OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORT CANADA S LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE (LDV) TIRE INVESTIGATION AND PLANNED TESTING OF CLASS 8 HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE (HDV) TIRES IN WINTER CONDITIONS ecotechnology for Vehicles Program (etv II) 2012 Tire Technology Expo, Cologne, Germany February 14, 2012 RDIMS # 7125861
Overview 1. ecotechnology for Vehicles II Program (etv II) 2. Background Tire Labelling 3. Part 1 etv Light Duty Vehicle (LDV) Tire Investigation 4. Part 2 etv II Heavy Duty Vehicle (HDV) Tire Investigation 5. Moving Forward 2
1. ecotechnology for Vehicles II Program The ecotechnology for Vehicles II (etv II) Program supports Transport Canada (TC) s strategic objective to develop a safe and environmentally responsible transportation system. Supports a proactive and integrated approach to address environmental benefits and potential safety risks of advanced transportation technologies. The initiative tests, evaluates and provides expert technical information on the environmental and safety performance of advanced light-duty vehicle (LDV) and heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) technologies. The program builds upon the program delivery experience and technical capacity established under the predecessor ecotechnology for Vehicles Program (2007-2011). Technical findings from the program: guide the proactive development of new or revised safety regulations, standards, codes and guidelines; support the development of non-regulatory industry codes and standards that anchor the market and industry efforts to integrate new vehicle technologies; and, help inform the development of future vehicle emissions regulations. 3
2. Background Tire Labelling Programs The European Union (EU) regulation 661/2009 will set mandatory rolling resistance of 12 kg/t for all passenger car tires and EU regulation 1222/2009 will have mandatory consumer information for tires produced after July 2012. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a proposed regulation in June 2009 that included rating systems for rolling resistance, wet traction and treadwear. Canada is also considering implementing a tire program to promote the use of fuel efficient tires. EU Tire Label 2012 NHTSA Proposed Rating System and Rubber Manufacturers Association Alternative 4
3. Part 1 Light Duty Vehicle (LDV) Low Rolling Resistance (LRR) Tire Investigation Objectives In 2009-2010, as part of the program s mandate to test and evaluate emerging advanced vehicle technologies, etv conducted a preliminary investigation of 25 light-duty vehicle tire models (including 4 winter tire models) to: evaluate whether rolling resistance coefficients can be used to compare the environmental benefits of tires; estimate the extent to which rolling resistance can affect fuel consumption; investigate whether rolling resistance has an impact on dry braking distances; compare coast down data to rolling resistance values; and, assess whether there is a relationship between Uniform Tire Quality Gradient (UTQG) ratings for traction and treadwear and rolling resistance coefficients. 5
3. Part 1 Light-Duty Vehicle (LDV) LRR Tire Project Testing was divided into two phases: Test Methodology Phase #1 Laboratory testing (rolling resistance coefficients). Steady speed (standard reference conditions & special conditions). Coast down (standard reference conditions & special conditions). Standard mean equivalent rolling force (over driving cycle at standard reference conditions). Phase #2 Dynamic testing. Braking distance (100-5 km/h). SAE J1263 coast downs. 6
3. Part 1 Rolling Resistance Coefficients Results Findings Within the sample of 25 tires tested, there was a 46% variance in rolling coefficients. Rolling resistance also appeared to be independent of tire classification (all season vs. winter). 7
3. Part 1 Braking Distance Results Does rolling resistance affect braking distance? 49.5 Tire #22 48.5 Tire #21 Tire #12 Tire #17 Tire #6 Tire #18 Tire #11 Tire #9 Tire #5 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 Dynamic Rolling Resistance Coefficient (Fz/Fn) 8.0 47.5 46.5 45.5 Tire #25 44.5 43.5 7.0 Braking Distance (m) - 100-0 km/h Pontiac G5 (P195/60R15) Toyota Camry (P215/60R16) Findings Preliminary findings suggest there is no correlation between rolling resistance and braking distance. 8
