1 / 31

LabProcICE Progress Report DTP Subgroup Tokyo 21/22/03/2013

Overview of the progress made, open issues on LabProcICE, scrutiny reservations and post-validation issues. Next steps discussed in meetings since DTP-12.

davidwelch
Download Presentation

LabProcICE Progress Report DTP Subgroup Tokyo 21/22/03/2013

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. Progress Report DTP Subgroup Lab Process Internal CombustionEngines (LabProcICE) WLTP-DTP-13 Tokyo, 21./22.03.2013

  2. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  3. Meetings since DTP-12 • 13.02.2013Phone/web conference • 20./21.02.2013Brussels workshop at AECC/ACEA Open issues Table (OIT): LabProcICE-175  minutes: LabProcICE-200 • 04.03.2013Phone/web conference - remaining RLD issues of OIT • Several dates:Phone/web conferences of Drafting Task Force & on other specific issues

  4. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  5. Open Issues Table (OIT) Current revision (part of general OIT from VTF) with 41 items:  LabProcICE-175rev2. Green: 16 items closed on working level. Yellow: 11 items with a scrutiny reservation from one party. Red: 13 items- Contradictory proposals from Contracting Parties- Open issues on working level- Issues to be decided until June 2013 Note: Items where LabProcICE is not in charge to prepare/make decisions were switched to white. slide 5

  6. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  7. Soak procedure (item 18 a) Solution 1 (EU position): Target temperature (23 ± 2) °C and forced cooling allowed stability & practicability criteria “The vehicle is soaked for a minimum of 6 hours and a maximum of 36 hourswith the bonnet opened or closed. If not excluded by specific provisions for a particular vehicle technologycooling may be accomplished by forced cooling down to the setpoint temperature. If cooling is accelerated by fans, the fans shall be placed so that the maximum cooling of the drive train, engine and the exhaust aftertreatment system is achievedin a homogenous manner. This conditioning shall be carried out for at least six hours and continue until the engine oil temperature and coolant, if any, are within ± 2 K of the setpoint.” slide 7

  8. Solution 2 (Japanese position)Soak periode (12 - 36 h), no target temperature (“natural cooling down”) representativeness criteria + covers benefits of heat storage systems EU objection: soak at 23°C is not representative India: prefers natural cool down, but allows forced cooling  solution 1 accepted? LabProcEV: no forced cooling. slide 8

  9. Soak for heat storage technologies (item 18b) Aim: harmonized approach instead of regional solution as e. g. eco-innovation concept in EU Solution 1: additional test (upon request of the manufacturer)- natural cooling down at [23 ± 3] °C. - soak period [12 h to 14 h] - usage of measured values as an regional option? Combine with solution 2 of general soak procedure? Solution 2: mandate to develop dedicated test procedure  later stage of gtr slide 9

  10. Monitoring RCB of all batteries(item 28 a/b) Agreed: charging of the battery can be omitted before precon (on the request of the manufacturer) + no charging after precon Open issue:Monitoring + Correction of CO2 value Solution 1:- RCB measurement- correction if RCB is above [0.5 or 1] % of consumed fuel energy- follow HEV (based on measurement) and/or TU Graz (energy calculation) EV: threshold dependent on mode construction  decision on value later Solution 2:- acc. to validation 2 results: no charging after precon is sufficient slide 10

  11. Handling of GSI (item 26) Situation: GSI only mandatory in Europe Solution 1:GSI as an option for the manufacturer in the gtr harmonized test procedure still needs to be developed  item 20 (gear change tolerances) not closed Solution 2:GSI excluded from gtr  regional procedure as an option for CPs slide 11

  12. Vehicle warming up for RLD and on dyno (items 16 / 17) Current gtr text: • warm up on the road: “Warming up is done by vehicle driving only. Driving shall be cruising and speed limit is [10 km/h] above the coastdown starting speed. (...)” • warm up on the dyno: “Prior to the test, the vehicle shall be warmed up appropriately until normal vehicle operating temperatures have been reached. This condition is deemed to be fulfilled when three consecutive coastdowns are completed (...) During this warming up period, the vehicle speed shall not exceed the highest reference speed within the given tolerance of Annex/chapter (tbd.)” slide 12

  13. Japanese proposal from validation 3: On the road: On the dyno: Solution:Issue expected to be solved on expert level slide 13

  14. 4WD dyno specifications (item 41) State of play: Provisions included in gtr draft Japan proposal: provisions to be excluded until US EPA / SAE discussions finalized Solution:In the meantime agreement on specifications on expert level  Wording provided to Drafting Coordinator Review after finalization of future 1066 regulation slide 14

  15. Speed trace violation (item 25) State of play: Void criteria not yet discussed Solution to be discussed in connection with normalization approach  Issue expected to be solved on expert level slide 15

