EUROPEAN PROJECT ON PORTABLE EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS: "EU-PEMS" PROJECT

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN PROJECT ON PORTABLE EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS: "EU-PEMS" PROJECT STATUS AND ACTIVITY REPORT P. Bonnel, A. Brunella, M. Carriero, I. Fumagalli, J. Kubelt, U. Manfredi F. Montigny, R. Hummel, A. Krasenbrink, G. De Santi 2006 EUR EN

2 EUROPEAN PROJECT ON PORTABLE EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS: "EU-PEMS" PROJECT STATUS AND ACTIVITY REPORT P. Bonnel, A. Brunella, M. Carriero, I. Fumagalli, J. Kubelt, U. Manfredi F. Montigny, R. Hummel, A. Krasenbrink, G. De Santi Authors for correspondence: Pierre Bonnel, Alois Krasenbrink European Commission, Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability Transport and Air Quality Unit, TP 441, Ispra (VA), Italy EUR EN

3 In collaboration and co-authored with: MM. Philip Good, Jose-Pablo Laguna-Gomez, Ferenc Pekar (EUROPEAN COMMISSION, DG ENTR) MM. Jan Kruithof, Bart Wieland, Guy Vijverberg (DAF TRUCKS) Mr. Juergen Stein (DAIMLER CHRYSLER) MM. Meinrad Signer, Arthur Stark, Antonio Appino (IVECO) MM. Kurt-Eric Gail, Klaus Richter (MAN) MM. Stefan Dungner, Sten Holgersson (SCANIA) Mr. Alf Ekermo, Olivier Boulet, Lars Gustavsson, Jonas Holmberg, Ms Karel Dupuis (VOLVO POWERTRAIN) MM. Manfred Linke, Wolfgang Singer (AVL) Mr. Cesare Bassoli, Marco Giaccone (CONTROL SISTEM) MM. Miro Janda, Les Hill, Ichiro Asano, Hans Stix (HORIBA) MM. Oliver Franken, Thore Simon, Atul Shah (SENSORS INC.) Mr. Iddo Riemersma (TNO) Mr. Jordi Izquierdo, Ms Rosa Delgado (IDIADA) Mr Eladio de Miguel Sainz, Ms Sonia Centelles (TRANSPORTS METROPOLITANS DE BARCELONA) Page 3 / 34

4 Acknowledgements We herewith acknowledge the support and the excellent co-operation spirit of all organisations and participants. Special thanks for the road test campaigns to: MM. Jan Kruithof, Guy Vijverberg, Juergen Stein, Arthur Stark, Kurt-Eric Gail, Klaus Richter, Stefan Dungner, Alf Ekermo, Olivier Boulet, Jonas Holmberg, Karel Dupuis, Philippe Prat, Hans Stix. At the Joint Research, we thank all the colleagues that have provided their help and assistance for running the experimental activities. We also thank Rita Paiola for her kind assistance in the organisation of the travels. Page 4 / 34

5 Mission Statement: The mission of the Joint Research Centre (JRC), one of the Directorates General of the European Commission (EC), is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national. LEGAL NOTICE Neither the European Commission nor any person Acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for The use which might be made of the following information. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the European server ( EUR EN European Communities, 2006 Reproduction is authorized provided the source is acknowledged Printed in Italy Page 5 / 34

6 Table of contents 1 Executive summary Introduction Background information Policy making in Europe Project objectives Overview of Tasks Work Progress Resources Task 1: Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation Task 2: Vehicle road testing with on-board instrumentation Task 3: Data reduction and evaluation Overview of results Task1: Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation Task 2: Road tests Preliminary conclusions and recommendations Instrumentation Installation of instruments Execution of tests Calculations and data analysis EU-PEMS future activities On board PM measurements Other measurement issues Methods for conformity checking technical activities of the EU-PEMS group List of acronyms References Page 6 / 34

7 1 Executive summary Introduction The European Commission through DG ENTR in co-operation with DG JRC launched in January 2004 a co-operative research programme to study the feasibility of portable emission measurement systems (PEMS) with a view to their application in Europe for in-use conformity (IUC) checking of heavy-duty vehicles. A six month planning phase between January and June 2004 concluded with the closure of the Call for Expression of interest published by DG ENTR. The technical and experimental activities started in August 2004 to study the use of PEMS systems and their potential application for on-road emissions measurement on heavy-duty vehicles. Project objectives The main objectives of the EU-PEMS project were defined as follows: To assess and validate the application and performance of different portable instrumentation relative to each other, and in comparison with alternative options for IUC testing; To define a test protocol for the use of portable instrumentation within the IUC of heavy-duty vehicles; To evaluate the US Not To Exceed (NTE) approach and possibly develop a simplified method in order to propose IUC pass/fail criteria; To address the need of the European industry, authorities and test houses to learn about the application of such systems. Once the research and development works have reached a satisfactory status, the intention is to make the test protocol and its data evaluation tools available for a PEMS IUC pilot programme, involving the European heavy-duty industry and National Authorities with the support of the Commission. Overview of the work progress: The main contributions can be summarised as such: The European Commission through DG JRC, acting in close cooperation with DG ENTR, prepared and co-ordinated the programme. In particular, DG JRC followed-up and executed the vehicle road tests in co-operation with ACEA. It also co-ordinated the data analysis required to examine the test results together with the relevant experts of the participating organisations. ACEA (with its members DAF, MAN, Iveco, Daimler, Volvo Powertrain, Scania) provided the test vehicles and co-operated with DG JRC to perform the on-road tests; Sensors Inc, Horiba, AVL and Control Sistem supplied the portable systems and provided training and product support whenever necessary; National laboratories (TNO, RWTÜV, IDIADA) involved in type approval and in-iuc have provided ad-hoc technical support based on their own experience. Page 7 / 34

