APPENDIX A OF DELIVERABLE D5.5

Transcription

1 APPENDIX A OF DELIVERABLE D5.5 CONTRIBUTION AND VIEWS OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF GERMANY (BAST) DATE: 31/05/2017 AUTHOR(S): SIGRID LIMBECK (BAST), JOST GAIL (BAST), HOLGER SCHWEDHELM (BAST), ILJA JUNGFELD (BAST) GRANT AGREEMENT N 0 : PROJECT TYPE: THEME 7 TRANSPORT SST GC.SST : INTEGRATION AND OPTIMISATION OF RANGE EXTENDERS ON ELECTRIC VEHICLES PROJECT ACRONYM: TRANSFORMERS PROJECT TITLE: CONFIGURABLE AND ADAPTABLE TRUCKS AND TRAILERS FOR OPTIMAL TRANSPORT EFFICIENCY PROJECT START DATE: 01/09/2013 PROJECT WEBSITE: COORDINATION: VOLVO (SE) PROJECT MANAGEMENT: UNIRESEARCH (NL)

2 Executive summary In Europe more than 75% of all transported goods are distributed by road transportation. Prognoses confirm that during the next 10 to 20 years freight transportation will increase or at least remain stable. The infrastructure for road transportation already exists and has to match with truck-trailer combinations. Replacements and renewals in infrastructure will take time. These facts have to be taken into account if modifications in dimensions and weights for trucks and trailers are amended in European directives. Current restrictions on maximum weights and dimensions of trucks and trailers for European cross-border traffic are defined in Council Directive 96/53/EC amended by Directive 2015/719/EC. The following report discusses the current regulations for trucks and trailers weights and dimensions and gives a brief overview of the actual road freight traffic situation in Europe. The current activities of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe with regard to rulemaking of Modular Vehicle Combinations (MVC) are mentioned and finally recommendations on further legal amendments are discussed. The recommendations are derived on the basis of the study at hand and on other different research studies concerning dimensions and loads for trucks and trailers. To amend the maximum allowed length for trucks and trailers from meters to e.g meters would be one very efficient possibility to safe resources. If this measure takes at the same time into account that these trucks should be equipped with additional safety features and that the existing road net and its proportion is an important issue which imposes some restrictions on the operation of longer trucks. E.g. the German field study LANG-Lkw, found out, that on permitted road net fuel savings are very high and the impacts on traffic, road safety, infrastructure, maneuverability have an acceptable risk if a certain low share of longer trucks is operated. The individual road net for LHGV (Long Heavy Goods Vehicle) could be enlarged step by step in each country individually and cross-border cooperation could realize a moderate integration of LHGV. The research studies show that increasing maximum weights of HGV from 40 tonnes to 60 tonnes will have impacts on infrastructure and road safety. These have to be assessed and monitored in further studies or trials. The number of expected replacement activities of 40 tonnes HGV to 60 tonnes HGV should be calculated before recommendations for increasing maximum weights at HGV are implemented. The infrastructure for 60 tonnes trucks should be selected carefully. Safety features which should be mandatory for these truck trailer combinations should be fixed on European level. Actually, in Germany LHGV with 60 tonnes weight are not permitted. New vehicle configurations with different total weight, length and/or different centers of gravity show also deviant performances in crashes with safety barriers. Detailed results have been already presented in Deliverable D5.3. The results showed that limits for the center of gravity of the payload should be set in order to minimize the risk of rollover. These limitations will improve driving dynamics as well. Beside the present amendments of Directive 96/53/EC, recommendations regarding LHGV combinations should be worked out in Europe. There are aspects concerning vehicle equipment e.g. load or axle load monitoring on LGHV, favoured power unit and trailer combinations with regard to road safety and infrastructure availability, axle numbers and motorization that could be specified and recommended. In addition a potential amendment of EN 1317 might improve the crash performance of safety barriers if all existing and new vehicle configurations developed in TRANSFORMERS are covered by the standard. In 2014 at UNECE level (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) an informal group on MCV started its work with regard to steering, couplings, vehicle stability and braking. Up to now requirements for the before mentioned technical topics are prepared. When the work of the informal group on MCV will be finished, the results will be implemented in several UN Regulations. It is recommended to take these requirements established on UNECE level as a prerequisite for every approval of a Modular Vehicle Combination within the European Union. and loads of vehicles 2 / 32

3 Contents 1 Introduction Current Legislation EU Directives National Legislation in EU Countries Current Vehicle Standards in Europe Trucks and Trailer Combinations Powertrain Vehicle Load Conditions Research Studies Field Trial on Longer Heavy Goods Vehicles Effects of transport demand of longer trucks (=LHGV) - basic evaluation [16] Profitability [15] Vehicle technology and road safety [17] Effects of LHGV on traffic safety and traffic flow at work sites [18] Effects of longer trucks (=LHGV) on traffic safety in entry-gateways to German motorways [19] Impact of long trucks (=LHGV) on road infrastructure [20] Effects of longer trucks (=LHGV) on safety-related and fire protection-related technical equipment of road tunnels [21] Trafficability of at grade intersections with long HGV (=LHGV)[22] Manoeuvrability of long trucks (=LHGV) on German motorways [23] Effects of overtaking and clearing of long trucks (=LHGV) on safety and processing of traffic [24] Analysis of the influence of long heavy vehicles (=LHGV) on traffic flow [25] Examination of the manoeuvrability of at grade intersections with heavy good vehicles [26] Real impact tests on common road restraint systems with extra long heavy load vehicles [27] Research on Load Position and Driving Dynamics [28] Research on crashes of new vehicle configurations with safety barriers [14] Modular Vehicle Combinations (MVC) - Activities with regard to rulemaking on the level of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Framework of UNECE Objective of the Work on UNECE-level Relevant Issues for Discussion with regard to MVC Braking Coupling Systems Discussion and Conclusions Recommendations Risk Register References Acknowledgment and loads of vehicles 3 / 32

