wnte evaluation oce 10102006 -...

Evaluation of the suitability to European conditions of the WNTE control zone concept as set out in the

OCE GTR

Henk Dekker - TNO

Stefan Hausberger, Martin Rexeis - TUG

Patrik Soltic – EMPAHeinz Steven - TUEV Nord

10 October 2006

jvarda01

Text Box

OCE Informal Document No. 54 Fifteenth Plenary Meeting of the Working Group On Off-Cycle Emissions 10 to 11 October 2006 Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

10/10/2006 WNTE Evaluation 2

WNTE Evaluation

• European driving conditions

• European ambient conditions

• Evaluation WNTE control zone and alternative approaches


WNTE Ambient Conditions Proposal

• Measurements valid if

– altitude < 1680 m above sea level

– humidity between 7.14 and 10.71 g water per kg dry air. Outside these conditions: correction factors for theemissions.

– ambient temperature between 12 and approximately 35 °C (two options exist). Below 12 °C : correction factors, aboveabout 35 °C correction factors (option A) or invalidity(option B)


Analysis of Ambient Conditions in Europe

• Main alp-crossing transitions Brenner (1375 m), Frejus (1312 m) and Gotthard (1175 m ) lie below the proposed 1680 m

• Weather: Analysis of daily European weather stations data of the year 2005 (source: NOAA)

-20 -10 0 10 20 3035

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

longitude [°]

latitu

de [

°]

altitude [

m.a

.s.l.]

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 20000

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

station altitude [m.a.s.l.]n

um

be

r o

f s

tati

on

s

• Average daily temperature of all stations: 9.6 °C


Frequency Distribution of Temperature and Humidity

0 5 10 15-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Fre

quency (

%)

humidity [g/kg]

avera

ge t

em

pera

ture

[°C

]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

WNTE

zone

(total 20.4%)

dry

zone

(total 2.5%)

wet

zone

(total 18.5%)

cold

zone

(total 11.4%)

hot zone

(total 0%)

hot&dry

zone

(total 0%)

hot&wet

zone

(total 0%)

cold&dry

zone

(total 47.2%)

cold&wet

zone

(total 0%)

→→→→ Only 20.4% of average temperatures in 2005 lied within theproposed WNTE conditions


Geographical Distribution of the Weather Conditions

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

hot&dry: T > 35°C & humidity < 7.14 g/kg

total :0.00016%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

hot: T > 35°C & humidity 7.14...10.71 g/kg

total :0.00016%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

hot&wet: T > 35°C & humidity > 10.71 g/kg

total :0.0016%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

dry: T 12...35°C & humidity < 7.14 g/kg

total :2.56%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

in WNTE ambient boundaries

total :20.4%

latitu

de [

°]0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

wet: T 12...35°C & humidity > 10.71 g/kg

total :18.5%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

cold&dry: T < 12°C & humidity < 7.14 g/kg

total :47.2%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

cold: T < 12°C & humidity 7.14...10.71 g/kg

total :11.4%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

40

50

60

70

Fre

quency (

%)

longitude [°]

cold&wet: T < 12°C & humidity > 10.71 g/kg

total :0%

latitu

de [

°]

0

20

40

60

80

100

northern European and alpine

countries are often cold and dry

southern European countries

are often wet


Influence of Widening the Zone

minimum zone temperature [°C]

de

lta

hu

mid

ity

ra

ng

e [

g/k

g]

80

70

60

50

40

30

contour label: coverage of average 2005 daily conditions (%)

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

currentproposal

→→→→ If the minimum zone temperature would be lowered to 5°C and the humidity range would be widened by 3 g/kg, about 65 % of the average European conditions could be covered (instead of ~ 20% with the current proposal) without the use of correction factors.


Evaluation OCE monitoring approaches

Requirements OCE monitoring approach:

• include all relevant operating conditions

• shall be able to detect defeat strategies

• compliant with PEMS


Methodology

Real life driving data

12 representative “HDV applications”: 45 hours driving from WHDC database

- rigid truck (mot / rur / urb)- truck trailer 30t (mot / rur / urb)- truck trailer 40t (mot / rur / urb)- garbage truck (urb)- urban bus (rur / urb)

Emission model “PHEM”

Measurements

↓Emissions for real life

driving

Emission data

EURO III:

measurements on 24 engines

→ 1 representative engine selected

EURO V:

only 1 engine measured

(SCR concept)