8 IDIADA has been involved in the preparation of a city bus test campaign that will be a joint exercise between DG JRC, IDIADA, TMB (Transports Metropolitans de Barcelona), IVECO and MAN. The PEMS systems selected for this initial phase of the EU-PEMS project complied with general requirements established in the early stages of the project. Given the fact that the PEMS instruments did not include the characterisation of PM and in order to not delay the progress of work, the onroad evaluation exercise (Task 2) did not include any portable PM instrument. In the meantime, progress has been made for the development of portable PM instruments and some evaluation works were started in September 2004 under laboratory controlled conditions (Task 1). Under Task 1 of the project, tests have been conducted in the EC-JRC heavyduty dynamic test facility to evaluate the performance of the candidate portable systems. The goal of the activity was to check how the portable systems compare with the high quality lab systems for emissions and also how they compare against each other. Under Task 2, the on-road evaluation of the PEMS systems was based on collected "real-world" emissions data at different locations and for a panel of vehicles typical for the various engine families and technologies currently existing on the European market. Seven test campaigns (Iveco, Scania, Volvo Powertrain Sweden and France, Daimler-Chrysler, MAN, Scania, DAF) were conducted. A minimum of 3 repeats per instrument and vehicle load were planned, amounting to nearly 150 hours of data being collected for all the test campaigns. Preliminary conclusions and development of the test protocol: The figures observed during the laboratory inter-comparison (Task 1) and from the on-road emissions measurements showed sufficient test to test repeatability for a given instrument and vehicle load. The performance (accuracy, repeatability) of the core measurements (analysers concentrations and exhaust mass flow) is therefore satisfactory for the purposes of in-use conformity checking. Therefore, the group will propose, for the development of the test protocol: When possible, to align the performance requirements and calibration procedures for the PEMS equipment with established existing requirements for laboratory instrumentation (Annex III of the 2005/55/EC Directive) To establish requirements for the measurement devices that are part of PEMS but do not exist for laboratory testing. In particular use of the Engine Control Unit and the Global Positioning System. The preliminary requirements for the installation of PEMS and the execution of tests have been set out in a technical support document Guide for in-field tests. In its current form, the installation is judged to be relatively easy. The tests procedures will be subject to revision for a number of well-identified technical issues such as PM measurement, cold start tests and different forms Page 8 / 34

9 of after-treatment systems. These open technical issues will need to be addressed during a future pilot programme. Status and activity report : The status and activity report presents the activities conducted during the first phase of the research, the main goal of which has been to develop the test protocol to measure gaseous emissions. From the observations made during the tests, the report will present options for the test protocol. The report will also give an overview of the work that has been conducted and the associated resources used and the time taken. The technical aspects and scientific results, together with the proposed test protocol will be developed in detailed technical reports, which will be released according to the following schedule: Task 1 Report Mar 2006 Task 2 Report Jan 2006 Task 3 Report Apr 2006 Guide for in-field tests (version 2) Feb 2006 Draft test protocol (gaseous emissions) Dec 2005 Page 9 / 34

10 2 Introduction The European Commission through DG ENTR in co-operation with DG JRC has launched in January 2004 a co-operative research programme to study the feasibility of portable emission measurement systems in view of their application in Europe for IUC of heavy-duty vehicles. Following a 6 months planning phase between January and June 2004, concluded by the closure of the Call for Expression of interest published by DG ENTR, the technical and experimental activities were started in August 2004 to study the use of PEMS systems and their potential application for on-road measurements on heavy-duty vehicles. The present document is the report of the activities conducted from the kick-off of the project, i.e. on the first phase of the research activities, whose main goal has been to develop the test protocol to measure gaseous emissions. From the first observations made during the experimental activities, the report introduces the options proposed for the development of the test protocol. In the last part, the open technical issues, the strategy and the resources to address the open issues are also introduced. The scope of the document is to give an overview of the work that has been conducted and more precisely for the associated resources and the timing (chapter 4). Examples of results and preliminary conclusions are presented in chapter 5. The technical aspects and scientific results, together with the proposed test protocol will be developed in the detailed technical reports to be released according to the following schedule: Task 1 1 Report Mar 2006 Task 2 2 Report Jan 2005 Task 3 3 Report Apr 2006 Guide for in-field tests (version 2) Feb 2006 First test protocol Dec Background information 3.1 Policy making in Europe The European Commission has set out the general framework of In-Use Compliance. The objective has already been formalised by DG ENTR in their paper [R1] on in-use compliance checking for heavy-duty vehicles and in Directive 2005/55/EC [R2], which has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 20 October The Directive repeals heavy-duty Directive 88/77/EEC with all of its subsequent amendments. The Commission s paper on in-use compliance checking [R1] stated that: "Further adaptations to the technical annexes of the adopted Directive are foreseen to include, for example, the specifications for PEMS equipment and 1 Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation 2 Vehicle road testing with on-board instrumentation 3 Data reduction and evaluation Page 10 / 34

