L-Vehs Sound: Study on enhanced sound requirements for mopeds, quads and replacement silencers of L-category vehicles

Transcription

1 L-Vehs Sound: Study on enhanced sound requirements for mopeds, quads and replacement silencers of L-category vehicles A European Commission (DG GROW) project Sept Sept Leonidas Ntziachristos, LAT Giannis Papadimitriou, LAT Heinz Steven, DAC Michael Dittrich, TNO Sven Schilling, TÜV Nord MCWG Brussels,

2 Project overview The main objective of the project is to perform due diligence on UN Regulations 9, 63, 92 before accession to EU regulations Identify any eventual flaws in the test procedures that need to be addressed, ensure robustness of testing, and propose cost-beneficial improvements Assess existing or potential anti-tampering technological solutions Enhance regulatory enforcement and market surveillance provisions in UN regs. Retain international harmonisation on the regulatory front Task 1: Public consultation (M1 M4), LAT/AUTH Task 2: Technical assessment (M3 M8), HSDAC Task 3: Cost-benefit analysis (M6 M10), TNO Task 4: Proposal for amendments (M8 M12), LAT/AUTH 2

3 Progress summary since last MCWG meeting We are in M4 of project. Main achievements so far, according to plan: Task 1 almost complete Questionnaire sent to stakeholders Responses collected and organised Processing of questionnaires and analysis of responses Results and conclusions Task 2 in progress Understanding and revision of UNECE regulations Analysis and comparison with EU regulations First drafts of amendments (e.g. on additional sound emission provisions, defeat device prohibition, etc.) 3

4 Task 1: Public consultation Two versions of the questionnaire have been used to gather feedback A was targeted to social stakeholders (cities, citizens, noise concerned associations, etc.) and focused on the environmental/social aspects of noise, impacts on citizens well being B was targeted to technical stakeholders (authorities, industry, etc.) and focused on technical issues related to noise control regulations, market surveillance and enforcement In total, the questionnaire has been sent to 123 individual entities (by , followed up by targeted phone calls): Countries, cities, citizens, drivers Motorcycle and noise concerned associations Environmental organisations and institutes Social stakeholders Technical services and type approval authorities Depts. of transport, market surveillance & enforcement authorities Industry and manufacturers Technical stakeholders 4

5 Task 1: Filled in questionnaires received 44 filled in questionnaires, ~36% of the number of entities contacted 12 negative replies Exactly equal split of responses (filled in questionnaires) between social and technical entities Technical stakeholders Social stakeholders 5

6 Task 1: Questionnaires received from National responses (technical services, type approval authorities, departments of transport, etc): AT, BE, CH (2), DE, ES (2), FR, GR, IE, LV, MT, NL, NO, PL Outside Europe: CN (2) Industry and manufacturers: ACEM, ATVEA, CECRA, FIGIEFA, Akrapovič (SI) Cities: Barcelona, Budapest, Hague, Hamburg, Madrid, Paris, Rotterdam, Tallinn, Utrecht Organisations (environmental, noise concerned, motorcycle, consumer, other): CEMR, ANEC, FEVR, LI Embassy, Malta EPA, FEMA, Norwegian Association against Noise, EEA, ICCT, RIVM (NL), AVERE, KU Leuven, UniFi 6

7 Task 1: Findings on the environmental and social aspects of noise pollution from L-cat vehicles Noise from L-category vehicles is considered to still be a significant problem Mostly in urban areas Secondarily in rural areas 7

8 Task 1: Findings on the environmental and social aspects of noise pollution from L-cat vehicles The problem is considered more intense During all periods of the year Secondarily, during weekends Noisy L-category vehicles are characterised as disturbing or rather disturbing by almost all participants of the survey 8

9 Task 1: Findings on the environmental and social aspects of noise pollution from L-cat vehicles 50% of the participants characterise noisy L-category vehicles as a threat because their noise distracts their attention when walking or cycling 9

10 Task 1: Findings on the environmental and social aspects of noise pollution from L-cat vehicles Who is the main responsible for noise? (1: main responsible, 4: less responsible) 1. The drivers that tune their vehicles 2. The weak enforcement of regulations 3. The non effective regulations 4. The industry (non-original silencers may be devices easily alterable, with several removable inserts to attenuate noise) 10

