Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Certification Options for Phase 2 James Sanchez Environmental Protection Agency October 22, 2013
EPA Team Acknowledgement Matthew Spears, Angela Cullen, Houshun Zhang, Byungho Lee, Prashanth Gururaja, Kevin Newman, Paul Dekraker SwRI Team Joe Anthony, Jayant Sarlashkar, Chad Stovell, Anthony Phan, Joe Steiber 2
Outline Greenhouse Gass Emission (GHG) Phase I GHG Phase II Update Certification Options for GHG Phase II Vehicle Simulations Model Validation Challenges Testing Variability Next Steps 3
Phase 1 - Highlights First ever Medium- & Heavy-Duty Standards Will reduce fuel consumption, CO 2 emissions, and operating costs for thousands of businesses Allows manufacturers to produce a single fleet of vehicles to meet requirement 530 million barrels less oil 270 MMT lower GHGs $50 billion in fuel savings $49 billion in net benefits 4
Phase 1 - Overview HD Engines Vocational vehicle, regulated via the chassis 5
Phase I Greenhouse Gas Emission Model (GEM) Energy Loss for 2010 Class 8 Trucks at 65 mph and 80,000 lb GVW EPA pre-specified Allowed user inputs Total Engine Loss 57-59% Inertial/Braking 0-2% Aerodynamic Loss 15-22% Vehicle Auxiliary Loads 1-4% Drivetrain 2-4% Rolling Resistance 13-16% 6
Phase II GEM Heat Rejection Exhaust Gas Friction Parasitic Loss Pumping Loss Total Engine Loss Inertial/Braking Aerodynamic Loss Vehicle Auxiliary Loads Transmission Axles and Shaft Rolling Resistance Phase II is a highly technical rule Certification should consider all components and systems that can be measured in a chassis and engine dyno cell in order to improve engine and vehicle efficiency 7
Range of Potential Certification Options (1) Full Vehicle Simulation + Simulation Hardware (2) Vehicle Simulation + Engine Standards + TCM/ECM (3) Controllers-in-the-loop Simulation or + TCM (4) Engine-in-the-loop Simulation (two variations) Vehicle simulation is one of the key certification elements regardless which option is selected (5) Vehicle Simulation + Powertrain-in-the-loop/ Engine Standard (6) Full Chassis Dyno Test 8
GEM Development and Support Team Heat Rejection Exhaust Gas Friction Parasitic Loss Pumping Loss Total Engine Loss Inertial/Braking Aerodynamic Loss Vehicle Auxiliary Loads Transmission Axles and Shaft Rolling Resistance GEM EPA Certification Tool GEM Validations Over 160 vehicle Variants Utilize some of the best facilities in the world EPA s National Vehicle & Fuel Emissions Laboratory Southwest Research Institute Oak Ridge National Laboratory National Renewable Energy Laboratory Environment Canada State-of-the-art facilities and Testing Team EPA modeling team supported my SwRI modeling program 9
GEM Development and Enhancement The Agency formed a strong internal team, working with Southwest Research Institute to develop the next generation of the GEM The key technical features of this enhanced GEM include More advanced engine controller o Engine fuel cut-off model during braking and deceleration o Idle controller Transmission models o Automatic transmission o Automated manual transmission Enhanced driver model Frictional clutch model GEM Graphical User Interface (GUI) 10
Vehicle and Powertrain Tests in Supporting GEM Vehicle chassis and powertrain testing at Southwest Research Institute One Class 6 box delivery truck chassis dyno tests with 7x6 test matrix One Class 6 flat bed vocational truck chassis dyno tests with 7x6 test matrix Kenworth T700 Class 8 tractor-trailer chassis dyno tests with 7x6 test matrix Daimler Cascadia Class 8 truck-trailer chassis dyno tests One transit city bus chassis dyno tests One garbage truck chassis dyno tests MD powertrain test with 7x6 test matrix HD powertrain test at Oak Ridge National Lab is being planned with DOE-EPA interagency agreement Driving cycle refinement with National Renewable Energy Lab is being planed with DOE-EPA interagency agreement Vehicle testing at Environment Canada Class 6 open box truck testing underway Coordinating additional testing opportunities GEM Validations will be done against over 160 vehicle variants 11
Outline Greenhouse Gass Emission (GHG) Phase I GHG Phase II Update Certification Options for GHG Phase II Vehicle Simulations Model Validation Challenges Testing Variability Next Steps 12
Sources of Chassis Testing Variability Driver behavior Pedal inputs Shift schedule Powertrain temperature Aftertreatment temperature Tire temperature Accessory load 13
Chassis Dynamometer Pedal Positions 100 90 80 Human driver has significantly different behavior for each test. Run 1 Run 2 Accelerator Pedal Positon, % 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time, Seconds 14
Chassis Dynamometer CO 2 Comparison CO 2 Mass Rate, kg/hr 120 100 80 60 40 At low load, the driver s behavior difference only slightly affected CO 2. Run 1 Run 2 Pedal variability affects CO 2 emissions more at higher loads. 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time, Seconds 15
Powertrain Cell Pedal Position Comparison 100 90 80 Accelerator pedal controlled by an actuator with the GEM Driver Model. Run 1 Run 2 Accelerator Pedal Positon, % 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time, Seconds 16
Powertrain Cell CO 2 Comparison 120 100 The powertrain test cell produces nearly identical CO 2 rates. The variability is comparable to an engine test cell. Run 1 Run 2 CO 2 Mass Rate, kg/hr 80 60 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time, Seconds 17
Next Steps Detailed pros and cons for each option are being analyzed The refined GEM will be comprehensively validated against over 160 vehicle variants 18