2021
DOI: 10.3390/en15010122
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the Effect of Chassis Dynamometer Load Setting on CO2 Emissions and Energy Demand of a Full Hybrid Vehicle

Abstract: Among the solutions that make it possible to reduce CO2 emissions in the transport sector, particularly in urban traffic conditions, are hybrid vehicles. The share of driving performed in electric mode for hybrid vehicles is highly dependent on motion resistance. There are different methods for determining the motion resistance function during chassis dynamometer testing, leading to different test results. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to determine the effect of the chassis dynamometer load f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences of upwards of 9% in terms of segment energy consumption are observed between the model and traditional one motor dynamometer operation, which become relevant in terms of vehicle or bus route design; these differences are similar to those obtained by Jaworski et al [58], who evaluated three different types of vehicle load settings (New European Driving Cycle (NEDC), Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) and their own calculations) to measure energy consumption on the same vehicle and dynamometer; presenting differences of up to 26%, depending on the load strategy used. Other authors, such as Ligterink et al, have proposed corrections to the WLTP load strategy, obtaining results of up to 10.3% with the original WLTP method.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Differences of upwards of 9% in terms of segment energy consumption are observed between the model and traditional one motor dynamometer operation, which become relevant in terms of vehicle or bus route design; these differences are similar to those obtained by Jaworski et al [58], who evaluated three different types of vehicle load settings (New European Driving Cycle (NEDC), Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) and their own calculations) to measure energy consumption on the same vehicle and dynamometer; presenting differences of up to 26%, depending on the load strategy used. Other authors, such as Ligterink et al, have proposed corrections to the WLTP load strategy, obtaining results of up to 10.3% with the original WLTP method.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…In tests on a chassis dynamometer, the motion resistance forces may differ from the actual resistance found on the road [33]. The value of motion resistance force affects not only energy consumption and exhaust emissions [34,35], but also the abrasive wear of tires and dynamometer rollers. Particle emissions from tires and brakes are also affected by the weight of the car under test.…”
Section: Results Of Dust Pollution Immission Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several factors contribute to these discrepancies, including variations in driving cycles [17][18][19][20][21] and traffic resistance encountered during real driving [22][23][24][25]. Additionally, the car's performance in urban traffic conditions is heavily influenced by the road infrastructure, such as the type of intersections [26,27], energy recovery possibilities during braking [28], and the driver's driving style [29,30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%