3. Part 1 Coast Down Results Does rolling resistance affect coast down times? 120 100 Speed (km/h) 80 60 40 20 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Time (s) Tire #6 (12.06) Tire #5 (11.72) Tire #12 (11.54) Tire #9 (11.43) Tire #11 (11.18) Tire #17 (10.60) Tire #18 (10.17) Tire #21 (8.99) Tire #22 (8.77) Tire #25 (7.37) Findings On-road tests results indicate a correlation between tire rolling resistance values and coast down times supporting the fuel savings potential of LRR tires. 9
3. Part 1 Treadwear vs. Rolling Resistance Do tires with a lower rolling resistance coefficient wear faster? Findings Preliminary tests suggest that there is no obvious relationship between tread wear and rolling resistance. 10
3. Part 1 Wet Traction vs. Rolling Resistance Does a lower rolling resistance value compromise traction? Findings Tests did not demonstrate any apparent relationship between UTQG traction and rolling resistance. 11
3. Part 1 Cost vs. Rolling Resistance Do tires with a lower rolling resistance coefficient cost more? Light Duty Passenger Vehicle Tire Testing Price ($) vs. Static Rolling Resistance Coefficient (SRC) 300 250 200 150 100 Price ($CDN) 50 12.00 11.75 11.50 11.25 11.00 10.75 10.50 10.25 10.00 9.75 9.50 9.25 9.00 8.75 8.50 8.25 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.25 0 7.00 Rolling Resistance Coefficient (Fz/Fn*1000) Findings Tests did not demonstrate any correlation between price and rolling resistance. 12
3. Part 1: Summary Based on a preliminary investigation of 25 tires, results suggest that LRR tire technologies can help reduce fuel consumption of light-duty vehicles without negatively affecting traction, braking performance or tire life (tread wear). However, what about heavy-duty (e.g. Class VIII Long-Haul) vehicles? 13
4. PART 2 Investigations into Class 8 Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDVs) Low Rolling Resistance (LRR) and Single Wide Based (SWB) Tires Rationale North American GHG programs for heavy-duty vehicles will accelerate the market uptake of LRR and SWB tires; Canadian industry has cited concerns about traction capabilities of LRR tires under certain cold weather (winter) conditions; and, Transport Canada is studying correlations between rolling resistance and durability, and winter traction. Objectives Study correlations between rolling resistance, durability, and traction; Provide Transport Canada with data to better understand tire performance; and, Share results with other Federal departments (Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada) who share aspects of tire regulation and reporting. 14
Testing comprised of 2 main approaches: 4. PART 2: Testing Methodology 1. Laboratory Testing Smithers Rapra (Ravenna, OH) 2. Dynamic (Track) Testing Smithers Rapra Winter Tire Testing Facility (Brimley, Michigan) GMs Cold Weather Testing Facility (Kapuskasing, ON) Rolling resistance and durability testing machine Class VIII heavy duty vehicle (18 wheel) 15
4. Part 2: Laboratory Testing A minimum of 10 distinct LRR EPA SmartWay-verified tires, and approximately 8 non-lrr tires (295/75R22.5 or equivalent), and up to 10 distinct SWB tires (445/50/R22.5). Testing objectives are to evaluate: Rolling Resistance (ISO 28580) Endurance (CMVSS 119) Snow traction performance (modified ASTM F1805) Data captured or calculated Rolling resistance coefficients Change in tire pressure, time to failure, type of failure Traction coefficients, acceleration (m/s 2 or G) 16
4. Part 2: Dynamic Track Testing Up to 10 distinct sets (up to 3 different tires per set) of LRR EPA SmartWay-verified tires (including one control tire), and up to 10 distinct sets of SWB tires (also including one baseline control tire) For both phase 1 (winter weather) and phase 2 (wet weather), testing objectives are to evaluate: Straight line braking (SAE J299) Acceleration (SAE J1491) Low speed turning (internal) Data captured or calculated Maximum straight line deceleration (m/s 2 or G) Acceleration (m/s 2 or G) Rate of turn, lateral acceleration (m/s 2 or G) 17
5. Moving Forward Laboratory testing will evaluate relationships between rolling resistance, durability, and winter traction of tires under controlled conditions. Results are expected by March 31, 2012. Winter performance track testing will evaluate relationships between rolling resistance and straight line braking, acceleration and low speed turning on snow covered pavement. Results are expected by April 30, 2012. Summer performance testing will evaluate relationships between rolling resistance and straight line braking, acceleration, and low speed turning on wet pavement. Results are expected by June 30, 2012. The need for additional testing will be assessed in mid-2012 and if work is needed, it will be completed in the winter of 2012/2013. 18