The development and validation of a vehicle simulator for the introduction of Worldwide Harmonized test protocol in the European light duty vehicle CO2 certification process

Fontaras, Georgios; Valverde, V.; Arcidiacono, Vincenzo; Tsiakmakis, Stefanos; Αναγνωστοπουλοσ, Κωνσταντινοσ; Komnos, Dimitrios; Pavlovic, Jelica; Ciuffo, Biagio

doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.06.009

Cited by 38 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of auxiliaries (AC and lights on) on NEDC conditions led to an average increase of 20% CO 2 for all vehicles despite the diversity of vehicle characteristics (engine power, battery capacity, AC system, type of lights, etc.). For both diesel and gasoline vehicles, the transition from NEDC to WLTC yielded a systematic increase in CO 2 emission although not all vehicles are affected in the same way confirming previously reported findings [44]. The cold start effect increases the CO 2 emission on all vehicles although the contribution for the total CO 2 differs a lot between vehicles (e.g., the CO 2 EF ratio of the cold start against the total NEDC EF is two times higher for D2 than for D7).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Emission Factors Derived from 13 Euro 6b Light-Duty Vehicles Based on Laboratory and On-Road Measurements

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tailpipe emissions of a pool of 13 Euro 6b light-duty vehicles (eight diesel and five gasoline-powered) were measured over an extensive experimental campaign that included laboratory (chassis dynamometer), and on-road tests (using a portable emissions measurement system). The New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and the Worldwide harmonised Light-duty vehicles Test Cycle (WLTC) were driven in the laboratory following standard and extended testing procedures (such as low temperatures, use of auxiliaries, modified speed trace). On-road tests were conducted in real traffic conditions, within and outside the boundary conditions of the regulated European Real-Driving Emissions (RDE) test. Nitrogen oxides (NO X ), particle number (PN), carbon monoxide (CO), total hydrocarbons (HC), and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission factors were developed considering the whole cycles, their sub-cycles, and the first 300 s of each test to assess the cold start effect. Despite complying with the NEDC type approval NO X limit, diesel vehicles emitted, on average, over the WLTC and the RDE 2.1 and 6.7 times more than the standard limit, respectively. Diesel vehicles equipped with only a Lean NO X trap (LNT) averaged six and two times more emissions over the WLTC and the RDE, respectively, than diesel vehicles equipped with a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) catalyst. Gasoline vehicles with direct injection (GDI) emitted eight times more NO X than those with port fuel injection (PFI) on RDE tests. Large NO X emissions on the urban section were also recorded for GDIs (122 mg/km). Diesel particle filters were mounted on all diesel vehicles, resulting in low particle number emission (~10 10 #/km) over all testing conditions including low temperature and high dynamicity. GDIs (~10 12 #/km) and PFIs (~10 11 #/km) had PN emissions that were, on average, two and one order of magnitude higher than for diesel vehicles, respectively, with significant contribution from the cold start. PFIs yielded high CO emission factors under high load operation reaching on average 2.2 g/km and 3.8 g/km on WLTC extra-high and RDE motorway, respectively. The average on-road CO 2 emissions were~33% and 41% higher than the declared CO 2 emissions at type-approval for diesel and gasoline vehicles, respectively. The use of auxiliaries (AC and lights on) over the NEDC led to an increase of~20% of CO 2 emissions for both diesel and gasoline vehicles. Results for NO X , CO and CO 2 were used to derive average on-road emission factors that are in good agreement with the emission factors proposed by the EMEP/EEA guidebook.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Emission Factors Derived from 13 Euro 6b Light-Duty Vehicles Based on Laboratory and On-Road Measurements

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…gearbox type, ratios, number of gears), and the engine (e.g. max power, capacity, maximum torque output) (Fontaras et al, 2018). CO2MPAS is an open-source tool, and it is available online with all its documentation (European Commission, 2015).…”

Section: Predicting Models For Co2 Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reference models used for the assessment of CO2 emissions estimates are the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions factors proposed by the EMEP/EEA guidebook, and a generic version of CO2MPAS (Fontaras et al, 2018) similar to the one described in (Tsiakmakis et al, 2017). The EMEP/EEA guidebook methodology (European Environment Agency, 2016), is more widely known by its software implementation, COPERT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It foresees an average-speed model and is frequently used in most European countries in order to estimate emissions of all major air pollutants produced by different vehicle categories. CO2MPAS is a vehicle-specific simulation model recently introduced by the EU in its vehicle CO2 certification system (Fontaras et al, 2018). Finally, it should be highlighted that the results of this study are bounded by a set of assumptions, which are summarized a) in the accuracy of the car-following models used for the simulation of different vehicle types, b) the accuracy of the emissions models, c) the accuracy of the vehicle dynamics simulation model and d) the absence of electric vehicle dynamics simulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of automation and connectivity on traffic flow and CO2 emissions. A detailed microsimulation study