Evaluation of OCE monitoring

approaches

• Covered percentage of

HDV applications

• # monitored

“emission events”

• max / min / average of

“emission events”

• Comparison of monitored

emission levels with total

emission levels

Engine load patternsEngine emissions(in 1 Hz resolution)


WNTE current draft

12.1

6.9

12.2

11.5

10.5

7.4

5.6

8.5

5.3

5.3

5.0

4.9

6.8

4.5

4.5

4.4

5.0

6.7

4.3

4.3

4.6

5.1

6.4

4.9

4.9

5.0

5.4

15.0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

engine speed [rpm]

en

gin

e p

ow

er

[kW

]Brake specific NOx emissions [g/kWh] / EURO III

NTE control area

Minimum samplingperiod: 30 seconds

g/kWh = Infinite


Distribution of NOx emissions

urban bus / urban

total WNTE


Coverage of the draft WNTE (all HDV)

(example: EURO III)

Coverage total HDV driving in Europe:

~22% time ~33% NOx ~28% PM


• Basic WNTE version:

Modified control area based concepts

Coverage total HDV fleet (example EURO III):

~22% time ~33% NOx ~28% PM

• Alternative WNTE version #1:- unchanged control area

- minimum sampling period reduced to 10s

~33% time ~53% NOx ~46% PM

Problems: - highly transient operation not covered- interpretability of short emission peaks- PM mass measurement with filter not applicable

• Alternative WNTE version #2:- enlarged control area

- minimum sampling period reduced to 10s

~41% time ~63% NOx ~57% PM


Enlarged WNTE control zone

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200

Engine speed [rpm]

En

gin

e T

orq

ue

[N

m]

modified NTE Control Area

PM carve out

70% max power

20% max power20% max torque

25% percentile of cumulative engine speed WHTC cycle


Alternative approach: „Work window“Method:

• Total driving time is measured and evaluated

• Calculation of [g/kWh] averaged over a fixed amount of engine work („work window“)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 1001 1101

time [s]

en

gin

e p

ow

er

[kW

]

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

cu

mu

lati

ve

po

sit

ive e

ng

ine

wo

rk [

kW

h]

engine power [kW]

cumulative positive engine work [kW]

0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.400

0.450

1 101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 1001 1101

time [s]

NO

x [

g/s

]0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

cu

mu

lati

ve N

Ox e

mis

sio

ns [

g]

NOx [g/s]

cumulative NOx emissions [g]

fix

ed

wo

rkw

ind

ow

variable time window variable time window


Work window based emission events

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

1 201 401 601 801 1001 1201 1401 1601 1801 2001 2201 2401 2601 2801 3001 3201 3401 3601 3801 4001 4201 4401 4601 4801 5001

time

insta

nta

neous N

Ox e

mis

sio

ns [g/h

] .

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

work

win

dow

based N

TE

events

NO

x [g/k

Wh]

instantaneous NOx emissions [g/min] work-window events NOx [g/kWh]

WWHTC


Alternative approach: CO2 specific

Method:

• Total driving time is measured and evaluated

• Calculation of [g/kg CO2] averaged over a fixed amount of emitted CO2 („CO2 window“)

Coverage total HDV fleet (example EURO III):

~99% time ~99% NOx ~99% PM

Features of work window and CO2 specific method:

- all relevant operation conditions covered- classification of emission events possible(unavoidable high or „defeat strategy“) ifboundary conditions for test trip are well defined

- PM mass measurement with filter is applicable



Extra advantages CO2 specific method:

- No „tricks“ needed to prevent excessive emissions in [g/kWh] at low loads

- Less sensitive to ambient conditions

- No ECM, kW or engine speed data necessary

- Less sensitive for possible PEMS flow measurement errors


Alternative approaches: CO2 specific methods

7.3

6.0

8.75.5

8.0

7.2

6.4

7.9

8.5

6.25.7

5.7

8.0

6.8

6.6

6.5

7.9

7.8

8.0

7.4

12.4

15.0

15.9

11.5

9.0

19.4

14.618.9

11.4

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

engine speed [rpm]

en

gin

e p

ow

er

[kW

]