4 Abbreviation List ACC BASt BABSIM BEV CNG CO 2 EBS EMS EU EVSC fa GRRF GTR HGV LHGV LKWÜberlStVAusnV Lkw LNG MVC PHEV RABT RDO Asphalt 09 RSTO UN UNECE WP Adaptive Cruise Control Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen Simulationsmodell für Bundesautobahnen Battery Electrical Vehicle Compressed Natural Gas Carbon Dioxide Electronic Braking System European Modular System European Union Electronic Vehicle Stability Control Axle Factor Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear Global Technical Regulations Heavy Goods Vehicle Longer Heavy Goods Vehicle Verordnung über Ausnahmen von straßenverkehrsrechtlichen Vorschriften für Fahrzeuge und Fahrzeugkombinationen mit Überlänge Lastkraftwagen (Heavy goods vehicle) Liquified Natural Gas Modular Vehicle Combinations Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Richtlinien für die Ausstattung und den Bereich von Straßentunneln Richtlinien für die rechnerische Dimensionierung des Oberbaus von Verkehrsflächen mit Asphaltdeckschicht Asphalt 09 Richtlinien für die Standardisierung des Oberbaus von Verkehrsflächen United Nations United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Work Package/Working Party and loads of vehicles 4 / 32

5 1 Introduction In Europe a large amount of goods are produced, imported and exported of which most of them are transported with trains, ships, planes and trucks. Therein, road transportation contributes to more than 70% off all transport modes. In 2013 more than million tonnes-km [1] were performed by trucks and trailers on European infrastructure. Moreover, studies predict that particular freight transport will increase considerably over the coming years. Due to this situation, improving efficiency of trucks is an important field for research and development that will have positive effects on humans and environment like pollution mitigation, conservation of resources and enhancement of road safety- and infrastructure. Road transportation should be done with maximum benefit and minimum losses to avoid additional environmental pollution such as noise- and pollutant emissions and to save resources like prime energy. One possible benefit is to use less trucks with trailers while optimizing their volume or weight capacity. Another one is to reduce fuel consumption and CO 2 -emissions for example by introducing new powertrains. When doing this the present infrastructure should be used carefully to avoid damages and extra costs and road safety must be guaranteed at all time. Requirements on maximum weights and dimensions of trucks and trailers for European cross-border traffic are defined in Council Directive 96/53/EC [2]. Directive 2015/719/EC [3] amends the before mentioned directive by changing maximum lengths and weights for special trucks and trailers specifications e.g. trucks with alternative drive systems or vehicles with aerodynamic devices. This new Directive has to be implemented in national legislation of each European country until 05/07/17. The following text examines the current regulations for trucks and trailers weights and dimensions, gives a brief overview of the actual road freight traffic situation in Europe, describes the UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) work on MVC (Modular Vehicle Combinations) and finishes with recommendations on further legal amendments. The recommendations are derived on the basis of the study at hand and on different other scientific research studies concerning dimensions and loads for trucks and trailers. and loads of vehicles 5 / 32

6 2 Current Legislation The European road transportation is regulated by EU Directives that have to be respected by all member states. Additionally, bilateral agreements and national regulations exist in northern European countries. The following sections describe new aspects of the current EU Directives for dimensions and weights and national regulations. 2.1 EU Directives Council Directive 96/53/EC and Directive 2015/719/EC are the current documents which describe maximum dimensions and weights for internationally used road vehicles in Europe. After approximately 20 years, Council Directive 96/53/EC was amended by Directive 2015/719/EC in This new Directive has to be implemented in national legislation of each European country until 05/07/17. The articles of Council Directive 96/53/EC define the maximum height of vehicles at 4.00 meters and the maximum width at 2.55 meters except superstructures of conditioned vehicles. The maximum vehicle length differs from meters to meters depending on kind of truck and trailer specification, maximum admitted weights for vehicles and vehicle combinations are between 18 tonnes up to 40 tonnes (44 tonnes for combined transport operation) depending on number of axles. Maximum weights for driving axle, single axle, tandem axles, tri-axles are specified for different vehicles and vehicle combinations in between 10 and 24 tonnes per axle. The following list compares and comments modifications regarding weights and dimensions in Council Directive 96/53/EC to the amendments in the new Directive 2015/719/EC. It includes the modification or addition of the articles 2, 8b, 10c and Annex I c, 2.3.1, and Paragraph (6) and (7) of Directive 2015/719/EC allow an additional weight for alternative powertrains and future alternatively fuelled vehicles: (6) Alternative powertrains, which include hybrid powertrains, are those which, for the purpose of mechanical propulsion, draw energy from consumable fuel and/or a battery or other electrical or mechanical power storage device. Their use for heavy duty vehicles or buses may generate extra weight, but reduces pollution. That extra weight should not be counted as part of the effective load of the vehicle, since this would penalize the road transport sector in economic terms. However, the extra weight should not result in the load capacity of the vehicle being increased either. (7) Future alternatively fuelled vehicles (with heavier powertrains than those used in conventionally fuelled vehicles) might also benefit from an extra weight allowance. Therefore, such alternative fuels may be included in the list of alternative fuels provided for by this Directive, if their use requires an additional weight allowance. The article 8b (2) was added: Article 8b(2) Directive 2015/719/EC Before being placed on the market, the aerodynamic devices referred to in paragraph 1 exceeding 500 mm in length shall be type-approved in accordance with the rules on typeapproval within the framework of Directive 2007/46/EC. In folded state these devices should not extend the maximum length of trucks more than 200 mm. Parallel to the amendment of the directive in a research project dealing with the CO 2 reduction potential of several different measures at trucks, the efficiency of different aerodynamic devices was tested and more than 4% fuel savings were reported[4]. and loads of vehicles 6 / 32