11 the associated test protocols, when these are developed and validated. The work being completed by the US EPA will provide a solid platform for the development of a test protocol for use in the EU. It also provides a means of attaining world harmonisation in this subject area." (...) "When appropriate, this would be contained in a Commission proposal setting out the general framework for IUC (based on that of light-duty vehicles) accompanied by a proposal for a simplified NTE approach that reflects on international work through the UN-ECE." Directive 2005/55/EC incorporates two amendments to Commission s proposal COM (522) 2003 that have been agreed by the institutions and that are relevant to in-use compliance: A new recital (7) was added that states: Under all randomly selected load conditions within a defined operating range, the limit values may not be exceeded by more than an appropriate percentage. A new paragraph (Article 2(10)) was added that states: For compression-ignition or gas engines that must comply with the limit values set out in Section of Annex I under the type-approval system, the following shall apply: under all randomly selected load conditions, belonging to a definite control area and with the exception of specified engine operating conditions which are not subject to such a provision, the emissions sampled during a time duration as small as 30 seconds shall not exceed by more than 100 % the limit values in rows B2 and C of the tables in Section of Annex I. The control area to which the percentage not to be exceeded shall apply, the excluded engine operating conditions and other appropriate conditions shall be defined in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 7(1). These amendments may not represent the ideal application of a Not to Exceed concept for IUC (they are the same amendments that both institutions accepted in the case of the Directive on non-road mobile machinery). However, they allow the Commission flexibility in preparing a future proposal in this area. Therefore, the Commission s proposal to use PEMS in the future for IUC of heavy-duty vehicles is accepted by the Member States and the European Parliament. The Commission regards the PEMS project as an extremely important initiative as it provides the basis on which to conduct tests on heavy-duty vehicles in real-life operations that are far more representative than tests in the laboratory and will be capable of monitoring how heavy-duty engines vehicles actually perform outside the limitations of today s regulatory tests. However, a robust and well-developed test protocol is necessary to provide for a reliable portable emission measurement system. Therefore, the Commission proposes to launch a second phase of the PEMS project starting in 2006, a manufacturer-run pilot test programme. The test programme would enable the conduct of confirmatory tests on heavy-duty vehicles, thus, it could confirm the Page 11 / 34

12 reliability and robustness of the PEMS protocol under real-life operating conditions. Depending on the outcome and timeframe of this pilot programme, the Commission will make the necessary steps in due course to prepare a proposal for use of PEMS for in-use compliance of heavy-duty vehicles. 3.2 Project objectives As laid down in the 2005 project plan [R3], the main objectives of the EU-PEMS project have been defined as follows: To assess and validate the application and performance of portable instrumentation relative to each other, and in comparison with alternative options for IUC testing; To define a test protocol for the use of portable instrumentation within the IUC of heavy-duty vehicles; To evaluate the US Not To Exceed (NTE) approach and possibly develop a simplified method 1 in order to propose IUC pass/fail criteria; To address the need of the European industry, authorities and test houses to go through a learning process. Once the research and development works have been reached a satisfactory status, the intention is to make the test protocol and its data evaluation tools available for a pilot program, involving the European heavy-duty industry and the national authorities with the support of the Commission. 3.3 Overview of Tasks Following the prime objectives, the project has been structured into three main tasks: Task 1: Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation; Task 2: Vehicle road testing with on-board instrumentation; Task 3: Data reduction and evaluation. The main objective of Task 1 and Task 2 is to provide the information needed to define the instrumentation performance requirements. Task 2 will address the issues of calibration and verification of the equipment but also provide the modus operandi. Task 3 encompasses all data analysis and calculations. As the project foresees the development of a test protocol, the following key issues need to be addressed: To specify the equipment and the measurement instruments to be used for testing; To define the calibration, verification and performance checks for the above equipment and instruments; 1 Which could also be applicable to other types of motor vehicles and validated according to the European needs Page 12 / 34

13 To prescribe how a test must be run, i.e. how to prepare the vehicle, run the equipment and instruments and collect the data. 4 Work Progress The scope of the paragraph is to give an overview of the work that has been conducted and more precisely for the associated resources and the timing. The results and preliminary conclusions are presented in chapter 5 whereas the technical details will be further developed in the technical reports to be annexed to the present document and to be released as explained in paragraph Resources Contributions The main contributions were as laid down in the project plan [R3] and can be summarised as such: The European Commission through DG JRC acting in close cooperation with DG ENTR has prepared and co-ordinated the programme. In particular, DG JRC has followed-up and executed the vehicle road tests in co-operation with ACEA and co-ordinated the efforts for the data analysis required to examine the test results together with the relevant experts of the participating organisations. ACEA (with its members DAF, MAN, Iveco, Daimler, Volvo Powertrain, Scania) provided the test vehicles and co-operated with DG JRC to perform the on-road tests; Sensors Inc, Horiba, AVL and Control Sistem supplied the portable systems and provided training and product support whenever necessary; National laboratories (TNO, RWTÜV, IDIADA) involved in type approval and in-iuc have provided ad-hoc technical support based on their own experience. IDIADA has been involved in the preparation of a city bus test campaign that will be a joint exercise between DG JRC, IDIADA, TMB (Transports Metropolitans de Barcelona), IVECO and MAN Instruments for gaseous emissions The PEMS systems selected for this initial phase of the EU-PEMS project complied with general requirements. The main instrumentation requirements, defined in the preparatory stages of the project, can be detailed as below: To be small, lightweight and easy to install; To work with a low power consumption so that tests of at least three hours can be run either with a small generator or a set of batteries; To measure and record the concentrations of NOx, CO, CO2, THC, gases in the exhaust; To record the relevant parameters (engine data from the ECU, vehicle position from the GPS, weather data) on an included data logger; Page 13 / 34