CO2 specific NOx emissions [g/kg] / EURO III


Alternative approaches: CO2 specific methods

within WNTE engine map and 30' window

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

all ambient

conditions

WNTE

ambient

conditions

zone

wet zone hot&wet

zone

hot and

hot&dry

zone

rela

tiv

e t

o e

mis

sio

ns

wit

hin

the

WN

TE

am

bie

nt

co

nd

itio

ns

zo

ne

NOx mass / work

NOx mass / CO2 mass

within WNTE engine map and 30' window

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

all ambient

conditions

WNTE

ambient

conditions

zone

wet zone hot&wet

zone

hot and

hot&dry

zone

rela

tiv

e t

o e

mis

sio

ns

wit

hin

the

WN

TE

am

bie

nt

co

nd

itio

ns

zo

ne

THC mass / work

THC mass / CO2 mass


Alte

rna

tive

sComparison OCE monitoring approaches

yes- -+oWNTE + minimum sampling period & work window for

averaging of emission events

no+ ++ ++“Compliance factor” based on CO2 specific emissions

yes+ +++“Work window”

yes- --o10s + enlarged control area

yes- ---

+ 10s minimum sampling period

yes- -+ +- -draft WNTE

ECU data necessary

feasibility

with PEMS (*)

“unavoid-able” high

emissions excluded

coverage of relevant

operating conditions

OCE monitoring approach

WN

TE

(*) incl. filter-based measurement of PM emissions


Summary I

•Findings are based on a large set of driving conditions from theWHDC database & emission data from ARTEMIS + COST 346 + D.A.CH.-NL (only one EURO V HDV):

•All approaches have specific advantages and disadvantages

•The actual proposal with a 30 second sampling period covers ~30% of European HDV emissions (large gaps especially in urban and rural driving)–> no large additional value to existing type approval

•Only ~20% of the European weather conditions are covered without the use of correction factors

•Reducing the minimum temperature from 12°C to 5°C & widening the humidity range by 3 g/kg, leads to a much better coverage ofweather conditions (65% instead of 20%)


Summary II

•PM mass measurement with filter is not applicable for control area based approaches

•An alternative with 10 second sampling and enlarged control areacovers ~55% of European HDV emissions, but transient and low load urban driving is still not covered–> reasonable additional value to existing type approval

•The work window based approach and the CO2 specific approach cover all relevant driving situations–> large additional value to existing type approval

•The CO2 based approach showed lower sensitivity to operating + ambient conditions and does not need measurement of engine work

•PM mass measurement with filter would be applicable


Summary III

•At least for work window and the CO2 specific approach further boundary conditions for the test trip would have to be defined

•The test trips and the evaluation should be divided at least into urban driving and highway driving

•The measured EURO V vehicle would have failed all OCE approaches due to increased emission levels after highly transient load changes and with inactive SCR in low loads; although the overall emission level was low (on average < 2g/kWh but scattering from 0.5 to 8 g/kWh)

•Without introducing OCE approaches EURO V and VI may have high NOx emission levels in several urban driving conditions which frequently occur


Open questions

Policy questions to define the boundary conditions:

•Shall OCE monitoring cover the thermal management of the engine and the exhaust gas after treatment too (e.g. cool down of SCR in stop&go)?If yes, low load driving has to be included in the trips

•Shall future HDV have low NOx emissions also in very unfavourabletraffic situations (e.g. highly transient conditions)?If yes, the control area based approach is not suitable

•Feasibility and costs for manufacturers should be considered too

Technological question:

•How can particulate mass be measured comparable to the typeapproval with filter method?


Thank you for your attention!


Backup Slides


HDV mileage distribution

100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%TOTAL

2.0%1.1%1.6%1.5%urban

0.2%0.7%1.2%1.1%ruralurban bus

0.4%0.3%0.4%0.4%urbangarbage truck

4.0%10.3%2.2%3.2%urban

8.8%8.2%11.5%10.9%rural

31.4%22.9%32.5%31.4%motorway

truck&(semi)trailer(GVM: 40t)

2.0%4.0%2.8%2.8%urban

4.4%3.4%5.4%5.2%rural

15.7%9.9%14.2%13.9%motorway

truck&trailer (GVM: 30t)

7.2%5.2%8.1%7.7%urban

10.4%12.1%10.9%11.0%rural

13.5%22.1%9.2%10.9%motorway

rigid truck

7.1%10.6%82.3%100.0%

ANLGERmix

country / weighting factor

share on total HDV mileage


Cumulative NOx emissions

total WNTE

truck + semitrailer 40t / motorway


WNTE control area + variants – Euro III

5.555.84

4.91

4.35

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

overall maximum overall weighted average overall minimum

total trip (overall weighted) WNTE event

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx

5.55

8.03

4.98

4.23

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00


total trip (overall weighted) NTE event (10s minimum sampling period)