11 Task 1: Suggestions for improvement of noise control in L-cat vehicles Main problem(s) identified in lack of adequate market surveillance and enforcement of regulations, and not so much in type approval procedure What is suggested: Anti-tampering measures, better market surveillance and enforcement (e.g. by police control) Prohibition of defeat devices and of easy manipulation by design Make more difficult to remove parts from an approved silencer Improve noise tests in more real driving conditions and better check of noise in motion Make the market more attractive for silent eco-friendly vehicles 11

12 Task 2: Technical assessment Objective: Ensure that the UNECE regulations 9, 63 and 92 provide at least the same or, favourably, improved level of stringency with respect to type-approval, market surveillance and enforcement requirements, concerning sound emissions, as the EU regulations and provide the technical background required for the later introduction of Euro 5 sound level limits. Assess, if those three UN Regulations contain the necessary references to and deliver the minimum test results level which are used for type-approval, market surveillance and enforcement purposes in the EU, concerning sound emissions. A further aspect is related to additional sound emission provisions (ASEP), which are intended to ensure, that the sound emissions in real world driving are in line with the sound levels measured during type approval. Such provisions are already laid down in ECE R 41. It will be assessed, whether they should be added to ECE R 9 and R 92 as well, to the extent that the direct reference of R 92 to R is not sufficient. 12

13 Task 2: Technical assessment Work done so far: First draft amendment version of Regulation 9, 63 and 92 covering the following issues: Complementation and modifications of definitions (rated maximum net power, reference mass, test mass, maximum vehicle speed) Modification of paragraph 6 Specifications 6.1 General specifications and 6.2 Specifications regarding sound levels only editorial modifications 6.3 Additional prescriptions related to tamperability and manually adjustable multimode exhaust or silencing systems was restructured and complemented as follows: 6.3 Additional requirements, Tampering protection measures, Manually or electronically controlled adjustable multi-mode exhaust or silencing systems, Prohibition of defeat devices, 6.3.4, 6.3.5, Additional sound emission provisions, user selectable software programs, compliance statement of the manufacturer according to Regulation

14 Task 2: Technical assessment Work done so far: First draft amendment version of Regulation 9, 63 and 92 covering the following issues (continued): Annex 3 (restructured and complemented by paragraph 4 according to Regulation 41): 2. Conditions of measurement 2.1 Test site, weather conditions and background sound correction, 2.2 Condition of the vehicle, 3. Methods of testing 3.1 Measurement of sound of vehicles in motion, 3.2 Measurement of sound emitted by stationary vehicles, 4 Sound from the vehicle in motion (data reported to facilitate in motion testing of the vehicle in use) 14

15 Task 2: Technical assessment Work done so far: First draft amendment version of Regulation 9, 63 and 92 covering the following issues (continued): Annex 4 (Limit values for sound of vehicles in motion): The limit values in paragraph 6 of Regulation 9 were put into a new Annex 4. Annex 5 in Regulation 9 and Regulation 63 needs to be updated in order to bring it in line with ISO 10844:2014. A Statement of Compliance with the Additional Sound Emission Provisions was added to Regulation 9 as annex 7 and Regulation 63 as annex 6, Additional Sound Emission Provisions (ASEP) were added to Regulation 9 as Annex 6, This annex is copied from ECE R 41 (annex 7) and needs to be substantially revised. A Method for measuring the maximum design vehicle speed was added in Regulation 9 as annex 8 and in Regulation 63 as annex 7. The text and the requirements were taken from EU 134/2014, annex X, appendix 1. 15

16 Next steps of the project Task 1: Public consultation Finalise the report which summarises the work performed Task 2: Technical assessment Discuss the proposed amendments with the EC and other stakeholders Elaborate a more specific and appropriate annex 6 (ASEP) for regulation 9 (specify vehicle subgroups and driving conditions) Prepare informal papers for the 63 rd GRB (16-18/2/2016) Task 3: Cost benefit analysis Start in January

17 Thank you for your attention!