14 To be robust and have the possibility to work under demanding environmental conditions, such as amongst others - temperature variations and vibrations. Two systems complying with the above requirements have been identified: The "SEMTECH-D" from Sensors, Inc; The "OBS-1300 from Horiba. Figure 1 - Sensors Semtech-D Figure 2 - Horiba OBS 1300 The SEMTECH-D is a commercially available PEMS. The OBS-1300 has a commercially available base (the OBS-1000) that has been upgraded for the needs of the project. The two above-mentioned systems are amongst the state of the art portable emissions measurement systems. The accuracy, repeatability and data logging capabilities that they provide were judged as sufficient to study the feasibility of PEMS for in-use conformity checking. The selection of these systems was not exclusive and other portable systems could be considered for the same application, provided that they offer at least equal characteristics in terms of dimensions, weight and measurement quality Instruments for PM Given the fact that the portable instruments presented in the previous paragraph do not include the characterisation of PM and in order to not delay the progress of work, the evaluation exercise under Task 2 (road tests) did not include any portable PM instrument. In the meantime, progress has been made for the development of portable PM instruments and some works could be started under Task 1. As far as PM instrumentation requirements are concerned, the EU-PEMS group proposed as main option to be evaluated for the mass measurement the PFS 1 technique coupled with continuous (QCM or TEOM) or filter (accumulated) mass measurements, as it establishes a link with the mass measurement used during the type approval process. It was also decided not to exclude a priori any other measurement technique that could provide either useful scientific information or be a reliable solution for the protocol. 1 Partial Flow Sampling Page 14 / 34

15 Three systems have been identified and provided so far: The Micro-PSS from Control Sistem; The Micro soot sensor from AVL; The Portable Opacimeter from AVL. Figure 3 Control Sistem Micro-PSS Figure 4 AVL Micro-Soot Sensor These systems have been considered to start an exploratory experimental phase whose objectives are for the PM portable instruments: To further refine the performance requirements; To address the issues of installation and integration of the PM instruments with the equipment for gaseous emissions. 4.2 Task 1: Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation Gaseous emissions Time frame: October 2004 January & February 2005 Emissions tests have been conducted in the EC-JRC VELA5 heavy-duty dynamic test facility to evaluate the performance of the candidate portable systems. The goal of the activity was to check how the portable systems compare with the high quality lab systems for emissions and against each other: The portable analysers (HC, CO, NOx, CO2) against the laboratory analysers; The portable exhaust flow measurement device (EFM) against the laboratory systems (Fuel flow combined with intake air mass flow measurements); The Engine Control Unit (ECU) against the laboratory systems, for engine torque, speed and fuel rate in particular. The two available portable systems tested were the Semtech-D, provided by Sensors Inc and the OBS-1300, provided by Horiba. The tests have been conducted on an Iveco Cursor 10 engine. Stationary (Custom Step (STP), European Steady State (ESC)) and transient cycles (European Transient Cycle Page 15 / 34

16 (ETC)) were performed. The number of repeats per type of test cycle and the simultaneous tests of the portable gas analysers is shown in the table below. Test Cycle PEMS Gas Analysers EFM Number of tests STP Semtech-D and OBS Semtech-D 5 STP Semtech-D and OBS OBS 5 ESC Semtech-D and OBS Semtech-D 3 ESC Semtech-D and OBS OBS 5 ETC Semtech-D and OBS OBS 4 TOTAL PM Time frame: August to October 2005 The tests concerning the evaluation of PM instruments have been conducted in the EC-JRC VELA5 heavy-duty dynamic test facility. As for gaseous emissions, the objective was to check how the portable systems compare with the laboratory systems. Test Cycle PEMS Laboratory PM Instrument Instrument(s) Number of tests CVS 6 ESC Micro-PSS PSS 20 AVL Smart Sampler (4) (6) ETC Micro-PSS CVS PSS 20 AVL Smart Sampler 18 (17) (5) ESC AVL Micro Soot Sensor CVS 2 ETC AVL Micro Soot Sensor CVS 16 TOTAL Task 2: Vehicle road testing with on-board instrumentation Time frame: October and November 2004 March to July 2005 The on-road evaluation of the PEMS systems was based on collected "realworld" emissions data at different locations and for a panel of vehicles typical for the various engine families and technologies currently existing on the European market. Seven test campaigns were conducted and therefore seven vehicles complying at least with the EURO3 requirements were tested. These vehicles are shown in the table below. Manufacturer Vehicle / Engine Capacity DAF TRUCKS CF75 FT 9.2 l DAIMLER CHRYSLER OM 501LA 12 l IVECO STRALIS / CURSOR l MAN 6.8 l RENAULT TRUCKS MIDLUM / DCI4 4 l SCANIA R l VOLVO TRUCKS FH 12 / D12D 12.1 l For every campaign, tests were carried out for: 2 PEMS systems (Sensors Semtech-D, Horiba OBS); 2 Vehicle loads (Full load and half-load or empty); A test trip of mixed driving conditions (including city, rural and highway driving) whose average duration was nearly 2 hours; Page 16 / 34

17 A minimum of 3 repeats per instrument and vehicle load was proposed that amount to nearly 150 hours of data collected for all the test campaigns. Figure 5 - Examples of installation of PEMS exhaust flow meters 4.4 Task 3: Data reduction and evaluation Time frame: Continuous effort from November 2004 The work developed under Task 3 can be categorised into different items: Harmonisation of data, calculation and reporting procedures; Evaluation of laboratory test results; Evaluation of road-test results; Evaluation of the Not To Exceed concept or alternatives. As the instruments that were used in the frame of the project had different philosophies and possibilities in terms of data reporting and processing, the group put a significant effort into the harmonisation of data and post-processing procedures, to allow a smooth a reliable start of the evaluation of the Not To Exceed concept and its alternatives. Ad-hoc project reporting procedures have been developed to ensure that all the calculations (of mass, distance specific and brake specific emissions) and verifications were done in a coherent way for the both PEMS and all the tests conducted throughout the project. The standardised test reports include, for every road test conducted in the EU- PEMS project: Second by second test data for all the parameters of the data platform ; Second by second calculated data (mass emissions, distance, fuel and brake specific); Improved time alignment procedures between the different families of parameters (analysers, EFM, engine); Data verification routines, using the duplication of measurement principle, to check for instance the directly measured exhaust flow against the calculated one; Averages and integrated values (mass emissions, distance, fuel and brake specific); Page 17 / 34