7 The article 10c was implemented to enable intermodal transport operation of 45-foot containers. To transport these containers special permit was required before the Directive 2015/719/EC was legislated, because they were not integrated in Council Directive 96/53/EC: Article 10c Directive 2015/719/EC The maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I, subject where applicable to Article 9a (1), and the maximum distance laid down in point 1.6 of Annex I, may be exceeded by 15 cm for vehicles or vehicle combinations engaged in the transport of 45-foot containers or 45-foot swap bodies, empty or loaded, provided that the road transport of the container or swap body in question is part of an intermodal transport operation. Due to modification of the article 10c, which implements 45-foot containers and 45-foot swap bodies, the differentiation of Annex I 2.2.2c which describes maximum weight of three-axle motor vehicles with two- or three-axle semi-trailer carrying 40-foot ISO containers into two parts was necessary. Annex I 2.2.2c was replaced and Annex I 2.2.2d was added. Replaced: Annex I 2.2.2c Council Directive 96/53/EC three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer carrying a 40-foot ISO container as a combined transport operation: 44 tonnes New: Annex I 2.2.2c Directive 2015/719/EC two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer carrying, in intermodal transport operations, one or more containers or swap bodies, up to a total maximum length of 45 feet: 42 tonnes; New: Annex I 2.2.2d Directive 2015/719/EC three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer carrying, in intermodal transport operations, one or more containers or swap bodies, up to a total maximum length of 45 feet: 44 tonnes; In Annex I vehicles are further specified because alternative powertrain concepts were added in directive 2015/719/EC, Article 2. Due to new heavy alternative powertrain systems the directive allows one tonne more weight for the vehicle including freight. Replaced: Annex I Council Directive 96/53/EC Two-axle motor vehicles:18 tonnes New: Annex I Directive 2015/719/EC two-axle motor vehicles other than buses: 18 tonnes Two-axle alternatively fuelled motor vehicles other than buses: the maximum authorised weight of 18 tonnes is increased by the additional weight required for the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne Two-axle buses: 19,5 tonnes; Annex I follows Annex I Replaced: Annex I Council Directive 96/53/EC Three-axle motor vehicles 25 tonnes 26 tonnes where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent within the Community as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9.5 tonnes New: Annex I Directive 2015/719/EC Three-axle motor vehicles: 25 tonnes, or 26 tonnes where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9.5 tonnes. and loads of vehicles 7 / 32

8 Three-axle alternatively fuelled motor vehicles: the maximum authorised weight of 25 tonnes, or 26 tonnes where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9.5 tonnes, is increased by the additional weight required for the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne ; Summarizing the modifications of the Council Directive 96/53/EC three main technical points have to be mentioned with regard to trucks. Raise maximum vehicle length (50 cm) for vehicles with aerodynamic devices Legalize transportation of 45-foot containers and 45-foot swap bodies up to 40 tonnes by raising maximum vehicle length (15 cm) Contribute 1 tonne to maximum weight of trucks for implementation of alternative powertrains These three modifications serve the purpose to reduce fuel consumption of road transportation by trucks and trailers. Technical progress that was beforehand tested in studies, e.g. aerodynamic devices and future technology like e.g. electrical powered towing units, now can be implemented more easy. Furthermore existing container dimensions were considered by raising length a few centimeters to ease combined transport. At the moment the additional weight allowance for alternative powertrains in paragraph (6) and (7) of Directive 2015/719/EC seems to be not valid for vehicle combinations (no change for Annex I, paragraph 2.2 of Council Directive 96/53/EC). In order to allow the additional weight also for vehicle combinations (e.g. those developed in TRANSFORMERS) the Directive 2015/719/EC would to be corrected resp. further amended. 2.2 National Legislation in EU Countries In Northern countries of Europe national regulations for longer and heavier vehicles complement the European directives. E.g. Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Finland, Norway and Sweden have trucks with special equipment, where the maximum legal weight was raised from 44 tonnes to 60 tonnes and maximum length from meters to meters [5]. These trucks follow the EMS (European Modular System). Germany in contrast in its trial with longer trucks LANG-Lkw (LANG-Lastkraftwagen) only allows longer vehicles up to meters but only up to 40 tonnes. The national derogation (LKWÜberlStVAusnV= Verordnung über Ausnahmen von straßenverkehrsrechtlichen Vorschriften für Fahrzeuge und Fahrzeugkombinationen mit Überlänge) regulates vehicle equipment, road net and driving options for LHGV (Long Heavy Goods Vehicle). The national or bilateral regulations are annotated positively by the European Commission within Directive 96/53/EU as follows: The European Commission has already provided guidance on the application of Article 4 of the Directive; transport operations do not have significant impact on international competition if the cross-border use remains limited to two Member States where the existing infrastructure and the road safety requirements allow it. This balances the Member States right under the principle of subsidiarity to decide on transport solutions suited to their specific circumstances with the need to prevent such policies from distorting the internal market. and loads of vehicles 8 / 32

