1. Drafting Subgroup Meeting Part of IWG #16, The Hague, October 2016
WLTP-16-04e
Drafting Subgroup Meeting Part of IWG #16, The Hague, October 2016

2. Complete GTR Can the subject of using the term "recorded" be closed?
Conclusion:

3. Complete GTR
The UN ECE does not like the use of "must" in regulations.
REQUEST: That the GTR be searched for uses of "must" which might be replaced by "shall".
Conclusion:

4. Complete GTR
A mail was sent to the group summarising where the unit Hz for frequency is used in the GTR and requesting input on consistency the frequency of the measurement of certain variables (speed, temperature, etc.).
Responses were received from BMW, VW and Japan.
See file "Table listing use of Hz master file BMW Japan VW comments".
Conclusion:

5. II. Text of the global technical regulation (slide 1 of 2)
Definition n/v ratio in the GTR includes equations (see the next slide).
REQUESTS:
that the definition be shortened and be a simple definition, and
that the equations be incorporated elsewhere in the GTR.
Furthermore, paragraph 2.(e) also refers to the equations in definition This must be corrected.
Conclusion:

6. II. Text of the global technical regulation (slide 2 of 2)
PROPOSAL: That the definition be shortened to:
n/v ratio means the engine rotational speed divided by vehicle speed in a specific gear.
REQUEST: That an appropriate location for the equations in the GTR be recommended.
Conclusion:

7. II. Text of the global technical regulation Paragraph 5. 6. 1
II. Text of the global technical regulation Paragraph , Interpolation family for ICE vehicles
Text as approved in July 2016:
Proposed rewrite of the above:
Conclusion:

8. II. Text of the global technical regulation Paragraph 5. 6. 1
II. Text of the global technical regulation Paragraph , Interpolation family for ICE vehicles
Proposed modification of the definition of "exhaust emissions".
REQUEST: Approval of the proposal.
Conclusion:

9. Annex 4 Road load

10. Annex 4, Paragraph 2.4.
REQUEST: Approval of accuracy of the calculations of f0, f1 and f2
Conclusion:

11. Annex 4, Paragraph
REQUEST: Approval of text submitted by Japan.
Conclusion:

12. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.1.1.1.1. Permissible wind condition when using stationary anemometry
REQUEST: Approval of additional text submitted by Japan.
Conclusion:

13. Annex 4, Paragraph
Use of replacing "notwithstanding" with "in addition to".
Conclusion:

14. Annex 4, Paragraph
The paragraph is not clear and should be discussed in the IWG.
Conclusion:

15. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.2.1.3.6. Delta road load caused by options
REQUEST: Adoption of text submitted by Japan.
Conclusion:

16. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.2.2.1. Tyre selection, (slide 1 of 2)
The following text was approved at the July 2016 road load task force meeting.

17. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.2.2.1. Tyre selection, (slide 2 of 2)
REQUEST: Drafting subgroup was requested to check the text.
DC: Proposes two sentences. The first ends after "…calculation procedure" and the second starts with "For vehicles produced for sale, the RRC class value for the tyres fitted shall be used."
Conclusion:

18. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.2.2.1., Tyre selection
Text proposed during the road load TF in July.
REQUEST: That the drafting subgroup submit any comments it may have.
Conclusion:

19. Annex 4, Paragraph 4. 3. 1. 3. 4. Split runs, stationary anemo
Annex 4, Paragraph Split runs, stationary anemo., (slide 1 of 3)
REQUEST: Adoption of the text.

20. Annex 4, Paragraph 4. 3. 1. 3. 4. Split runs, stationary anemo
Annex 4, Paragraph Split runs, stationary anemo., (slide 2 of 3)
PROPOSALS:
That (a) could read as follows: The condition of the vehicle should be maintained as constant as possible at each split point.
That (b) could read as follows: At least one speed point from the lower speed range shall overlap with at least one speed point of the higher speed range.
DC recommends that the term coastdown be deleted from (b) and (c) as the entire section deals with coastdowns.
Conclusion:

21. Annex 4, Paragraph 4. 3. 1. 3. 4. Split runs, stationary anemo
Annex 4, Paragraph Split runs, stationary anemo., (slide 3 of 3)
PROPOSAL:
Comment from I. Riemersma to point (d): This is not according to what was agreed. The last proposal from Japan reads: the overlapped speed point(s) may be set between the reference speed points.
My counter proposal reads:
If the track length does not allow to fulfil requirement (b), one additional speed point shall be added to serve as overlap speed point.
This has yet to be discussed
Conclusion:

22. Annex 4, Paragraph 4.3.1.3.6. PROPOSAL: Conclusion:
That the reference to be changed to 6.8., as there is no paragraph
Conclusion:

23. Annex 4, Paragraph 4. 3. 2. 4. 3. Split runs, on-board anemo
Annex 4, Paragraph Split runs, on-board anemo., (slide 1 of 2)
REQUEST: Adoption of the text.

24. Annex 4, Paragraph 4. 3. 2. 4. 3. Split runs, on-board anemo
Annex 4, Paragraph Split runs, on-board anemo., (slide 2 of 2)
PROPOSAL:
That (a) could read as follows: The condition of the vehicle should be maintained as constant as possible at each split point.
That (b) could read as follows: At least one speed point from the lower speed range shall overlap with at least one speed point of the higher speed range.
DC recommends that the term coastdown be deleted from (b) and (c) as the entire section deals with coastdowns.
Conclusion:

25. Annex 4, Table A4/3, Paragraph 4. 3. 1. 4. 2
Annex 4, Table A4/3, Paragraph Coefficient h as a function of n (slide 1 of 2)
Japan proposes that h/√n should be deleted.
The equation for Pj should be calculated by "n" and "h" individually.
Results will be different between A: h n 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 n
𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐵: h n 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒
That table be expanded to at least n=30.
That 2.3 aligns with ISO See file "coefficient h".
Conclusion:

26. Annex 4, Table A4/3, Paragraph 4. 3. 1. 4. 2
Annex 4, Table A4/3, Paragraph Coefficient h as a function of n (slide 2 of 2)
Annex 4, Table A4/3, Paragraph Coefficient h as a function of n (slide 2 of 2)
A. Feucht says that for n=10, h=0.70 and not 0.73.

