Vehicular Fuel Consumption Simulation and Measurement Dr. Horizon GITANO-BRIGGS University Science Malaysia 1 Challenges of Field FC and Emissions Individual Vehicle Variation Environmental Factors (Temp, Rain…) Driver Factors (Aggressive, slow) Load Factors (Hills, passengers) Traffic Factors (Jammed, or free flowing) Variation from vehicle to vehicle (identical units) Tuning, Wear, part-to-part variation Model to Model variation Geographic Location Variation Hills, Loads, Traffic, … Page 2 of 32 Vehicle FC Modeling Speed-Load model is useful and fairly accurate –but• No acceleration load prediction (can be included, but based on what acceleration?) • No Hill prediction (again can be included, but what is the topology?) • Gearing can be included, but depends on shift speeds – Shift speeds vary by ~2x depending on driver aggression (3000rpm up shift mellow, 6000 racing) Vehicle tuning: still need some engine data Page 3 of 32 Vehicle Power Modeling S m a ll M o to rc yc le P o w e r/S p e e d C a lc u la to r 600 g m /k W h Fuel D ens 720 g m /l 35 1 29 k m /h deg N Speed H ill F c lim b Pow er E s t. F C 9 .7 2 803 482 M ile a g e 52 m /s W g m /h r k m /l R o llin g R e s is ta n c e W e ig h t 110 kg R id e r C rr 60 0 .0 1 8 kg C o e fic ie n t F o rc e 3 0 .0 2 N 7000 6000 M ile a g e (a s s u m in g g e a rin g g ive s V m a x a t P m a x ) 5000 4000 3000 k g /m ^3 m² C o e fic ie n t N 2 9 5 B a s e lin e 3 0 1 -3 k g 3 7 0 D e c c rr O n ly O n ly 3 2 1 0 .4 A re a O n ly 0 0 .0 0 0 3 2 1 C d .2 8 3 5 4 3 0 b s fc O n ly O n ly 1 2 3 .6 7 .2 30 62 1 4 3 4 1 0 .8 1 4 .4 97 136 13 29 1 8 .0 2 1 .6 2 5 .2 2 8 .8 3 2 .4 7306 .0 3 9 .6 181 234 295 367 451 80 548 90 660 442 BSFC +C R R 5 2 5 P lu s Are a a n d C d 2000 8 8 3 R a d ic le 1 0 2 0 T o ta lly O p t 1000 Ae ro d yn a m ic D ra g D e n s ity 1 .1 8 A re a 0 .6 Cd 0 .7 Fd 2 3 .4 2 C hange V e h ic le T o p s p e e d m a c h e s M a x P o w e r P o w e r D e m a n d (W ) BSFC 0 0 10 20 30 M o d e le d P o w e r D e m a n d Speed Speed Pow er m /s kph W 5 6 7 8 9 40 50 60 10 S p e e d (k p h ) 11 0 .6 2 .8 F it 54 91 139 203 282 3 7190 0 494 Vehicle Models can be good predictors of power. They are less accurate at fuel consumption prediction. Page 4 of 32 Individual vehicle FC Variation Vehicle Load con not directly predict FC Relies on knowledge of engine operating point and efficiency • Efficiency varies widely based on individual vehicles operation point (speed vs. torque) even at same power Page 5 of 32 Effect of Rider Stance, Load, Tire Pressure Individual vehicle Power and FC 20% ↑ FC 2 x ↑ Power Page 13 of 29 FC Review Power = Torque x Speed FC = Power x BSFC (Break Specific Fuel Consumption, gm/kWh) Car on highway: 15Nm, 6000 rpm, BSFC = 600 gm/kWh P = 15 x 6000 x 2π / 60 = 9.4kW FC = 600 * 9.4 = 5640 gm/hour FC = 5640gm / 720gm/liter = 7.8 liters/hour 100km/h => 7.8l/100km => 13km/liter Page 7 of 32 Engine BSFC (gm/kWh) Maximum Torque Curve (WOT) Engine Torque 270 290 280 300 350 400 800 Engine Speed Page 8 of 32 Constant Power Curves 8 kW Engine Torque Power: 1 2 3 4 6 Engine Speed Page 9 of 32 Various Gear Ratios Engine Torque For same power BSFC varies from 290 to 350 (ie. 20%) 4th 290 3rd 300 350 2nd Engine Speed Page 10 of 32 Engine Technology Not all technologies will have similar patterns of FC or emissions (ie. it is hard to generalize FC/Emissions results) Different technologies give different variations of FC •Carbureted 2T loses ~35% of fuel unburned typically •At idle it may be >70% due to miss-firing •Direct Fuel Injection can run exceptionally lean ay idle - Stratified Gasoline vs. LPG leakage •LPG: Based on 1 study ~60% of tanks/systems had significant leaks •Gasoline systems will have fewer leaks as more noticeable, but suffer from more “pilferage” Page 11 of 32 Idle Combustion Pressure Comparison Pressur e (100kPa) ) 30 Carbureted: fires 1 out of 4 cycles 25 20 3 x misfires 3 x misfires 15 10 5 0 0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0 .4 0 .5 T im e ( s ) Late combustion Pressure (100 kPa) 30 Direct Fuel Injection: More consistent 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Time (s) Page 12 of 32 Fleet Vehicle FC Variation Variation: