WLTP-E-Lab Sub Group
Progress report
WLTP-DTP-E-LabProc-088
Leader: Per Ohlund / Kazuki Kobayashi
Lab process-EV meeting in Paris
Face to Face meeting was held on 5th and 6th of
March at PSA in Paris.
 Open issues were discussed.
Mode construction
Shorten test procedure for BEV
Utility factor
RCB correction
Break off criteria
and so on.
 Next meeting will be held in May.

Open issues of E-lab sub group
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
7&11
End of charge criteria
No agreement
Still open
Can start
14
RCB correction
window
Depends on Mode construction
To be decided by
confirmation
tests results
Can start
19
Calculation method of
CD to CS break off
criteria
No agreement
Still open
Can start
20
Soak condition with
forced cooling
Follow ICE recommendation.
Except the soaking with charging.
Battery temperature should be within the
criteria
Will be closed
Can start
21
Vehicle classification
ACEA proposal under development
Still open
Can not start
22
End of charge criteria
No agreement
Still open
Can start
Impact for Confirmation test
Can start: To be discussed until June
Can not start: To be decided before confirmation
test
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
7&11
End of charge criteria
No agreement
Still open
To be discussed
Can start
Charging Condition [Ah]
Electric consumption =ΔE/Electric range
How to guarantee ΔE is important to calculate correct electric consumption.
No3
To conduct
continuously
Fully Charged
ΔE0
ΔE1
Test n
Driving cycle [/]
(transient)
Recharge
Recharging
soak
Counter Proposal
1.E0/E1:Criteria (Japanese regulation less than10% )
2.Average E0&E1 for electric consumption calculation
3.Test WLTC and AER city continuously (to be optional in stead of 1or 2 )
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
14
RCB correction
window
Depends on mode construction
To be decided by
confirmation tests results
Can start
According to VP2 result,
To be same as NEDC CO2 value, the criteria should be 0.5% (in case L-exH).
NEDC
WLTC
Fuel consumption (l/100km)
6.655
6.940
Driving distance (km)
10.966
23.274
1% fuel energy per cycle (MJ)
0.23053
0.51022
Max RCB criteria (Ah)
-0.202
-0.447
Equivalent CO2 (g/km)
n.a
-5.445
In case each phase correction should be decided by actual test result.
Therefore it should be considered after confirmation test.
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
19
Calculation method of
CD to CS break off
criteria
No agreement
=>Based on Cycle energy demand
To be discussed
=>Closed
Can start
explanation
The break-off criteria for the charge-depleting test is reached when the
relative net energy change as shown in the equation below is less than
4 per cent.
ACEA proposal
Relative net energy change [per cent]
= _________NEC____________
Cycle energy demand of the test vehicle
The break-off criteria for the charge-depleting test is reached when the
relative net energy change as shown in the equation below is less than
[x] per cent.
Japanese proposal
Relative net energy change [per cent]
＝_________NEC_______
___
Consumed fuel energy during the CS-cold test
Comparison ACEA vs Japan with ACEA Comments (27.02.2013)
ACEA
proposal
Merit
Demerit
・The criteria would be calculated
before CD test.
CS and CD can be conducted
separately
Technology neutral: criteria
independent of the efficiency of
the power train (as hard to reach
for a very efficient PT as for a low
efficient PT) (*)
Also DEKRA confirmed in VPII
the applicability of the cycle
energy demand based BoC.
・Necessary to calculate Cycle energy demand
of the test vehicle for beak off criteria before
test.
・The criteria of the vehicle which has a few
generative efficiency would be narrow.
・Not including deceleration energy(regenerative
energy).
The impact of the regenerative energy on the
BoC is rather small and negligible for the
final FC and CO2 values.
・Fuel consumption is including
deceleration energy.
 this is not technology neutral,
Japanes
as it takes into account the PT
e
efficiencies
Proposal
・similar thinking with ISO.SAE
 GTR intention is to create
robust and worldwide applicable
test procedures
・Necessary to conduct CS test before CD test.
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
20
Forced cooling
Follow ICE recommendation.
Except the soaking with battery charging.
In case forced cooling, Battery temperature
should be within the criteria.
Follow ICE
Will be closed
Can start
To be charged without
forced cooling!
Battery temperature within criteria
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
21
Vehicle classification
No agreement
For confirmation test is as
following
ACEA proposal under
development
Can not start
L3+M3+H3
(ver.5.1)
L3+M3+H3 (+ExH3)
(ver.5.3)
Class3
34
L2+M2+L2
PMR
L2+M2+H2
L2+M2+H2(+ExH2)
Class2
22
70
A power of OVC-HEV should be
considered.
Motor power +ICE power
Motor power or ICE power
Hybrid system power?
Class1
L1+M1+L1
L1+L1+L1
90
120
135
Maximum speed
To move on Confirmation test,
No classification=>Class 3 all vehicle
Japan proposed to use Maximum speed in R68 .
Maximum speed means:
For electric vehicle, the highest average value of the
speed, which the vehicle can maintain twice over
distance of 1 km.
To move on Confirmation test , Based on R68
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
22
Shorten test
procedure
Depends on mode construction which will be
decided in Tokyo meeting
Still open
=>To be
postponed
phase 2
Can start
Japan proposed Shorten test procedure based on SAE1634.
According to additional test by Japan, it was shown that significant time
reduction was provided with small amount of error in ranges.
ACEA welcomes the idea to develop a shortened range test procedure
based on MCT

ACEA needs more time to elaborate on the JP MCT proposal and proposed
to postpone later stage (Phase 2).