18 Data filtering, based either on geographical data (from GPS, using Sub-trips and combination of sub-trips) or on engine parameters (All engine operation or restricted area of engine map like the US-NTE area). For every campaign, a standard summary report has also been issued to allow test-to-test comparison for a given route, vehicle load and instrument combination. 5 Overview of results The scope of the present document is not to give detailed technical and scientific information on the activity. Therefore, this paragraph highlights only the type of analysis conducted, the most striking results and the information that were found to be most relevant for the development of the test protocol. Further details will be given in the technical reports (Annexes 1 to 3). 5.1 Task1: Instrumentation inter-comparison and validation Time frame for the technical report: March Gaseous emissions For the stationary tests, the correlation between the laboratory and the PEMS analysers has been evaluated for the different modes and also for the complete cycle. Figure 7 shows some examples of scatter plots obtained for the European Transient Cycle (ETC) with one of the portable systems (SYSTEM2) against the reference laboratory system (SYSTEM1). Figure 8 is an example of summary for a series of stationary tests, showing the slope of the regression lines obtained for all the (SYSTEM1, SYSTEM2) scatter plots: the left bar (value 1.00) representing the reference system and the two other bars the slope values obtained for the two PEMS systems y = 0.96x R 2 = 0.96 SYSTEM SYSTEM1 Figure 6- PEMS (SYSTEM2) versus reference system (SYSTEM1) on transient cycle (ETC) Exhaust mass flow (kg/h) Page 18 / 34

19 y = 0.99x R 2 = y = 0.83x R 2 = 0.79 SYSTEM SYSTEM (a) SYSTEM SYSTEM (b) y = 0.99x R 2 = 0.99 y = 1.02x R 2 = SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM1 (c) (d) Figure 7- PEMS (SYSTEM2) versus reference system (SYSTEM1) on transient cycle (ETC) Concentrations [ppm] of HC (a), CO (b), CO2 (c), NOx (d) VELA5 SEMTECH OBS STP_ STP_ STP_ STP_240105_02 STP_ STP_250105_02 STP_ STP_ Figure 8- Slopes of scatter plots portable systems versus reference system on stationary cycle (STP) CO2 concentration [ppm] Page 19 / 34

20 The main lessons learned from the correlation testing for gaseous species and exhaust mass flow measurements can be summarised as such: The correlation between the portable systems on the reference laboratory systems is good: under both stationary and transient conditions, the portable instruments exhibit response times and accuracies close to the laboratory analysers, apart from the CO measurements. In the latter case, the portable analyser, whose range is wide, is compared with two laboratory analysers (one for the higher range and one for the lower range). Care must be exercised for the calibration and verification of both systems (for instance calibrating both the portable and the laboratory systems with the same mixtures) Sampling is an important issue: the exhaust temperature must be carefully monitored at different locations of the test set-up, as cold spots can lead to condensation- evaporation phenomena for HC PM As the corresponding activity and the data evaluation are on going, the results cannot be reported in the present report but will be presented in the technical report to be issued for Task Task 2: Road tests Time frame for the technical report: January 2006 As the main objective was a continuous development and improvement of the test protocol, the contents and the requirements for the various test campaigns were adapted to the needs corresponding to the stages of the project. For instance, the first two test campaigns, conducted with Iveco (October 2004) and Volvo (November 2004) were used to develop the test protocol. For the other five campaigns, the tests were carried out according to the complete set of requirements and for the last three with the complete package of data verification and analysis tools Test routes The selected test routes included typical urban, suburban (mixed), and highway driving. Whenever possible, the trips have included a combination of: Hill climbs; Segments with cruising at constant speed and segments that are highly transient in their character; Different altitudes. The candidate routes minimum duration was of one hour. From the start-up of the project, the strategy was that in-use testing should entail multiple shorterlength tests, rather than fewer extended length tests in order to prevent voiding tests due to component failures or operator errors. The trips were run with unloaded (or semi-loaded) and loaded vehicles. Page 20 / 34

21 The representative character of the proposed trips is illustrated from Figure 9a to Figure 9c. Figure 9a shows that the trip length differs from manufacturer to manufacturer but was at least not shorter than 50 km. The altitudes also differ from test site to test site, with average altitudes ranging from 30m to 700m, as illustrated in Figure 9b. The trip average speeds presented in Figure 9c were obviously influenced by the distance driven on the motorway. TRIP LENGTH [km] COMPLETE TRIP VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER (a) ALTITUDE [m]. AVERAGE SPEED [km/h] COMPLETE TRIP COMPLETE TRIP VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER (b) 0 VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER (c) Figure 9 Characteristics of the test trips (a) Total Length (b) Altitudes (c) Average speed (d) Emissions measurements It is beyond the scope of the present document to present detailed analysis of the results. Therefore, the objective of the present paragraph is simply to highlight the type of analysis conducted from the emissions road data and to illustrate the on-going investigations regarding: The evaluation of on vehicle instrumentation behaviour; The development of the test protocol (for calculations and verifications of the test data). The base measured quantities concentrations and exhaust mass flow - have been analysed in order to illustrate possible differences arising from the instruments and/or the real-world testing conditions. On the following charts (Figure 10 and Figure 11), the average measured values obtained for the complete trips are presented: one bar represents the result obtained for a given test trip, vehicle load and PEMS. The associated error bar illustrates the effect of road and environment upon the average value and therefore the effects of: Page 21 / 34