9 3 Current Vehicle Standards in Europe 3.1 Trucks and Trailer Combinations In 2013 statistic reports show that road freight traffic is increasing throughout Europe. E.g journeys of trucks were counted in Germany[6] as well as approx trucks >3.5 tonnes[7] and approx tractors[7] were registered. These registered trucks split into two towing units, namely rigid trucks or tractors. They are connected to trailers and semitrailers. The following figure (Figure 1) illustrates two vehicle combinations. Tractor with semitrailer Rigid Truck with trailer Figure 1- Two truck-trailer combinations Vehicle configurations developed in WP3 and WP4 of TRANSFORMERS are based on first vehicle combination (tractor with semitrailer). The truck population in European countries varies considerably. In most countries the proportion of tractors with semitrailer is higher than rigid truck with trailer combinations regarding rigid trucks with more than 5 tonnes load. In 2012 e.g. Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Poland, Germany, Sweden, Portugal have more than 60% tractors with semitrailers. Most trucks are classified by transport weight. These classes are different throughout Europe. Dimensions as height and width are unified because of infrastructure e.g. height of bridges or width of lanes. They are regulated in EU directives as pointed out for dimensions and weights in Chapter Currently all combinations allow generally a maximum length of meters. Furthermore the age distribution of European HGV (Heavy Goods Vehicles) gives information about truck equipment in general. New towing units have better safety equipment e.g. brake assistance than older ones. In 2014 European statics[8] report that 57% of the operated trucks are less than six years old; 15% are less than 2 years old and 4% are older than 15 years. 3.2 Powertrain Powertrain technology made large progress during last years. New technologies like hybrid cars, electro cars, gas powered cars and fuel cell cars were developed and already placed in today s market. These technologies are particularly transferred to rigid trucks and tractors. However today nearly all HGV are still powered by combustion engines fired with diesel and partly with gasoline. The following figure (Figure 2) prognoses the development of alternative powertrains in Germany for rigid trucks >3.5 tonnes and tractors, which was calculated before the TRANSFORMERS project was started. Thus the effects of electrically driven trailer axles as developed in WP3 and their fuel and emission saving potential are not included. and loads of vehicles 9 / 32

10 Mio. Truck 0,6 Rigid Truck Mio. Tractor 0,25 Tractor 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 PHEV diesel/el Fuel Cell BEV CNG Diesel 0,2 0,15 0,1 Hybrid LNG/diesel LNG CNG Diesel 0,1 0, Figure 2- Prognoses for future powertrain prognoses in Germany [9] The two diagrams present rigid trucks and tractors no significant alternative powertrains during the period from 2010 to Even up to 2050, prognoses for all options of powertrains except for diesel have a small share. These prognoses are made due to expected developments of new powertrain concepts [9]. For rigid trucks and tractors PHEV-D (Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Diesel) and BEV (Battery Electrical Vehicle) are difficult to realize because of the high energy request for vehicles > 7.5 tonnes. If these vehicles are operated with batteries, those need to be disproportionate heavy and expensive. Nevertheless there are efforts to support new concepts and as shown above alternative powertrains are considered in the current directive on masses and dimensions. Gas powered trucks can be e.g. powered by LNG (Liquified Natural Gas). CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) is not that favoured because of the low energy density. The positioning of adequate CNG gas tanks for trucks with more than 28 tonnes has to be on truck and trailer because the volume is very large. Summarizing these aspects the possibility to change road transportation to alternative powertrains seems extremely difficult to realize. Therefore optimizing freight transportation by optimal utilization of truck capacity e.g. volume, becomes more important. At the moment for road transportation optimizing freight volume in truck trailer combinations it is the most efficient possibility to reduce fuel consumption. However, the solution developed in TRANSFORMERS can be able to increase the share of electrically driven truck trailer combinations. 3.3 Vehicle Load Conditions In 2014 more than 400 billion tonnes-km are quarterly counted in Europe [10], which is 75% [11] of all transported freight. To distribute goods efficiently trucks and trailers are indispensible. Realizing economic transportation trucks should be fully and economically laden and unladen journeys should be minimized. In Germany in 2014, 310 billion tonnes-km [12] were operated. European Statistics of 2005 report, that in average only 80% of load capacity was used in Germany. In whole Europe 2005 load capacity was occupied in average 75%. Hence, there is capacity for improvement. Load availability, load volume, load weight and low transport costs are aspects that lead to unused capacities. As explained in chapter the overall weight and the axle loads for vehicle combinations are regulated in Council Directive 96/53/EC. Maximum axle weights had been harmonised at 10 tonnes for a single non-driven axle. The maximum for a single drive axle is 11.5 tonnes. The maximum load for a tandem drive axle is 18 tonnes, when the axle distance is between 1.3 and 1.8 meters, except with twin tyres and road friendly suspension for which it is raised to 19 tonnes. and loads of vehicles 10 / 32

