1 / 7

WLTP Annex 4, Weight in Coast Down

WLTP-DTP-LabProcICE-156rev2. WLTP Annex 4, Weight in Coast Down. BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012 C. Lueginger. Influence of weight in Coast Down Test, proposal. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Introduction. Targets for ideal coast down result Knowledge of weight at the coast down test.

maureenf
Download Presentation

WLTP Annex 4, Weight in Coast Down

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WLTP-DTP-LabProcICE-156rev2 WLTP Annex 4, Weight in Coast Down BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012 C. Lueginger Influence of weight in Coast Down Test, proposal

  2. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Introduction • Targets for ideal coast down result • Knowledge of weight at the coast down test. • Weight shall be the test mass (TMH or TML). • Problems: • Weighing the car is only possible before and after the test. • Influence of traffic and meeting the tolerances makes test duration not foreseeable. • Proposal: • For calculation take the average of weight before and after the test. • This averaged weight has to be within a tolerance to the test mass (e.g. 20 kg). •  Calculation is showed in “20121017__Influence of weight in coast down_BMW.xlsx”. WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012

  3. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Facts Facts about road load determination Using a higherweight in calculationthanthe real weight was, leadsto a higherroadload (influenceofinertia). The moreweight, thehighertherollingresistance. Influenceofrollingresistance on roadloadislessthaninfluenceofinertia. Bytakingtheaverageoftheweightbeforeand after the test, influenceofinertiaandrollingresistance will alwaysbeopposite.Therforetheerrorisreduced. See picture: WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012

  4. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Different cases in Coast down, Description Chart isanimated, please press Shift+F5. (5) extreme tolerance (3) extreme begin (4) extreme end (1) ideal (2) typical WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012

  5. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Different cases in Coast down, Result (1) used for calculation, (2) not measureable WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012

  6. WLTP Annex 4, weight in Coast Down Comparing the different proposals WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 14.11.2012

  7. WLTP Annex 4, Weight in Coast Down Summary and Recommendations • Takingtheaveragereducestheinfluenceoferrors in weight. • Withinusefultolerancesthereishardly an effect on roadload due totheweight. Weatherconditionshavemuchmoreinfluencethanthisvery extreme examples. E.g. 20 kg generateabout 0.2 g/km CO2 in the WLTC. • Proposal: • For calculation take the average of weight before and after the test. • This averaged weight has to be within a tolerance to the test mass (e.g. 20 kg) or greater than the test mass. WLTP Annex 4, Influence of weight in coast down test, BMW, EG-63, 12.11.2012

More Related