22 Weather (wind, temperature and humidity); Vehicle speed (influenced by the traffic conditions and the driver behaviour). Every group of 4 bars represents one vehicle and one route, with from left to right: Value for PEMS 1 Fully loaded vehicle Value for PEMS 2 - Fully loaded vehicle Value for PEMS 1 Empty or half-loaded vehicle Value for PEMS 2 - Empty or half-loaded vehicle The test-to-test repeatability can be evaluated from the error bars in Figure 10 and Figure 11, but is better estimated in Figure 12, that shows the test-to-test repeatability of the CO2 average concentration, for one instrument, one vehicle load and one route. CO2, EFM (average deviation below 3% for the same driver) and NOx (average deviation below 10%) measurements were found to exhibit an excellent test-to-test repeatability, when the traffic conditions and the driver behaviour do not vary significantly. HC is strongly affected by the vehicle temperature condition whereas CO is influenced by the trip characteristics in terms of accelerations. The latter has been observed by separating the emissions on motorway and out of motorway sub-trips. The CO emissions, were found to be significantly influenced, by the dynamic character 1 of the trips: lower values are therefore obtained for the motorway sub-trips that present less speed variations than the city or rural sub-trips. COMPLETE TRIP AVERAGE CORR. NOx CONCENTRATION [ppm] PEMS1 PEMS2 PEMS1 - LL PEMS2 - LL VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER Figure 10 - Trip average NOx Concentrations for all the test campaigns 1 Indicators of the dynamic character are the number and frequency of accelerations and decelerations of the vehicle. Page 22 / 34

23 COMPLETE TRIP 1000 AVERAGE EXHAUST MASS FLOW [kg/h] PEMS1 PEMS2 PEMS1 - LL PEMS2 - LL 0 VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER Figure 11 - Trip average exhaust mass flow An indication of instrument effects may also be observed when looking at families of two bars. These effects were found to be significant when the difference in % between the two PEMS systems was exceeding by far the testto-test average deviation. AVERAGE DEVIATION [%] TEST-TO-TEST REPEATABILITY (AS AVERAGE DEVIATION FOR A SERIES OF 3 TESTS) PEMS1 PEMS2 PEMS1 - LL PEMS2 - LL VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER 1 Figure 12- CO2 concentration Test-to-test repeatability (Average deviation 1 ) 1 The average deviation is the average distance to the mean expressed in percentage of the mean Page 23 / 34

24 COMPLETE TRIP 20 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INSTRUMENTS CO2 [%] PEMS FL PEMS - LL 0 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER Figure 13- Example of instrument effects: Difference in % between PEMS1 and PEMS2 on the trip average CO2 concentration Evaluation of real-world in-use emissions results One of the project objectives was To evaluate the US Not To Exceed (NTE) approach and possibly develop a simplified method in order to propose IUC pass/fail criteria. In that respect, the first step taken by the group was to review the different options [R6] and their implication in terms of testing and data required and finally to open the debate on the method to be adopted to derive the in-use limits. The different options, together with the corresponding evaluations based on the collected data, will be discussed in detail in the technical report of Task 3. They can be summarised through two main questions: 1. What type of emissions data should be considered: Brake, distance or fuel specific emissions? Brake specific emissions, for instance, incorporate trip effects, as the mass emissions become specific to the trip work. They are also consistent with the homologation approach that is made for engines on the basis of brake-specific emissions. However, the brake-specific emissions rely on reliable engine torque measurements that can only be provided through Engine Control Units, which implies technical (accuracy, calibration ) and legal aspects (Use of ECU as an instrument in an official test procedure). The brake specific results that are presented in Figure 14 (for NOx and the complete test trips) indicate that the brake specific emissions were found to be almost independent from the vehicle, the test routes and the instrument: All fully-loaded vehicles produce an average 6 g/kwh. The only exception was observed for (WM2530, PEMS2) that could clearly be attributed to a measurement effect (malfunctioning of a NOx analyser). Page 24 / 34

25 COMPLETE TRIP BRAKE SPECIFIC NOx [g/kw.h] PEMS1 PEMS2 PEMS1 - LL PEMS2 - LL 2 0 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER Figure 14- Brake-specific emissions for 6 vehicles and the complete trips 2. Should the calculation account for all engine operation or not? Emissions could be calculated for the complete engine operation or restricted to a limited area of the engine maps. The US Not To Exceed (NTE) tool is one example of data extraction based on engine operating points, i.e. where the calculation of emissions is made only for those points that are within the NTE area (illustrated in Figure 15). In the US-NTE, there are several other conditions to be met (based on engine parameters mainly) for the data to be taken into consideration. In addition to these conditions, there is a minimum sampling time of 30 seconds Figure 16 shows the test times (in % of total test time) whose engine operation (based on engine speed and torque values) was falling within the US-NTE area: for the fully loaded vehicles, an average of 20% of the total test time was found within the NTE area whereas the same figure was only about 10% or less for empty or half-loaded vehicles. This observation raises questions about the cost-effectiveness of a NTE concept and the design of test routes to maximize the test times in the NTE area. Therefore, some alternative solutions not involving brake-specific emissions and/or Not To Exceed, such as the compliance factor (ratio between the certification data and the in-use data) will also be evaluated by the group. Page 25 / 34

