whereas coastdown testing can use vehicle deceleration to determine load, steady-state testing can offer advantages in validating road load coefficients for vehicles with no mechanical neutral gear (such as plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles).

Many problems are associated with applying standardized vehicle test methods, such as the Federal Test Procedure (FTP), to hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). Since 1992, the Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE's) HEV Test Procedure Task Force has been working on developing a standard procedure for HEV testing (Draft SAE J1711). Because the current draft requires considerable knowledge of the vehicle's response to the test cycles, still has unresolved problems, and is too lengthy, Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) uses portions of past J1711 drafts in combination with concepts developed through many HEV tests (over 50 to date) for its HEV competition testing. Successful vehicle characterization was achieved at the 1997 FutureCar Challenge competition by characterizing each vehicle's individual operational modes in such a way that the elements of the FTP and Federal Highway Test were satisfied.

The strong correlation between vehicle weight and fuel economy for conventional vehicles (CVs) is considered common knowledge, and the relationship of mass reduction to fuel consumption reduction for conventional vehicles (CVs) is often cited without separating effects of powertrain vs. vehicle body (glider), nor on the ground of equivalent vehicle performance level. This paper challenges the assumption that this relationship is easily summarized. Further, for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) the relationship between mass, performance and fuel consumption is not the same as for CVs, and vary with hybrid types. For fully functioning (all wheel regeneration) hybrid vehicles, where battery pack and motor(s) have enough power and energy storage, a very large fraction of kinetic energy is recovered and engine idling is effectively eliminated.

Many leading companies in the automotive industry have been putting tremendous amount of efforts into developing new designs and technologies to make their products more energy efficient. It is straightforward to evaluate the fuel economy benefit of an individual technology in specific systems and components. However, when multiple technologies are combined and integrated into a whole vehicle, estimating the impact without building and testing an actual vehicle becomes very complex, because the efficiency gains from individual components do not simply add up. In an early concept phase, a projection of fuel efficiency benefits from new technologies will be extremely useful; but in many cases, the outlook has to rely on engineer’s insight since it is impractical to run tests for all possible technology combinations.

Hybrid electric vehicles have demonstrated their ability to significantly reduce fuel consumption for several medium- and heavy-duty applications. In this paper we analyze the impact on fuel economy of the hybridization of a tractor-trailer. The study is done in PSAT (Powertrain System Analysis Toolkit), which is a modeling and simulation toolkit for light- and heavy-duty vehicles developed by Argonne National Laboratory. Two hybrid configurations are taken into account, each one of them associated with a level of hybridization. The mild-hybrid truck is based on a parallel configuration with the electric machine in a starter-alternator position; this allows start/stop engine operations, a mild level of torque assist, and a limited amount of regenerative braking. The full-hybrid truck is based on a series-parallel configuration with two electric machines: one in a starter-alternator position and another one between the clutch and the gearbox.

This study involves the battery requirements for a fuel cell-powered hybrid electric vehicle. The performances of the vehicle [a 3200-lb (1455-kg) sedan], the fuel cell, and the battery were evaluated in a vehicle simulation. Most of the attention was given to the design and performance of the battery, a lithium-ion, manganese spinel-graphite system of 75-kW power to be used with a 50-kW fuel cell. The total power performance of the system was excellent at the full operating temperatures of the fuel cell and battery. The battery cycling duty is very moderate, as regenerative braking for the Federal Urban Driving Schedule and the Highway Fuel Economy Test cycles can do all charging of the battery. Cold start-up at 20°C is straightforward, with full power available immediately.

As emerging automated vehicle technology is making advances in safety and reliability, engineers are also exploring improvements in energy efficiency with this new paradigm. Powertrain efficiency receives due attention, but also impactful is finding ways to reduce driving losses in coordinated-driving scenarios. Efforts focused on simulation to quantify road load improvements require a sufficient amount of background validation work to support them. This study uses a practical approach to directly quantify road load changes by testing the coordinated driving of two vehicles on a test track at various speeds (64, 88, 113 km/h) and vehicle time gaps (0.3 to 1.3 s). Axle torque sensors were used to directly measure the load required to maintain steady-state speeds while following a lead vehicle at various gap distances.