11 Frequent axle loads for 40 tonnes HGV combinations are [13]: 6-7 tonnes for the steering axle, up to 11.5 tonnes for the drive axle, up to 8 tonnes for each towed (trailer or semitrailer) axle. There are several aspects e.g. subjective driver preferences, delivery routes, bulky loads, partial load that lead to unfavourable load positioning on trucks. The best load positioning with regard to driving dynamics can be theoretically calculated and analyzed using indicators like reward amplification, dynamic off-tracking, yaw damping and zero damping speed. These indicators are used to find general recommendations for save load positioning. They are of course, too laborious to apply them on each trip. However it is recommended to consider, if the indicators mentioned before can be used on European level for setting performance requirements with regard to the driving stability of truck trailer combinations using one or more trailers. Requirements for the center of gravity in z-direction of the whole vehicle resp. trailer and/or the payload do not exist in Council Directive 96/53/EC and Directive 2015/719/EC. Since Finite Element simulations in Deliverable D5.3 [14] showed a significant influence on the performance in crashes with safety barriers it is highly recommended to investigate and determine limits for the center of gravity of the payload. The above mentioned indicators might help to check those limits. and loads of vehicles 11 / 32

12 4 Research Studies During the last 20 years studies and tests of European countries e.g. Denmark, Finland, Netherland, Germany and Sweden focused on enhancement of legal maximum vehicles volume or maximum vehicles weights. Vehicle volume has been raised by vehicle length up to meters, while the other dimensions are not changed. Mass has been raised up to 60 tonnes. Different German studies e.g. Gigaliner, EuroCombi and current field study LANG-Lkw (Chapter 1.3.1) did and do research on these LHGV being just longer but not heavier. Denmark started a field study with Long Vehicles in 2008, which is extended until Additionally to enhancement of length, this Dansk study includes maximum weights up to 60 tonnes. The following sections describe selected midterm results figured out in the field study LANG-Lkw and in one specific research study on load position. 4.1 Field Trial on Longer Heavy Goods Vehicles From 2012 to 2014 Germany carried out the first part of a field study on LHGV. This project was scientifically accompanied by Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) and supported by several research studies. The main idea of LHGV is to raise road transportation efficiency by enhancing freight volume capacity without changing maximum legal weight. This challenge is realized by different vehicle combinations with maximum length of meters instead of meters. Maximum height and width are not modified. Before the project started the legal conditions for truck and trailer combinations were fixed in the temporary national regulation "LKWÜberlStVAusnV" in Germany that includes truck equipment, defines a special road net and requirements for truck drivers. The LHGVs for this study are only operated in Germany[15]. In the beginning the project was realized with 23 forwarders, who operated 43 vehicles in five different truck and trailer combinations (Figure 3). Typ I: Tractor with longer Semitrailer Typ II: Tractor with Semitrailer and Trailer Typ III: Rigid Truck with Dolly and Semitrailer Typ IV: Tractor with Semitrailers (B-Double) Typ V: Rigid Truck with Trailer Figure 3- Truck Trailer Combinations of Field Study LANG-Lkw [15] and loads of vehicles 12 / 32

13 The follow up study or second part of the study will be finished in the end of 2016 with more than 56 forwarders and more than 145 vehicles. These research activities include many aspects e.g. vehicle technology, road safety, environmental impacts, infrastructure, as well as market potential analysis and profitability. The following parts point out midterm results of the research studies published by BASt (Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen). They are all summarized in one report [14, BASt, Zwischenbericht LANG-Lkw, 2015] Effects of transport demand of longer trucks (=LHGV) - basic evaluation [16] Hence, the fundamental work focus on that investigation was primarily the development of the design, coordination, implementation as well as an analysis of the empirical data collection. Within one year and on a weekly basis, a total of transport processes including a 2.35 mill. driving performance, tons of transported goods and hours of driving time were investigated as well as analyzed by the use of an online questionnaire. As investigated, no participating company of the test run adopted the long truck as a substitute of rail freight transport. In addition, instead of the conventional truck the long truck was adopted for pre- and post-haulage in intermodal transport. Due to these findings, statistical evaluations concerning transport demand effects as well as modal-shifts are not possible, and were therefore not conducted. However, the basic framework and requirements were already created and designed. In the meantime, publicists, commercial and media experts as well as both participating and nonparticipating transport companies in the test pilot have been interviewed, and were asked to make an assessment of the pilot run and characteristics of long trucks. These assessments included subjects concerning operational areas, criteria of selection means of transport and expected advantages as well as disadvantages of long trucks. In addition, infrastructure requirements, potential changes in logistical processes and transport chains as well as a general assessment concerning market areas of long trucks were included in these assessments made by the parties involved. The statements of nonparticipating companies were similar to assessments made by the participating companies. As a new aspect, potential competitive disadvantages of small business companies were mentioned. According to these experts assessments, infrastructural aspects, for instance general adequacy as well as capital expenditures and adaptation requirements were assessed in a controversial manner. All in all, the qualitative interviews of nonparticipating parties and experts represented arguments discussed in corresponding publications. The market potential of long trucks has been estimated with the help of a descriptive analysis of statistics concerning transports of goods for German trucks. As a result, approximately 2-9% of all transports respectively 3-7% of the driving performance of conventional trucks could be replaced by long trucks Profitability [15] During one year the forwarders that participate the field study list all freights and trips of their LHGV. Out of this profitability of long heavy good vehicles was evaluated with the following results: LHGV have a cost benefit of 16% compared to conventional vehicles, if an utilization rate of more than 83% can be realized. One LHGV replaces theoretically 1.56 conventional vehicles, which means in effect that two long heavy good vehicles replace three conventional ones. LHGVs need 12% more fuel than conventional vehicles, but 25% overall fuel benefit can be realized due to two-to-three replacement. LHGV transport efficiency is improved 14% regarding transport volume (l / (100 m³ km)).[17] Vehicle technology and road safety [17] Vehicle technology for LHGV requires additional or alternative equipment, which is installed at five certificated test vehicle combinations and checked by official experts in advance. There are indispensable requirements for road safety belonging to these trucks e.g. disc brakes and retarder, lane control system, EVSC (Electronic Vehicle Stability Control), EBS (Electronic Braking System), electrical traction control or differential lock, ACC (Adaptive Cruise Control), air suspension for all axle except steering axle. An additional camera system installed at the rear side of the truck makes it easier for the drivers to see the following vehicles. Contour markings and a new plate installed at the and loads of vehicles 13 / 32