Gearing, Tire Size, Replacement Parts, Wear •Vehicle tuning varies (7% are grossly mistuned) •Driver behavior variation: 2x variation in acceleration One study found FC ok in city but bad in rural because gearing was the same, and engines were revving too high for rural highway speeds Re-geared for highway speeds and FC greatly improved •Probably require>30 vehicle samples for any reasonable estimates Page 13 of 32 Dyno vs Road Testing Obvious environmental factors: Temp, rain, road surface •2ndary: Engine temps •Even with careful control may still have ~10% variation (road – dyno) •While dyno tests may not give exactly the same FC numbers as road tests, they are pretty good at vehicle to vehicle comparisons Strive to get a dyno test to match the road FC, but don’t stress! The vehicle to vehicle comparison should still be valid unless the dyno test is totally inappropriate! Page 14 of 32 Dynamometry Measurements: good for comparisons Fuel economy of 4-stroke and 2-stoke motorcycles Vehicle fuel economy as function of motorcycle age Page 24 of 29 Dynamometry Measurements: good for comparisons Fuel economy versus engine size Fuel economy by manufacturer Page 25 of 29 Dynamometry Studies part throttle resulting in high pumping losses extra work done to overcome the larger aerodynamic drag Optimum speed for best FE Some studies are much easier to do on a dynamometer Page 15 of 29 Dynamometry Studies 10 7000 Power (at Dyno) 9 6000 8 Torque (Nm) Torque 6 4000 5 3000 4 3 2 1 0 4000 Optimum speed for Red lines - Carbureted Blue Lines - EFI best FE Both give same power and torque WOT 5000 6000 7000 Power (W) 5000 7 2000 1000 8000 9000 0 10000 Engine Speed (rpm) Technology comparison: Carb vs EFI Page 15 of 29 ECER40 V eloc ity(km/h) Drive Cycle Comparison 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 Time(s ) M’sian Urban Cycle M’sians accelerate more aggressively, faster and spend less time stopped Page 19 of 32 Drive Cycle Analysis: Malaysia • 600 motorcycle survey • Average mileage 5500km/year Similar speeds and accelerations Page 20 of 32 FUEL CONSUMPTION COMPARISON: Chassis Dyno vs. On-Road Drive cycle Distance (m) Time Fuel (s) Consumed (g) Chassis Dyno Mileage (km/L) On-road Mileage (km/L) Suburban 4643 442 73.9 45.2 50.8 Highway 25260 1589 451.4 40.3 43.6 Difference (%) 11 8 The vehicle was transient dyno tested on a representative drive cycle, and compared with on the road fuel consumption for that mode of driving. Typically there is a 10% difference between the 2 methods. Page 21 of 29 Fuel Consumption and Emissions Factors Typical “balanced” drive cycle => 42.8 km/l Annual mileage ~ 5,500km/year 128.5 l/vehicle per year 5,000,000 bbl/year total fuel consumption by motorcycles in Malaysia Typical emissions (New carbureted small 4T motorcycles): gm/km kg/vehicle/year kTons/year (Msia) CO: 7.0 38 308 HC: 0.7 3.8 31 NOx: 0.15 0.83 6.6 CO2: 50 275 2200 Page 22 of 32 Effect of Technologies: Carb vs EFI Even if the test pattern doesn’t match the road cycle exactly, the differences between various technologies should be obvious: Emissions (gm/km) on the ECE-R40 Test: Carbureted EFI CO: 7.0 1.1 HC: 0.7 0.24 NOx: 0.15 0.08 CO2: 50 55 Page 23 of 32 Field FC Measurements Individual tank fill-ups variation is large (>10%) •Probably requires ~10 tank fills (Empty to Full 10x) •Data taking sometimes questionable (does the recorder care about data quality?) Running with a calibrated fuel bottle will give accurate results for a given drive. This is SOP for Shell Eco Marathon and similar “eco races”. Page 24 of 32 Field Vehicle Measurements GPS is ok for speed, but it may overestimates speed when slow (dither) •Wheel sped pick better: gives good V and A and distance •No hill, no load info Simple, inexpensive data loggers can track a vehicles movement for months with high resolution. Page 25 of 32 Data Collection: Wheel Speed pickup Target Sensor Inductive sensor reads signal from 2 targets on rear wheel, 180 degrees apart Data from the speed pickup is stored in the portable data logger at 10Hz and later downloaded into the computer. • RPM vs Time Page 26 of 32 Motorcycle Roll Down Test: GPS vs Wheel Speed Aerodynamic resistance dominates Notice