1. Status Januar 2014 - Verification of test normality
Trip #1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i
Emission [g/km]
Different trips, routes, driving behaviours
„any time – any place“
Result of emission measurement
Approach 1: „Normalisation“ of all data
Approach 2: Limitation of „Boundary Conditions“
Driving style
Emission [g/km]
Road incline
Emission [g/km]
Vehicle velocity
Emission [g/km]
Shifting
Emission [g/km]
Macro transient:
soft  aggressive
Incline distribution
Average velocity
Shifting behaviout
typical  unusal
cumulative positive altitude gain
Maximum velocity
Micro transient: “Pedal Pumping”
Idling

2. Round Robin Test Data and methodology
Major goals of the Round Robin tests:
Evaluate the influence of route composition and driving style on emission results.
Evaluate the performance of normalization tools.
Identify driving characteristics which possibly affect emission results and are not corrected by normalization in a proper manner.

3. Round Robin Test Data and methodology
To ensure confidentiality, ADA (Abgaszentrum der Automobilindustrie) was asked to conduct a round robin exercise with PEMS measurement systems and evaluate the data
In total more than 60 PEMS-tests were performed using 3 state of the art 2xPC / 1xSUV diesel vehicles on 4 different test routes with most selling 4 cyl Turbocharged Diesel.
 Underfloor SCR-System
 SRC on DPF
 Combined NSC + SCR
 Power to weight ratios [kW/to]: 58 to 67
During the test campaign in spring 2014, ambient temperatures ranged from °C
The driver remained unchanged throughout the campaign, but were told to perform the test driving in three different styles
Test results were analyzed using CLEAR (1.5) and EMROAD (5.7 and 5.8 –> average values).

4. Round Robin Test
Stuttgart
Neckarsulm
Wolfsburg
Steyr
The test routes were defined in a way that the share of urban, rural and highway driving matches future legal requirements as good as possible (based on the respective shares discussed today). Altitudes ranged from 60 m to 500 m above sea level.

5. Round Robin Test - Correlation between NOx and (v*apos)95%ile
Every EU6 car shows same behaviour (distinguish well between bias and non bias driving behavior)
Intended aggressive driving as indicated by(vapos)95%ile results in higher NOx-emissions

6. Additional data - Correlation between NOx and driving dynamics
Source : OEM data pool

7. Analysis of Driving Style
(v x apos) P95% [m²/s³]
vehicle speed [km/h]
ACEA proposal:
Based on map classification
mod./extend. minimum
moderate maximum
extended maximum
(v x apos)95%ile
2 + 0,288*vmean
11 + 0,288*vmean
14 + 0,288*vmean
The Percentile based proposal allows 5% of a PEMS-Trip without any restriction (max. acceleration is allowed)

8. Explaining v*apos95%
driver selected trip (Compact class)

9. Explaining v*apos95%
intended aggressive (compact class)

10. Comparison driving dynamics upper limit ACEA / TUG proposal
Dyn. BC
Threshhold
Indicator
Source U* R* M*
Driving style
Lower
rpa
TUG
0,14
0,08
0,04
ACEA
Higher
P95 (v x a)95th perc. 14 24
P95 (v x a) 95th perc. 20
*) Categorisation by v-threshholds instead od map based
Stillstand: v < 2 km/h (analog EMROAD)
Urban: v < 60 km/h
Rural: 60 km/h < v < 90 km/h
Motorway: v > 90 km/h

11. Validity evaluation of HB efa cycles
All cycles are covered

12. Summary – driving dynamics
Need to add an dyn. BC to avoid too “harshly and gently” driving (as already stated in EU COM dec 2014 draft)
Sensitivity towards emission has been demonstrated
Pre-Selection of a suitable indicator has been successful
Working hypotheses have been derived to quantify possible upper and lower threshholds for the driving behavior
Findings are based on PEMS measurements of TUG data base (> 250? Measurements of different parties)
Findings are confirmed by ACEA PEMS measurements (> 500 measurements)
Findings cover all HB-EFA cycles

13. Next steps – driving dynamics
Need to prove validity of working hypotheses of suggested lower and upper thresholds to avoid “false failures” by
WLTP data base evaluation according to the RDE regulation criteria (per vehicle and tripwise, with > 90 min trip length until end of CW 10/15
Further PEMS measurements (e.g. TÜV measurements) until end of CW XX/15
Present technical proposal to next suitable RDE-LDV