14 rear of the LHGVs helps the other traffic partners to identify long trucks. On-board load control monitors present load weight, which enables drivers to check the load by themselves. Besides the truck equipment, driving and braking tests were performed with LHGV combinations. The cornering characteristics were realized as simulated and they are in between the legal distances. Braking distance of long heavy good vehicles were tested compared to conventional truck systems.both vehicles had maximum weight of 40 tonnes. The load for the conventional truck is 25.5 tonnes. The LHGVs transport 17 tonnes. The conventional truck has 5 axles and the long heavy one had up to 8 ones. Test results show that braking distance of the longer trucks with 8 axles are shorter (36 meter braking distance) than the conventional one (44 meter braking distance), which is possibly due to the number of axles. Regarding the braking distance and the cornering characteristics of the tested LHGVs there is no negative impact on road safety Effects of LHGV on traffic safety and traffic flow at work sites [18] Work sites represent critical areas on motorways. The required expansion (incorporation of lanes) and the maintenance (restoration or complete renewal) of motorways inevitably lead to an increased installation of long-term and short-term work sites. Previous studies on the use of LHGV assume that no fundamental risks of new type arise from an increase in the permissible length of vehicles or vehicle combinations. It is however not excluded that the vehicle lengths entail an increase in the number of critical situations, exempli gratia in transition areas of work sites. Findings which confirm this assumption are not yet available, though. Therefore, the use of longer trucks at long-term and short-term work sites should be analyzed with the aim to obtain research-based findings about the impact on traffic safety and traffic flow at work sites on motorways. Regarding this fact, it is particularly to assess if differences between longer trucks and conventional trucks can be expected. For this purpose, empirical studies on longer trucks at work sites based on a research and review of international literature on previous findings regarding the effects of longer trucks and heavy traffic on traffic flow and traffic safety at work sites on motorways were carried out as part of the field test with vehicles and vehicle combinations. A total of 34 long-term work sites with 40 different traffic diversions and 18 short-term work sites with partial lane closures of at least one driving lane were passed through by 16 accompanied longer truck drives of eight different truck companies. All drives were analyzed regarding possible effects of longer trucks on traffic at work sites. The results of the empirical investigations show that no measurable impact from longer trucks on traffic safety and traffic flow at work sites on motorways can be expected. In both long-term and short-term work sites the longer trucks could drive through all traffic routings without any problems or negatively affecting the traffic flow or traffic safety. On the part of other road users, no driving behaviour which was adapted to the longer trucks could be observed. Thus, no increased demands on the safety of long-term and short-term work sites need to be placed due to the use of longer trucks. In this regard the same general requirements apply to longer trucks that generally arise from heavy traffic Effects of longer trucks (=LHGV) on traffic safety in entry-gateways to German motorways [19] The behaviour of the road users in the entering areas on motorways meeting a longer truck should be observed. The aim was to derive an evaluation of road safety for the permanent use of longer trucks. To investigate this task, trips of longer trucks were monitored by a front- and a side camera, to observe the traffic in the area next and in front of the truck. To compare the trips of the longer truck with today already usual heavy goods vehicles, the trips of a truck-trailer combination were observed in the same way. The localisation of the entry-gateways was realized by GPS-tracking of the trips. Overall 534 passings with longer trucks and 271 passings with a truck-trailer combination were recorded on entry-gateways. In addition to the systematic analysis of the traffic situation in the entering areas the speed of the trucks passing the entry-gateways was analysed. Altogether the investigations showed no abrupt driving manoeuvre in the entering areas. Furthermore it was found out, that both the behaviour of the road users as well as the measured truck speed showed no reasonable differences between the longer truck and the usual truck-trailer combination. and loads of vehicles 14 / 32