Model and Wheel Data overlay (good agreement) Rolling resistance dominates Page 9 of 29 Instrumentation: Advanced Concepts Torque sprocket: Measures both speed and torque at wheel • Includes hill and load effects (but not engine efficiency) • Torque Spkt + engine speed (from generator signal) can be decent predictor of engine operating condition (speed torque) and thus FC Outer section is separate from inner section. Torque compresses springs, allowing outer section to rotate with respect to inner section. Features on both sections are detected by speed pickup. Page 28 of 32 Instrumentation: Advanced Concepts Torque sprocket: Speed, Torque, and Acceleration (from V) 30 s p e e d (k m /h ) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 tim e (s ) 200 180 160 T o rq u e ( N m ) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 t im e ( s ) Page 29 of 32 Instrumentation: Advanced Concepts In fuel injected vehicles the ECU “knows” how much fuel is being injected. OBD 2 (On Board Diagnostics) Vehicles can have FC read directly from the ECU On non-OBD EFI systems Injection Duration can easily be measured and combined with injector calibration to get a good FC number Carbureted vehicles can be instrumented with EFI sensors: •Measure engine speed and throttle position •Can back-calculate FC accurately if you have “mapped” the engine Page 30 of 32 Instrumentation: Advanced Concepts In EFI systems the injector does not open or close instantly. The injector calibration curve will give the fuel delivered based on an injection duration (signal) including both of these effects. Injector Signal Delivered Fuel Flow Rate Injector Signal Duration Page 31 of 32 Instrumentation: Advanced Concepts 2-T LPG EFI used for fuel tracking in bi-fuel motorcycle. In gasoline mode (carbureted) can record info for gasoline FC via separate calculation Page 32 of 32 Implications for CDMs Vehicle Measurement are crucial: Wheel speed pickup V and A, and distance are reliable Measuring Torque and speed we can estimate FC well Engine Measurement are getting better: TPS + Engine Speed, and Temp With a “calibrated” vehicle we can accurately get the FC Higher Resolution data, but on a limited number of vehicles? Road “gas bottle” test still most reliable: Still will have some variation so need several runs. ~30 vehicles to get a good idea of the FC for a given senario. Page 33 of 32 Conclusions We can (and should) use standard tests to compare the emissions/FC benefits of various technologies These tests should be as close to the real operating conditions as possible although standard (ie. dyno) tests may not correlate perfectly with field tests Field tests are a good idea (for final confirmation) but must be well controlled: –Fuel metering should be very carefully controlled –Environmental conditions, loads, speeds, … should all be controlled In-Stitu Instrumentation for monitoring actual usage is probably the best way to go in the long run. This may require further development of instrumentation. Page 34 of 32 Thank You Contacting Us For more information please contact us via: University Science Malaysia HorizonUSM@yahoo.com Focus Applied Technologies Lot 1174 Jalan Hutan Lipur Kpg. Sg. Buaya Nibong Tebal 14300 Penang, Malaysia + (6016) 484-6524 (Voice) +(604) 594-1025 (Fax) Horizon@FocusAppliedTechnologies.com www.FocusAppliedTechnologies.com 36 Motorcycle Power Demand Coefficient of drag, Cd • frontal area • vehicle mass Coefficient of rolling resistance, Crr • rider and payload mass • tire pressure Page 4 of 29 Parameters Affecting Fuel Consumption Factors Effects Motorcycle Condition Driving pattern Road Condition Environmental Condition Vehicle’s Emission Fuel Consumption Operational Cost Page 2 of 29 Motorcycle Driving Patterns Comparison Malaysia • Aggressive acceleration/breaking • Predominantly as commuters also as delivery and even in construction • Very different “rules” from cars • Lots of Motorcycle-only infrastructure West (US, Europe) • More steady cruising with mild accelerations • Mainly for leisure and occasionally for commuting • Follow same rules as cars Page 39 of 32 Gear Ratio Effect: +/- 50% effect on FC Typical Seasoned Motorcycle Page 14 of 29