26 US-NTE (Not To Exceed) Definitions: Engine torque (Nm) Applicable at: -Altitudes<5500 ft -Normal operating conditions 0.5xPmax 100% 75% Pmax n low = 0% (at 0.5xPmax) n high = 100% (at 0.7xPmax) n (limit NTE)=15% A speed=25% B speed=50% C speed=75% 0.7xPmax 50% = NTE-control area 25% 0.3xMmax 0.3xPmax n low A B C n high AE 0% 15% 25% 50% 75% 100% Engine speed (rpm) Figure 15- Definition of US-NTE area COMPLETE TRIP - WITH 30s RULE FULL LOAD LOW LOAD %TIME IN NTE AREA VM1715 VM5512 VM6740 VM0015 VM2001 VM3542 VM2530 MANUFACTURER Figure 16- Percentage of test time in the US-NTE area with the 30 second rule 6 Preliminary conclusions and recommendations The scope of the present paragraph is to present the approach chosen and the decisions made for the development of the test protocol. Generally speaking, this approach is based on the conclusions from the first experimental activities and built around the existing legal requirements, i.e. the new European Directive [R2] and the United States Part 1065 [R7] that has a specific chapter (Subpart J) addressing in-field testing. The present chapter does not address the details of the proposed protocol, that will be included in the test protocol to be released as annex with the final version of this report. 6.1 Instrumentation PEMS equipment technology and performance From the figures observed: Page 26 / 34

27 - During the laboratory inter-comparison exercise (Task 1, comparison of measurements made PEMS and laboratory instruments (see paragraph 5.1); - From the on-road emissions measurements (in terms of test to test repeatability (paragraph 5.2.2, Figure 12 and Figure 13) for a given instrument and vehicle load; The performance (accuracy, repeatability) of the core measurements (analysers concentrations and exhaust mass flow) is satisfactory. When possible, the performance requirements for the PEMS equipment can be aligned with established existing requirements for laboratory instrumentation (Annex III, Appendix 4 of the EU Directive [R2]) PEMS requirements must be established for the measurement devices that do not exist nor are allowed for laboratory testing: Engine Control Unit Global Positioning System The calculation of exhaust flow through Fuel or/and Intake air flow or/and A/F should be allowed, provided that the quality of on-board measured flows matches the one required for homologation testing. Further information is available in a very detailed technology review on PEMS, presented in a US-EPA technical support document [R8] PEMS calibration and verification Calibration procedures: as for the instrumentation, the requirements will be aligned with established existing requirements for laboratory instrumentation shall be aligned with the existing calibration procedures in Annex III, Appendix 5 of the Directive [R2] PEMS verification procedures, both for the verification to be carried out at regular intervals and the verifications to be made before each test, must be established for: The quantities broadcasted by the Engine Control Unit (Engine torque or percent torque, engine speed and fuel rate); The Exhaust Flow Meter; The weather station (ambient temperature and humidity); The Global Positioning System. Qualification of engine torque shall be further developed, by establishing a correlation between engine torque and other engine parameters (fuel rate for diesel vehicles in particular). Page 27 / 34

28 Some verification procedures implemented in the frame of the road tests were found satisfactory and could be proposed to solve a few aforementioned issues, like for instance: The execution of a short pre-test (10 to 20 minutes) with a verification of the complete data set; The zero-span of the gas analysers every before and after each test run, therefore approximately every two hours; The verification of data using the duplication of measurements (like for instance the calculated versus the directly measured exhaust flow, the data from the weather station against the data from the engine control unit, etc ). 6.2 Installation of instruments The preliminary requirements for the installation of instruments on the vehicles and used for the road test campaigns have been addressed in the Guide for infield tests, that will be updated to match the test protocol. The installation of instruments in its current form can be judged as acceptable (see paragraph 4.3 of the present report). An issue that will be further specified in the test protocol and next version of the Guide is the backpressure that could be induced by the EFM. 6.3 Execution of tests The preliminary requirements for the execution of tests used for the road test campaigns have been addressed in the Guide for in-field tests, that will be updated to match the test protocol. The issues that will be further specified in the test protocol and next version of the Guide are: The more detailed requirements for the test routes (in terms of distance, type, altitude and weather conditions); The in-field verification of the measurement devices and more precisely the qualification of: o Engine speed (using a secondary measurement device); o Weather data (using the duplication of measurement principle, i.e. cross checking the data from the ECU and from the weather station) o Qualification of EFM after pre-tests The execution of the pre-test and the associated calculations and verifications; The procedures to select and unselect the data through the use of GPS, checkpoints, and the combination of sub-trips; Recommendations for cold start (important for the future generations of vehicles equipped with after-treatment systems) Page 28 / 34

29 6.4 Calculations and data analysis The calculations formula to be aligned with the existing calculation formula for raw transient testing established in Annex III, Appendix 2 of the Directive [R2] for the European Transient Cycle and more precisely for: Corrections (Dry to wet, NOx humidity); Calculation of mass emissions; Calculation of brake-specific emissions. The formula whose validity may be questionable for on-road applications will be subject to review. 7 EU-PEMS future activities 7.1 On board PM measurements The first and most critical issue is the status of development of commercially available PM portable instrumentation. There are several problems associated with the development of a reliable measurement procedure for PM: Number of available measurement techniques; Parameters that can influence the results either in the test set-up or the test settings; In their technology review presented in December 2004 regarding the available measurement techniques [R9], Horiba insisted on the variety of methods that could be considered. As outcome of the discussion, the EU-PEMS group proposed to take into consideration the following elements: The target in the EU context is a two hours on-road test; The main approach for homologation is so far mass measurement and the procedures to be developed for in-use conformity must keep the link with mass measurement; Partial Flow Sampling (PFS), that is an accepted measurement principle for laboratory testing, is also a technology ready for on-board testing; One of the options considered to evaluate test data is based on the Not To Exceed principle, which requires a continuous mass measurement in order to extract the PM mass data for those points that are in the NTE area. Therefore, the EU-PEMS group proposed as main option to be evaluated for the mass measurement the PFS technique coupled with global or continuous mass measurement (QCM or TEOM), as it establishes a link with the mass measurement and because it is straightforward to link it with a Not To Exceed type compliance tool. Alternative options, not making use of the NTE but rather able to provide a YES/NO evaluation should not be excluded, like for instance filter mass based measurements or soot measurements. Page 29 / 34