15 Therefore the behaviour of the road users in the entering areas of the analysed vehicle combinations can be considered as comparable. The investigations showed no higher safety risk of the longer truck in comparison with the truck-trailer combination. Based on this the road safety in the analysed entrygateways is expected to be comparable for both longer trucks and truck-trailer combinations passing by Impact of long trucks (=LHGV) on road infrastructure [20] In order to determine over or under-stressed pavement structures caused by long-trucks, a sample of 1746 rides in direct transport and 483 rides in combined transport were analyzed. The average gross mass of a long-truck is 32 tons. From the sample, approximately 9% of the trucks were overloaded. The overload was below 3 tons. The maximum axle load was 11.7 tons. The axle load distribution of long-trucks in combined transport showed lower values than the axle load distribution in direct transport. Compared with equivalent conventional trucks, the number of 10 ton equivalent axle loads of long- trucks was 5% lower. The mean axle factor fa for long-trucks is The volume of transport of long-trucks is equal to 1.53 times the volume of transport of equivalent conventional trucks. The number of long-trucks in the total collective of heavy traffic is increasing (up to 9%), resulting in a smaller B-number per RStO 12 (Richtlinie 12 für die Standardisierung des Oberbaus von Verkehrsflächen). However, this would not normally lead to a change to the next smaller load class. The design by RDO Asphalt 09 (Richtlinie 09 für die rechnerische Dimensionierung des Oberbaus von Verkehrsflächen mit Asphaltdeckschicht Asphalt 09) using the data from long-trucks resulted in a slightly lower fatigue status at the end of the designs 30 years of useful life. This would lead to a marginal extension of the pavement life. The data from long-trucks, under the defined traffic technical specification and allowed vehicle weight limits, would not result in over-stressed pavement structures. In comparison with conventional trucks, the calculated long-truck under-stressed pavements has only a marginal significance and does not have any practical impact in the useful life of the pavement Effects of longer trucks (=LHGV) on safety-related and fire protection-related technical equipment of road tunnels [21] Maintaining mobility and protecting people and environment from negative impacts caused by traffic necessitates effective solutions to cope with increasing goods traffic. The introduction of longer transport vehicles or different vehicle combinations is considered to be one of the possibilities to handle the long-term growing road freight traffic. Due to their greater maximum length of m Eurocombis offer a higher load volume compared to conventional HGVs, while retaining the presently permissible total weight. Within the framework of the research project it was examined whether the use of Eurocombis necessitates higher requirements for the safety-related and fire protection-related technical equipment. Based on investigations about load volume and composition energy and smoke release rates for Eurocombis were determined. Using CFD simulations of various fire scenarios the effects of smoke and temperature on tunnel users were calculated. In the subsequent quantitative safety assessment the extents of damage and occurrence frequencies were compared to those of a RABTconform tunnel (Richtlinien für die Ausstattung und den Bereich von Straßentunneln) without Eurocombi traffic for each scenario. The objective of the research project was to check whether the fire loads set so far for fires in road tunnels equally cover Eurocombis. Additionally, the safety risks for road tunnels resulting from Eurocombis in the German road network, particularly in case of fire, had to be identified, quantified and assessed. The effects of vehicle fires involving Eurocombis on the safety of tunnel users were analyzed in order to be able to derive higher safety-related and fire protection-related requirements for road tunnels, if applicable Trafficability of at grade intersections with long HGV (=LHGV)[22] The present study describes in this context the trafficability on at-grade intersections and roundabouts on German motorways. To this aim, the real operation on intersections of the long HGV has been analysed. Therefore the driving behaviour, the driving geometry and the resulting space required was measured of each long HGV. The measuring systems were digital cameras and laser scanner. The laser scanner recorded the edge of the HGV with coordinates and save this data in a and loads of vehicles 15 / 32