Makridis

Mattas

Mogno

et al. 2020

Atmospheric Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interest on the impact of vehicle automation and connectivity in the future road transport networks is very high, both from a research and a policy perspective. Results in the literature show that many of the anticipated advantages of connected and automated vehicles or automated vehicles without connectivity (CAVs and AVs respectively) on congestion and energy consumption are questionable. Some studies provide quantitative answers to the above questions through microsimulation but they systematically ignore the realistic simulation of vehicle dynamics, driver behaviour or instantaneous emissions estimates, mostly due to the overall increased complexity of the transport systems and the need for low computational demand on large-scale simulations. However, recent studies question the capability of common car-following models to produce realistic vehicle dynamics or driving behaviour, which directly impacts emissions estimations as well. This work presents a microsimulation study that contributes on the topic, using a scenario-based approach to give insights regarding the impact of CAVs and AVs on the evolution of emissions over a highway network. The motivation here is to answer whether the different driving behaviours produce significant differences in emissions during rush hours, and how significant is the impact of detailed vehicle dynamics simulation and instantaneous emissions in the outcome. The status of the network is assessed in terms of flow and speed. Furthermore, emissions are estimated using both the average-speed EMEP/EEA fuel consumption factors and a generic version of the European Commission's CO2MPAS model that provides instantaneous fuel consumption estimates. The results of this work show that conservative driving of AVs can deteriorate the status of the network, and that connectivity is the key for improved traffic flow. Emissions-wise, the AVs have the highest fuel consumption per km travelled among other types, while CAVs only marginally lower the overall consumption of humandriven vehicles. For the same traffic demand, the total emissions for different vehicle types remain at comparable levels.

show abstract

“…Until August 2017, light vehicles in the European Union (with a reference mass not exceeding 2610 kg) were tested with the standard New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) driving test that included four repeated Urban Driving Cycles (UDCs) and one Extra Urban Driving Cycle (EUDC) [47][48][49][50]. Since September 2017, there has been a new procedure in force in the EU in the area of fuel consumption, carbon dioxide and exhaust emission standards: the Worldwide Harmonized Light-Duty Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) EU [51][52][53]. Although the WLTP is also a test carried out under laboratory conditions, it covers situations possibly closest to everyday actual operating conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Computer Tool for Modelling CO2 Emissions in Driving Cycles for Spark Ignition Engines Powered by Biofuels

Tucki¹

2021

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A driving cycle is a record intended to reflect the regular use of a given type of vehicle, presented as a speed profile recorded over a certain period of time. It is used for the assessment of engine pollutant emissions, fuel consumption analysis and environmental certification procedures. Different driving cycles are used, depending on the region of the world. In addition, drive cycles are used by car manufacturers to optimize vehicle drivelines. The basis of the work presented in the manuscript was a developed computer tool using tests on the Toyota Camry LE 2018 chassis dynamometer, the results of the optimization process of neural network structures and the properties of fuels and biofuels. As a result of the work of the computer tool, the consumption of petrol 95, ethanol, methanol, DME, CNG, LPG and CO2 emissions for the vehicle in question were analyzed in the following driving tests: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA US06 and EPA USSC03); Supplemental Federal Test Procedure (SFTP); Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (HWFET); Federal Test Procedure (FTP-75–EPA); New European Driving Cycle (NEDC); Random Cycle Low (×05); Random Cycle High (×95); Mobile Air Conditioning Test Procedure (MAC TP); Common Artemis Driving Cycles (CADC–Artemis); Worldwide Harmonized Light-Duty Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP).

show abstract

The development and validation of a vehicle simulator for the introduction of Worldwide Harmonized test protocol in the European light duty vehicle CO2 certification process

Cited by 38 publications

References 29 publications

Emission Factors Derived from 13 Euro 6b Light-Duty Vehicles Based on Laboratory and On-Road Measurements

Emission Factors Derived from 13 Euro 6b Light-Duty Vehicles Based on Laboratory and On-Road Measurements

The impact of automation and connectivity on traffic flow and CO2 emissions. A detailed microsimulation study

A Computer Tool for Modelling CO2 Emissions in Driving Cycles for Spark Ignition Engines Powered by Biofuels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About