Development and use of the vehicle

energy/emission simulator

Christian Vock

AVL

ICT-Emissions Exploitation group workshop, Brussels, 2013-11-13

Overview

Energy and Emission Simulator

– Targets in the project

– Micro and Macro Emission Simulation

– Micro Simulation

– Conventional Vehicles

– Advanced Vehicles

– Macro Simulation

2

Targets

• Modeling of general conventional vehicles (micro

scale)

• Modeling of specific advanced vehicles (micro scale)

• Validation of micro emission models with chassis

dynamometer measurements and real world tests

• Validation of macro emission model

3

Micro and Macro Emission Simulation

4

Traffic Simulation

Macro Simulation

vaverage

FCaverage CO2 average

Micro Simulation

Micro Emission Simulator Modeling of

‘conventional’ passenger cars

• Conventional passenger cars are vehicles which are not equipped

with special electric systems in order to reduce fuel consumption.

(no hybridization)

• In total 30 generalized vehicles created

– Five key segments

• A’: Mini-car

• B’: Small cars

• C’: Medium-Large Cars

• D’: Large and executive

• E’: Jeeps and SUVs

– Three efficiency categories, equivalent of Years 2008, 2012 and 2015

– Fuels: Gasoline and Diesel

5

Micro Emission Simulator Procedure to determine

vehicle properties (example Class B’)

6

• Exploration of most popular vehicles within class

• Collection of input data for vehicles selected

• Determination of average properties (e.g. capacity, weight, resistance, max power)

• Engineering experties to derive additional parameters (e.g. gear ratios) where necessary

• FC/emission maps selected based on extended ERMES database

Micro Emission Simulator ‘conventional’

passenger cars Typical Vehicle Model

7

Micro Emission Simulator ‘conventional’ passenger

cars - Comparison to Type Approval Tests

8

• Work is not fully finished yet

• Updated numbers should be closer to segment average data

Gasoline Vehicles Diesel Vehicles

Micro Emission Simulator ‘conventional’ passenger

cars – Validation Chassis Dynamometer

9

Deviation of FC

against

measurements

Peugeot 308

e-HDI FAP

BMW X1

sDrive20d

Efficient

Dynamics

VolksWagen

Golf 1.4 TSI

90 kW

Toyota Avensis

1.6 VVT-i Average

UDC 5.5 -2.7 4.8 1.1 3.5

EUDC 0.0 0.0 -3.6 -4.9 2.1

NEDC 2.2 -1.7 0.0 -4.2 2.0

Artemis Urban -2.9 -2.2 -2.9 2.8 2.7

Artemis Road 8.9 -1.9 1.6 4.7 4.3

WLTC 0.0 0

Average 4.7 1.5 1.5 3.9 2.8

Micro Emission Simulator ‘conventional’ passenger

cars – Validation Real Lift Tests (Madrid – Urban

Highway)

• 1 Gasoline vehicle (FIAT Punto 1.2 G) 5 runs

• 1 Diesel vehicle (FIAT Punto 1.3 D) 5 runs

• Measurements done on West section of M30 equipped with variable

speed control limits

• 8 of 10 runs (gasoline & diesel) stay within expected 5% margin

10

Micro Emission Simulator Modeling of

‘advanced’ passenger cars

• Advanced technology passenger cars are in the context of the

project vehicles which are equipped with future technologies such

as Start&Stop, Hybrids, Range Extender, or Electric vehicles

• Creation of generalized vehicles not possible due to low availability

on market and high number of different hybrid topologies

• 16 specific vehicles equipped with different hybrid topologies and

covering different vehicle categories were modelled

11

Micro Emission Simulator ‘advanced’ passenger cars

Hybrid Topologies and Operating Strategies

12

Micro Emission Simulator ‘advanced’

passenger cars Covered Vehicles and classes

13

• Some combinations could not be filled since no vehicle in this class with the defined hybrid topology exists on the market (specifically Diesel)

• Other combinations could be filled with more resources

Controls

Micro Emission Simulator ‘advanced’ passenger cars

Typical Vehicle Model (Range Extender)

14

Electric Motor & Battery

Micro Emission Simulator Validation of

Advanced Simulation Models

15

• Maximum error between simulation and published data: 7%

• Average error: 3%

Macro Emission Model

16

• Macro scale models already existing are validated and

compared with micro emission simulation results

Macro Emission Simulation

17

Turin (Urban) Traffic Data – Gasoline Vehicle

• Generally good agreement between average speed

model (COPERT, macro emission simulation) and

instantaneous speed model (CRUISE, micro

emission simulation)

Macro Emission Simulation

18

Madrid (Urban Highway) Traffic Data – Gasoline Vehicle

• For high saturation levels at urban highway COPERT underestimates FC

increase

• Reason: Different driving pattern compared to speed profiles used for

COPERT FC curve determination

• Investigation for Urban test case on saturation level (Turin) pending

Main Results

19

• 30 generalised conventional vehicle models that

improve the existing COPERT 4 database

• 15 advanced vehicle models completed that

complement and expand emission knowledge towards

future vehicles

• Extensive validation via real world campaign and

chassis dynamometer measurements

Thank you for the attention

20

Christian Vock (AVL)

christian.vock@avl.com

Leonidas Ntziachristos (LAT/AUTh)

leon@auth.gr

Roberto Tola (CRF)

roberto.tola@crf.it