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx

5.55

9.27

5.13

4.15

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00


total trip (overallweighted)

NTE event (enlarged control area + 10s minimum sampling period)

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx


WNTE control area – Euro III

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke s

pecif

ic e

mis

sio

ns [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb

truck+trailer 30t / mot

truck+trailer 30t / rur

truck+trailer 30t / urb

truck+semitrailer 40t / mot

truck+semitrailer 40t / rur

truck+semitrailer 40t / urb

garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb

minimum sampling period: 30s


WNTE control area variants – Euro III

WNTE events / NOx

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke s

pecif

ic e

mis

sio

ns [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb



WNTE control area variants – Euro III

WNTE events / NOx

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke s

pecif

ic e

mis

sio

ns [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb

enlarged control area



Work Window approach #1 Euro III

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke

sp

ec

ific

em

issio

ns [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb




truck+semitrailer 40t /mot

truck+semitrailer 40t /rur

truck+semitrailer 40t /urb

garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


Work Window approach #3 Euro III

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke

sp

ec

ific

em

iss

ion

s [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


CO2 based compliance factor Euro III

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

Co

mp

lian

ce

Facto

r [-

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


WNTE control area + variants - Euro V

1.92

7.42

1.91

0.040.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00


total trip (overall weighted) NTE event (10s minimum sampling period)

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx

1.92

2.74

2.22

1.56

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00


total trip (overall weighted) WNTE event

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx

1.92

8.61

1.78

0.000.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00


total trip (overall weighted) NTE event (enlarged control area + 10s minimum sampling period)

[g/k

Wh

]

NOx


WNTE current draft

Emission events detected for the EURO V (40t truck trailer)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

bra

ke s

pecif

ic N

Ox e

mis

sio

ns [

g/k

Wh

]

Total range of emissions with

active SCR

Total range of emissions with

inactive SCR

Only 3 events(total duration: 120s) within 10.000 secondsof measurements


WNTE control area variants - Euro V

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

NO

x e

vent [g

/kW

h]

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

NO

x e

vent [g

/kW

h]

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

NO

x e

vent [g

/kW

h]

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

NO

x e

ve

nt [g

/kW

h]


Alternative approach: Work Window Euro V

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

quantil

NO

x [

g/k

Wh

]

Approach 1: W_WHTC

Approach 2: 0.5*W_WHTC

Approach 3: WHTC; Pmin=4%

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

quantil

NO

x [

g/k

Wh

]

Approach 1: W_WHTC

Approach 2: 0.5*W_WHTC

Approach 3: WHTC; Pmin=4%


Alternative approach: CO2 Euro V

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

Com

plia

nce

Facto

r [-

]

NOx

CO

HC

PM

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

percentil

Com

plia

nce F

acto

r [-

]

NOx

CO

HC

PM


Work Window approach #1 Euro V sim

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke

sp

ec

ific

em

iss

ion

s [

g/k

Wh

]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


Work Window approach #3 Euro V sim

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

bra

ke

sp

ecif

ic e

mis

sio

ns

[g

/kW

h]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb

truck+trailer 30t /mot



truck+semitrailer 40t/ mot

truck+semitrailer 40t/ rur

truck+semitrailer 40t/ urb

garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


CO2 based Euro V (simulated engine)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

quantile

Co

mp

lia

nc

e F

ac

tor

[-]

rigid truck / mot

rigid truck / rur

rigid truck / urb







garbage truck / urb

urban bus / rur

urban bus / urb


WNTE limits

WNTE limits for EURO III engines EURO III ETC limit

[g/kWh] WNTE limit

[g/kWh]

OICA proposal 04/2006 6.25 NOx

OICA proposal 06/2006

5.00

6.36

OICA proposal 04/2006 0.200 PM


0.16

0.211

HC 0.78 0.98

CO 5.45 6.81

WNTE limits for EURO V engines

EURO V ETC limit [g/kWh]

WNTE limit [g/kWh]

OICA proposal 04/2006 3.00 NOx


2.00

2.50

OICA proposal 04/2006 0.045 PM


0.03

0.039

HC 0.55 0.83

CO 4.00 5.00



1. Assessment of the CO2-specific emission behaviour in the type approval cycle “TA” based on the

according emission limits:

0,273

][content)(carbon [g/kWh] 190

[g/kWh] limit)(emission ]/g[gTA

fuel

cycleTA transient

CO2emissions −∗

=

2. Determination of the CO2 specific emission events during the OCE monitoring “OCE”:

Boundary constraint:

a) In the OCE testing the same fuel has to be used as in type approval test

b) The emission events “OCE” are calculated by averaging the CO2 specific emissions over

periods fixed by the amount of CO2 emitted in the type approval test:

[g] )CO (mass

[g] emissions) (mass

]/g[g OCEcycleTA transient 2

testOCE

CO2) (mass

CO2emissions

cycleTA transient

∑=



3. The considered OCE test complies with the regulations, if all compliance factor events

“CFOCE”(calculated by division of the CO2 specific emission events in the OCE monitoring

“OCE” by the constant CO2-specific emission behaviour in the type approval cycle “TA”) are

lower or equal the defined limit for the compliance factor for passing the OCE regulations

“CFFail”:

Fail

!

OCE CF TA

OCECF ≤=


Reasons for HDV OCE monitoring

Example: 1 manufacturer, 3 emission standards

EURO I

0.00.1

0.20.3

0.40.5

0.60.7

0.80.9

1.0

Pe/P_rated 0.00.1

0.20.3

0.40.5

0.60.7

0.80.9

1.0

n_norm

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

NO

x [

(g/h

)/kW

_ra

tedP

ow

er]

EURO II

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Pe/P_rated 0.00.2

0.40.6

0.81.0

1.2

n_norm

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

No

x[(

g/h

)/kW

_ra

ted

pow

er]

EURO III

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

Pe/P_rated 0.00.1

0.20.3

0.40.5

0.60.7

0.80.9

1.0

n_norm

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

NO

x[(

g/h

)/kW

_ra

tedP

ow

er]


Reasons for HDV OCE monitoring

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

BS

NO

x [

g/k

Wh

]

type approval limit

type approval measured

real world highway

real world city

Pre EURO EURO I EURO II EURO III EURO V

1993/94 1995/96 2000/01 2008/09

Inactive SCR system

(low catalyst temperature)

Only oneengine

measured(SCR-

concept)


Current WNTE control zone

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200

Engine speed [rpm]

En

gin

e T

orq

ue

[N

m]

NTE Control Area

PM carve out

70% max power

30% max power30% max torque

25% percentile of cumulative engine speed WHTC cycle


European driving data

• Basis of the analysis was the European part of the WHDC database, used for the development of a Worldwide Harmonised Heavy-Duty Engine Emissions Test Cycle

motorway rural urban total

1 coach 16000 310 259 136 108 503

1 garbage truck 26500 180 478 478

12 rigid truck 5600 to 24000 50 to 198 1321 1865 1224 4410

16trailer/semitrailer

truck28000 to 41380 160 to 407 39754 18960 1318 60031

5 urban bus 12300 to 27600 137 to 177 75 958 1033

total 41334 21036 4087 66456

No of vehicles

distance driven in km

vehicle categorygross vehicle

mass in kgrated power in kW


Percentage of driving time in WNTE zone

vehicle category motorway rural urban

coach 51.1% 36.2% 19.1%

garbage truck 45.9%

rigid truck 62.7% 45.1% 25.8%

trailer/semitrailer truck 50.7% 44.6% 26.8%

urban bus 32.2% 25.0%

percentage of time in NTE area related

to driving time


coach 24.2% 4.2% 0.0%

garbage truck 15.0%

rigid truck 38.6% 13.7% 1.5%


urban bus 3.6% 1.1%

percentage of time of >= 30 s events in

NTE area related to driving time

No time window

30 s time window


Percentage of driving time in WNTE zone

20 s time window

10 s time window


coach 29.8% 9.8% 0.0%

garbage truck 20.2%

rigid truck 44.1% 17.7% 3.0%


urban bus 8.1% 2.9%




coach 37.0% 19.9% 2.2%

garbage truck 28.8%

rigid truck 52.0% 27.2% 7.8%


urban bus 16.5% 8.7%




Distribution of the duration of NTE events

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

duration of NTE events in s

cum

fre

quen

cy

veh 3, motorway

veh 3, rural

veh 3, urban


Distribution of the duration of NTE events

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 30 60 90 120 150

duration of NTE events in s

cu

m f

req

ue

ncy

veh 6, motorway

veh 6, rural

veh 6, urban

wnte evaluation oce 10102006 -...

Documents