  16. Open issues – to be solved until June 2013 Table of running resistances (item 11) State of play: Need for table as an alternative to measurement methods agreed. Proposal by PSA still objected General considerations by EU-COM (WLTP-DTP-13-05 - running resistances_EU.doc)1) oriented towards "worst" case  avoid incentive to apply default values. 2) Limited usage  e.g. small series, number of vehicles, vehicle category DTP-13: Agreement on principles to come to a solution necessary Next steps: EU-Com and OICA will work on proposal slide 16

  17. Comparison of RLD measurement methods (item 12) Solution 1: Include all 3 methods which are defined in ISO standard:coast down / torque meter / windtunnel supported by Japan (scrutiny on windtunnel), EU (partly) and OICA Solution 2:Define reference method in case of no equivalency (shown) EU-COM (supported by NL) proposed coast down  Industry is asked to provide back-to-back data for all three methods to show equivalency & repeatability slide 17

  18. Other RLD issues Longitudinal slope for oval test track (item 36) Within +/- 0.1% for total value? Rotating mass (item 38) consistency within Annex 4 needs to be checked Calculation methods (item 39) include all methods from ISO standard? slide 18

  19. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  20. Vehicle test mass / inertia / aerodynamic features / tyre selection (items 2 - 8) Agreed: - test mass approach (interpolation TMh/TMl) - stepless inertia (rounded to next kg, tolerance at dyno: 10 kg) In principle agreed: General concept how to include aerodynamic features and tyres Drafting Task Force established Still scrutiny reservation on aspects (Japan) new open issues might rise up during drafting slide 20

  21. Aspects to be confirmed: Movable body parts“… shall operate during road load determination as intended under wltc test conditions (temperature, speed, accelerations, no road inclination ...)” Payload factorsBased on Document WLTP-DTP-13-06 – Joint compromise proposal.ppt from EU, Japan, Korea (and support of T&E):Categories 1-1 / 1-2: 15%Category 2: 28 % slide 21

  22. Handling of multimode / default mode definition(items 33 / 34) Solution 1: CO2/FE: test vehicle in default mode. If there is no default mode  average best and worst case Default mode definition: “The default mode is defined as a single mode which is always selected when the vehicle is switched on regardless of the operating mode selected when the vehicle was previously shut down. The mode used for the default must not be able to be redefined by the customer / dealer. Selectable shift lever design: The position appeared initially to drive the vehicle forward, after started the engine. (In case of [P-R-N-D-S-L], D is default mode.)” slide 22

  23. Solution 1:supported by Japan and India, but objections from EU Solution 2: Average best and worst case, no default mode requirement  Not representative. Weighted averaging based on survey data instead? slide 23

  24. Temperature setpoint and tolerances (items 14 / 15) Solution 1: Setpoint: 23 °C Tolerances: Soak: ± 3 °C (5 min average) Test start: ± 3 °C (1 Hz values) Test cell: ± 5 °C (1 Hz values) Note: Test start tolerance only accepted with start condition of vehicle = setpoint ± 2 °C depends on soak procedure approach slide 24

  25. Tyre conditioning (RLD) (item 9) Solution 1: The tyres used for the test shall: not be older than 2 years after production date, not be specially conditioned or treated (e.g. heated or aged), with the exception of grinding in the original shape of the tread. have a constant tread depth between 100 and 80 per cent of the original tread depth over the full tread width of the tyre. be run-in on road for at least 200 km before road load determination. Note: wording in OIT was revised based on LabProcICE-197rev1 by NL slide 25

  26. Use of on-board anemometry (RLD) (item 13) Solution 1: Keep method in gtr (derived from ISO standard) Former reservation from India withdrawn? __________________________________________________________ Vehicle run-in mileage (RLD) (item 32) Solution 1: 10000 – 80000 km. Vehicles with min. mileage of 3000 km (on request of the manufacturer) Scrutiny reservation from Japan slide 26

  27. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  28. Possible issues for post-validation • GSI handling • Monitoring of RCB of all batteries (correction procedure) • Handling of aerodynamic options within test mass approach • Normalization methods • Effects of mode construction • … slide 28

  29. Overview • State of the working progress • Open issues table • (a) Open issues (red) • (b) Scrutiny reservations (yellow) • Post-validation issues • Next steps

  30. Next steps • DC drafting sessions • f2f-Workshop in Berlin:24. / 25. April 2013 • phone/web conferences

  31. Thanks for your attention. LabProcICE contact: Béatrice Lopez de Rodas - beatrice.lopez(at)utac.com Konrad Kolesa - konrad.kolesa(at)audi.deMarkus Bergmann – markus.bergmann(at)audi.de Stephan Redmann – stephan.redmann(at)bmvbs.bund.de

More Related