30 7.2 Other measurement issues The scope of the present chapter is to list the issues that will be reviewed by the group on the basis of the data already collected and/or once more data as been generated (from additional experimental activities and/or the pilot program). The future vehicle technologies that encompass engine, after treatment technologies and fuels are expected to have an effect both on the test protocol and the accuracy required for the measurements. Therefore, the robustness of the protocol shall be evaluated for the following issues: Lower emission levels and accuracy of the portable analysers; Cold start requirements for vehicles equipped with catalytic converters and/or PM traps; Alternative fuels (Natural gas, bio-diesel, emulsions). 7.3 Methods for conformity checking The work started under task 3 of the project and whose first results are highlighted in paragraph of this report will continue. The main target will be to produce a position report (Technical report) to suggest 2 or 3 options that will be available for the pilot programme to be started mid technical activities of the EU-PEMS group The 2006 technical activities of the EU-PEMS group will be oriented towards the following objectives: - The definition of a solid protocol for on-board PM measurements; - The measurement issues linked to new vehicle technologies and emissions control systems in particular; - The definition of the heavy-duty pilot program proposed by the European Commission [R10]. The general time frame is currently as follows: PM exploratory testing (Laboratory) until Apr 2006 PM on-vehicle screening tests (City buses) from March 2006 PM on-vehicle screening tests (Trucks) from Apr 2006 Pilot program for gaseous emissions from July 2006 Pilot program including PM from July 2007 Regarding the development of the PM test protocol, the first vehicle screening tests will be conducted: On city buses under the program to be run jointly by IDIADA, TMB, EC- JRC, SENSORS, AVL, HORIBA, MAN and IVECO. Two vehicles will be tested in March 2006 and two vehicles in June 2006; On trucks, under co-operative test campaigns to be run jointly by EC- JRC, instrument providers and the ACEA members that have Page 30 / 34

31 volunteered. The typical duration foreseen for these trials is one week and a maximum of 5 campaigns will be carried out in Regarding the measurement issues linked to new vehicle technologies and emissions control systems, the instruments and the vehicles to be made available for the future pilot program represent an ideal opportunity to carry out the ad-hoc tests that will provide the needed information. Therefore, small test programs will be designed, upon proposal of the future co-ordinating body of the pilot program and be run with the approval of the participating parties. Page 31 / 34

32 List of acronyms Acronym Definition o A/F Air-Fuel ratio o CH4: Methane gas o CO: Carbon monoxide gas o CO2: Carbon dioxide gas o ECU: Engine Control Unit o EFM: Exhaust Flow Meter o ESC: European Steady state Cycle o ETC: European Transient Cycle o FID: Flame Ionisation Detector analyser o FS: Full Scale o GPS: Global Positioning System o I/O: Input / Output o NDIR: Non-Dispersive Infrared analyser o NDUV: Non-Dispersive Ultraviolet analyser o NO: Nitric oxide gas o NO2: Nitric dioxide gas o NOx: Nitric oxides gases o O2: Oxygen gas o PEMS: Portable Emission Measurement System o PM: Particulate Matter o PFS Partial Flow Sampling o PID: Vehicle data Parameter IDentifier o QCM Quartz Cristal Microbalance o SAE: Society of Automotive Engineers o STP Custom Step Cycle o TEOM Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance o THC: Total Hydrocarbons Page 32 / 34

33 8 References R1. Commission paper by Directorate General Enterprise on "In-use compliance checking (IUC) for heavy-duty vehicles", 95th meeting of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Group, Brussels, 26th of January R2. European Directive 2005/55/EC on the "approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from compression-ignition engines for use in vehicles, and the emission of gaseous pollutants from positive-ignition engines fuelled with natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas for use in vehicles" R3. European Project On Portable Emissions Measurement Systems: "EU- PEMS" Project: Project Plan 2005, February R4. European Project On Portable Emissions Measurement Systems: "EU- PEMS" Project: Guide for the preparation and the execution of the road tests, Version 1.0, May R5. Alf Ekermo (Volvo) - In-use US testing experience, presentation at the 2nd meeting of the PEMS planning group, Brussels, 22nd of January R6. Alf Ekermo (Volvo) - PEMS-testing at Volvo in Gothenburg, presentation at the meeting of the PEMS project steering group, Ispra, 11th of April R7. US Code of Federal Regulations Part 1065, US Environmental Protection Agency, June 2005 R8. In-Use Testing Program for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles, Technical Support Document, US Environmental Protection Agency, June 2005, R9. Les Hill (Horiba) PEMS Possible Measurement Methods for On-Board Particulate Measurement, Brussels, presentation at the meeting of the PEMS project steering group, Brussels, 12th of December R10. Commission paper by Directorate General Enterprise on Pilot Programme for use of Portable Emissions Measurement Systems (PEMS) in Heavy Duty Vehicle In Use Compliance, 97th meeting of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Group, Brussels, 1st of December Page 33 / 34

34 The mission of the Joint Research Centre (JRC), one of the Directorates General of the European Commission (EC), is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national. LB-NA EN-C