Fuel consumption measurement in LDVs

Transcription

1 Fuel consumption measurement in LDVs WLTP 2 nd act Working Group Brussels, 20 September 2017 Disclaimer The views expressed in this presentation are those of the author and do not reflect the official European Commission s view on the subject Cosmin Codrea European Commission CLIMA C.4 Road Transport 1

2 In a nutshell the discussion so far... The "gap" between TA and average real-world CO 2 has increased significantly under NEDC -> many undermining effects The WLTP will be more realistic, but... Concerns raised about the reliability and representativeness of laboratory test procedures over time Systematic and robust reality-check needed for WLTP EC and MS are called to establish a monitoring mechanism using on-board sensors - e.g. EMIS Recommendations

3 The response of the Commission WLTP being introduced gradually as of September 2017 Standardising on-board fuel consumption measurement devices proposed under WLTP 2 nd act Requirements for accessibility and accuracy for all LDV types as of 2020 and all vehicles as of 2021 Using existing TA and CoP tests no additional burden Need as enabling technology to esablish a monitoring framework (subsequent step)

4 Accessibility requirements Generic unrestricted OBD access: ISO (SAE J1979) For M1 and N1 vehicles that are run on mineral diesel, biodiesel, petrol and ethanol: (a) Total fuel consumed (lifetime) (b) Total distance traveled (lifetime) (c) Engine fuel rate (instantaneous) (d) Vehicle fuel rate (instantaneous) For M1 or N1 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles: (a) Total fuel consumed (lifetime) (b) Total fuel consumed in charge depleting operation (lifetime) (c) Total fuel consumed in driver-selectable charge increasing operation (lifetime) (d) Total distance traveled (lifetime) (e) Total distance traveled in charge depleting operation with engine off (lifetime) (f) Total distance traveled in charge depleting operation with engine running (lifetime) (g) Total distance traveled in driver-selectable charge increasing operation (lifetime) (h) Engine fuel rate (instantaneous) (i) Vehicle fuel rate (instantaneous) (j) Total grid energy into the battery (lifetime) For pure electric M1 and N1 vehicles: (a) Total distance traveled (lifetime) (b) Total grid energy into the battery (lifetime)

5 Accuracy requirements at TA Best on-board achievable accuracy AND Fuel/distance ratio from OBD within 4% of WLTP measurement (2017/1151) WLTP charge ballance formula Δ fuel consumed Δ distance 4% for 1, 2 or 3 tests (cumulative fuel and distance) CS Type 1 test for PHEVs fuel consumed distance driven (from dyno) Ref: TNO 2013 report

6 Accuracy requirements for CoP Ford IE Existing CO 2 tests to be used: 3 to 16 vehicles from one IP family Once an IP family passes the CoP for CO 2, an additional pass/fail criterion applies: Average FCM accuracy of all tested vehicles < 4% x B (B set provisionally to 1 tbc)

7 JRC FCM accuracy measurements 1 passenger car (more to come) WLTP-TOTAL CARBON BALANCE (REGULATION) OBD SIGNAL FC (l/100km) DISTANCE (km) FUEL CONSUMED (l) FC (l/100km) DISTANCE (km) FUEL CONSUMED (l) Accuracy (%) TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST RDE Total CARBON BALANCE (REGULATION) OBD SIGNAL FC (l/100km) DISTANCE (km) FUEL CONSUMED (l) FC (l/100km) DISTANCE (km) FUEL CONSUMED (l) Accuracy (%) TEST TEST TEST TEST

8 Cost estimates CARB 2015 impact assessment Component Cost * CARB OBD act monitors many parameters beyond fuel consumption * ECU programming +TNO 2013 study 8

9 Data collection and reporting issues This provision concerns the enabling technology only (FCMs) Data collection and reporting: subsequent proposal & analysis Aggregated and annonymised data needed to assess systematically the representativeness of WLTP Main options for collection an reporting: national authorities (via periodic inspections) manufacturers (via servicing) [ad-hoc fleet sampling] combination of the above Issues to be addressed (among others): data protection (opt-out clause) vehicle access (physical vs. telematics) administrative burden time lag

10 Some "co-benefits" On-board FCMs: enabler for any on-road CO 2 testing > no PEMS needed!! PHEV CS/CD data allow assessing the e-km driven, utility factor, charging behaviour Electric energy consumption: incentivise the energy efficiency of PHEVs and BEVs

11 Existing showcases with telematics GM OnStar / VoltStats HDV Fleet Management System (FMS) Volvo

12 ACEA position 5/9 main points Gap monitoring only feasible via fuel sales monitoring at the pump Specific study with FCMs on a wide vehicle sample should be sufficient Data protection issues Details on data collection and usage "Infeasibility" of some of the US OBD specs Cost/benefit analysis 2-3 years lead-time for new types + 1 year for all types 12

13 References EP EMIS Committee EP ENVI Committee &format=PDF Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM) HLG Opinion 2016 "Closing the gap" ne TNO 2010 "Effects of a gear-shift indicator and a fuel economy meter on fuel consumption" 18_legislation/FCM%20-%20GSI%20efficiency%20(TNO).pdf TNO "Fuel consumption meter requirements for light-duty vehicles Final report" 9d0d82a6b91f TNO 2016 "Heavy-duty vehicle fuel meter systems" CARB OBD II regulation, section of title 13, California Code of Regulations, as approved by OAL on July 25, CARB 2015 STAFF REPORT: Technical Status and Proposed Revisions to On-Board Diagnostic System Requirements and Associated Enforcement Provisions for Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines (OBD II) 13