27. Annex 4, Paragraph 5.1.
Use of the term produced for sale instead of an individual vehicle.
Conclusion:

28. Annex 4, Paragraph 6.8.
Determination of road load delta by a flat belt or chassis dyno
A comment was received that this is not a complete sentence. The proposal is that there should be a comma between "this annex" and "the delta". The commentator also proposed that "road load delta" be used instead of just "delta" to make sure that this term is properly defined and referenced (note that it is only stated in the title of 6.8, but not defined in the text)
Conclusion:

29. Annex 4, Paragraphs and
A point was raised during the July meeting as to whether one should refer to a single-axis and dual-axis chassis dynamometer or are the terms single-axle and dual-axle chassis dynamometer preferable.
L. Hill (Horiba) recommended single-axle and dual-axle.
REQUEST: Decision by the group.
Conclusion:

30. Annex 5 Test equipment

31. Annex 5, Paragraphs , , and
Proposal from W. Coleman regarding the external vehicle cooling fan. See file " Cooling fan proposal Coleman".
Conclusion:

32. Annex 6 Test procedure

33. Annex 6, all
At the July drafting meeting, it was mentioned that the first/leading number "1" from all paragraph numbers in this annex is extraneous. It has been done. See the latest GTR or the file "Annex 6 renumbered".
NOTE: cross-references have been checked within Annex 6 but not with the rest of the GTR.
REQUEST: That the task of removing the first/leading "1" is approved.
Conclusion:

34. Annex 6, all
At the July drafting meeting, it was mentioned that the structure of the paragraphs on preconditioning the test vehicle is not logical. A proposed restructuring of those paragraphs has been circulated to this Subgroup pending its approval. See "Proposed restructuring of Annex 6 on preconditioning".
REQUEST: That the proposed restructuring be approved.
Conclusion:

35. Annex 6, Paragraph (1.)2.3.1. Test vehicle: general
JASIC requests adoption of the following additional text:
Conclusion:

36. Annex 6, Paragraph (1.)2.4.2.2. Dynamometer operation
DC requests the road load task force whether the following was adopted in July:

37. Annex 6, Figure A6/2, Speed trace tolerances
REQUEST: To adopt the following proposed speed trace diagram:
Conclusion:

38. Annex 7 Calculations

39. Annex 7, Paragraph 3.2.3.2.2.1. Mass of an individual vehicle
REQUEST: The drafting group is asked to comment /adopt the additional text proposed by JASIC.
In the case, that the interpolation family is derived from one or more road load families, the calculation of the individual road load shall be performed within the road load family applicable to the individual vehicle.
Conclusion:

40. Annex 7, Paragraph 3.2.3.2.2.2. Rolling resistance of an individual vehicle
The drafting group is asked to comment on the third variable:
Conclusion:

41. Annex 7, Paragraph 3.2.3.2.2.4. Calculation of RL for individual vehicles
REQUEST: The drafting group is asked to comment /adopt the change to the text proposed by JASIC.
Conclusion:

42. Annex 7, Paragraph 3.2.3.2.3. Calculation of cycle energy demand
REQUEST: The drafting group is asked to comment /adopt the additional text proposed by JASIC.
Conclusion:

43. Annex 8 EVs

44. Annex 8, Paragraph 1.5.
The July drafting meeting concluded that the IWG must decide whether to use "and" or "or".
Conclusion:

45. Annex 8, Table A8/4 in Paragraph 3.4.4.2.1.3.
With regards to the title in the table "Distance driven", the following question has been raised by M. Nägeli: In the case of the STP: Is this clear enough or must it be more specific? What exactly is meant? Expected total distance driven for the complete shortened test procedure or the expected calculated distance for PEVs?
Discussion in SG EV in advance of the discussion in the drafting subgroup.
Conclusion:

46. Annex 8, Paragraph 4.2.3. Utility factor-weighted fuel consumption for OVC-HEVs
Comment from M. Nägeli: With reference to the following text, there is no fuel consumption correction coefficient for HEVs in the GTR but only a CO2 correction factor. Therefore, the text must be changed.
The wording is a first attempt and must be discussed within the task force.
Conclusion:

47. Annex 8, Paragraphs 4.3.1. and 4.3.2. Conclusion:
Comment from M. Nägeli: With reference to the following text, there is only a vehicle L in case of applying the interpolation approach.
REQUEST: Approval of the text in red.
Conclusion:

48. Annex 8, Paragraph 4.4.1.2.2. Conclusion:
Comment from M. Nägeli: With reference to the following equation and text, UBEcity is defined as the used energy up to and excluding the phase where the combustion engine starts consuming fuel.
Furthermore, contradiction in the description of UBEcity
Has to be discussed in SG EV in advance of the Drafting TF
DC: Has "phase" been struck through by accident?
Conclusion:

49. Annex 8, Paragraphs 4.6. and 4.7.
The new additions and/or corrections to the stepwise procedures to calculate final test results of OVC-HEVs and PEVs have to be adopted.
Conclusion:

50. Annex 8, Appendix 1
Figures A8.App1/1, A8.App1/3, and A8.App1/4 have been modified and have to be adopted.
Conclusion:

51. Complete GTR
Any other open points?
Conclusion:

52. END