16 local coordinate system. The data was imported in a CAD-software, and a tractrix curve for each HGV was prepared. In the end the tractrix curve of each long HGV were compared with a normal truck. The real measured tractrix curves of the long HGV would fit on guideline planed intersections (with exception of the tested long HGV type 2). The swept area of the long HGV is covered of the intersection. To get this result, the long HGV must drive an ideal line on the intersection. This ideal driving line was not measured in this trial. The drivers were always a bit too far to the right or left site in her driving line. So they drove over the hard shoulder or the neighbouring lanes (not the banquet). At business and under pressure of time, deviations of the ideal driving line must be accept. In the short term it would be more tolerable to drive over the hard shoulder on intersection. But in the long term is a widening of the driving lanes useful. On roundabouts the long HGV needed all available space, to drive one or three-quarters. In a threequarter turn in the roundabout, the outer edges covered the hard shoulder. In a full turn in the roundabout, the long HGV overran the outer boundaries of the roundabout in the exit lane. The lowest deviations from the reference vehicle have type 1 and 5. This long HGV are better or corresponded with the reference vehicle. The tractrix curve of the tested long HGV (except type 2) matched together with the geometric design of at-grade intersections while driving with ideal driving line. When there are small deviations from the ideal driving line, the long HGV drove over the hard shoulder Manoeuvrability of long trucks (=LHGV) on German motorways [23] The potential impacts that the long vehicles could have on roads, carriageways on junctions and interchange points, gateways, driveways, weaving lanes, parking in emergency rest stops (in tunnels) and parking on rest areas was also evaluated. The purpose of this study gives answers to the questions of area required, handling and geometrical requirement. The study worked with follow shot by the measuring vehicle (called UNO), photogrammetry attempt, cameras at the trucks and a laser scanner for the measure at the parking areas. The photogrammetric helps to understand the driving lines of the different long-vehicles. The follow shot by the measuring vehicle and the laser scanner help to compare to a long heavy goods vehicle with a conventional heavy goods vehicle. The study shows that long heavy goods vehicles don t have problems in carriageways on junctions and interchange, weaving lanes, access and exit lanes. If a long heavy goods vehicle turns right into an overriding road it overruns the left turn lane there. Long heavy goods vehicles (25.25 m) aren t able to park in emergency rest stops. The parking on rest areas is only possible through overriding the neighbouring parking lot Effects of overtaking and clearing of long trucks (=LHGV) on safety and processing of traffic [24] Due to the fact, that the number of LHGVs participating in this field test is relatively small, measurements and observations are only performed from the LHGV itself. Another reason for this is the priority use of LHGVs on motorways and therefore the missing street sections on country roads. The collected data contains information about the behaviour of overtaking vehicles during the overtaking process, including approaching, lane switching, passing and reeving back in front of the LHGV. The performed analysis of 200 overtaking maneuvres of LHVs or compared vehicles (this analysis used a truck trailer, because it is shorter than an articulated train and therefore reflects the worst case) offers no evidence for an increased safety risk in overtaking a LHV. Given a situation in which an LHV is being overtaken, the marginal values of safety distances tend to enlarge to a reasonable extent. The accelerations at a critical velocity of the overtaking vehicle are slightly above average. Therefore, this study cannot offer any arguments to support the assumption of a greater safety risk in the clearing of transport hubs by LHVs. All in all, the data confirms that LHVs have a lower velocity than a compared vehicle during an overtaking manoeuvre. The greater velocity difference between the overtaking vehicle and the vehicle being overtaken might imply that these overtaking manoeuvres are safer than the convenient ones. and loads of vehicles 16 / 32

17 However, a systematically lower velocity of LHVs would probably lead mainly on motorways to a higher number of overtaking manoeuvres by other trucks. During the continuous operation of LHVs in future matching velocities can be expected. Even in this case, no evidence was found that a higher safety risk exists: All parameters show that the marginal values of critical overtaking manoeuvres rise in accordance to the length of the truck. Theoretically, this indicates that the greater distance at least compensates the superior length of the LHV. Therefore, an increased risk seems rather unlikely Analysis of the influence of long heavy vehicles (=LHGV) on traffic flow [25] In this research project, the influence of long heavy vehicles on traffic flow at freeway interchanges was analyzed by using the microscopic simulation tool BABSIM (Simulationsmodell für Bundesautobahnen). The sample consists of different exit and entrance types as well as a weaving area. The simulation models were calibrated and validated for heavy vehicle percentages between 10% and 15% with data from loop detectors. For each investigation site, simulations were conducted with a percentage of long heavy vehicles of 0%, 1%, 2% and 5% as well as three different scenarios with different proportions of entering and exiting vehicles. Another approach was to compare scenarios in which three regular heavy vehicles were substituted by two long heavy vehicles. For each scenario, ten simulation runs were conducted. The mean traffic breakdown volume was used to estimate the capacity and to compare the different scenarios. Overall, the results of the simulation study indicate that percentages of long heavy vehicles between 1 and 5% of the total traffic volume do not significantly influence the capacity of freeway interchanges. The effects of long heavy vehicles on interchange capacity are in the range of the capacity differences between different interchanges that can be observed in the field even under similar geometric and traffic conditions Examination of the manoeuvrability of at grade intersections with heavy good vehicles [26] The project focused on the examination of the manoeuvrability of at grade intersections with heavy goods vehicles. Therefore the aim of the research project was to analyze the deficits in geometric design of at grade junction in urban and nearby urban areas concerning the manoeuvrability with heavy goods vehicles. In addition to this, the dimensions of the German design vehicles FGSV, 2001 should be proved. Based on comprehensive on-line questioning of about 250 federal and local road authorities it could be shown, that only a small number of road authorities is involved in problems concerning the manoeuvrability of at grade intersections with heavy trucks. Most often small roundabouts caused problems. In some cases the wrong choice of the design vehicle is responsible for the damage at the road infrastructure. However, the dimensions of the design vehicles for the heavy goods vehicles did not change for the past 15 years. However, more than before truck-trailer combinations with central axis were covered during the empirical studies. If the German design vehicles will be updated in the future, it is recommended, to add this special type of truck-trailer combination in the catalogue. By comparing theoretical (by software) and practical (by road trials using differential global positioning system) turning templates it could be shown, that software and trial swept path differ only a few centimeter. Curve simulations by software show therefore with right use suitable means to proof the practicability at grade intersections. The systematic comparison of different heavy goods vehicles showed strong differences concerning the space consumption for example by driving into a small roundabout or an intersection. These differences are based on the different physical characteristics of the heavy goods vehicles with different length, different wheelbase and different overhang (front and rear). The different heavy goods vehicles used different trajectories by driving through the different road facilities. The practical road trials also showed different trajectories for various driving speeds and various driving manoeuvres. and loads of vehicles 17 / 32