Japan still require 4 phase value.
To accept mode construction, this procedure is necessary.
Or need to consider counter proposal.
Proposed shorten test procedure with MCT based on SAE J1634
Shorten test procedure for W LTC （
M C T)
160
W LTC v5
140
S peed (km / h)
120
M iddle
4.76km
433s
100
Low
3.09km
589s
80
60
High
7.16km
455s
40
１）
To prevent uneven condition, num ber of Low / M iddle
should be several tim es.
２）
B efore C SC m and after C SC m should be sam e.
Ex-High
8.25km
323s
20
0
0
200
Low 1
400
600
M iddle 1
800
Tim e (s)
1000
1200
1400
H igh1
（3 .0 9 km ） （4 .7 6 km ） （7 .1 6 km ）
9 m in 4 9 s
7 m in 1 3 s 7 m in 3 5 s
1600
1800
Ex- H igh1
M iddle 2
（8 .2 5 km ）
5 m in 2 3 s
（4 .7 6 km ） （3 .0 9 km ）
7 m in 1 3 s
9 m in 4 9 s
Low 3
M iddle 3
Low 2
H igh2
（3 .0 9 km ） （4 .7 6 km ） （7 .1 6 km ）
9 m in 4 9 s
7 m in 1 3 s 7 m in 3 5 s
C SC M
5 5 m ph
（8 9 km / h）
Ex- H igh2
M iddle 4
（8 .2 5 km ）
5 m in 2 3 s
（4 .7 6 km ） （3 .0 9 km ）
7 m in 1 3 s
9 m in 4 9 s
The distance exclude C SC m
Each
phase
Low
M iddle
1 2 .3 6
1 9 .0 4
2356
1732
Low ＋M iddle
3 1 .4 0
H igh
Ex- H igh
1 4 .3 2
1 6 .5
910
646
H igh＋Ex- H igh
3 0 .8 2
Total
6 2 .2 2
5644
km
km
sec
Low 4
C SC E
5 5 m ph
（8 9 km / h）
Estimated Range with MCT
Phase
Measured Range
(SCT)
Estimated Range
(MCT)
Comparison
SCT vs MCT
Low
177.1km
183.2km
6.1km
3.6%
Middle
170.1km
172.9km
2.8km
1.7%
High
147.3km
146.1km
1.2km
0.8%
Ex-High
98.5km
99.5km
1.0km
1.1%
The results show that the error was small. Thus, it is considered that the shorten
test procedure with MCT is usable.
Time reduction effect with the shorten test procedure with MCT
The measurement of AER and AER city with SCT consumed 2days.
The measurement of four ranges with MCT consumed 3:30.
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
24
Methodology to make
Utility factor
Solution1
Global harmonized utility factor
Solution2
Global harmonized UF calculation based
on US/EU/Japanese data and traffic
volume regarding charging behavior .
(note, data from EU is still unavailable)
Still open
Can start
25
Fractional of Utility
Factor
Use fractional Utility factor
Closed
Can start
26
Number of Utility
factor
Depends on Mode construction
Still Open
To be discussed
after Tokyo meeting
Can start
Tokyo meeting
It is agreed to apply regional Ufs at least for Phase I.
EU commission confirm Japanese proposal.
The harmonization of the methodology will be submitted by seems
not to be possible.
Discussions to reach for a globally harmonized methodology and a
globally harmonized UF will go on.
WLTP harmonized Utility Factor
Japan studied harmonized Utility Factor.
According to SAEJ2841, the base data used for the calculation of each Urban and Highway mode are
separated by the average vehicle-speed 38.41mph.
This method give harmonized UF is calculated by this classification below;
Low-Highway as Urban / Extra-highway as Highway
Accumulative average speed（km/h）
Accumulative avelage speed(mile/h）
Urban or Highway
specification
ver.5.3 ver.5.1 ver.5.3
ver.5.1
ver.5.3
ver.5.1
Time (seconds)
590
590
Average speed（km/h)
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
11.7
11.7 Urban
Middle
Time (seconds)
433
433
Average speed（km/h)
39.3
39.5
27.5
27.6
17.1
17.2 Urban
High
Time (seconds)
455
455
Average speed（km/h)
56.4
56.7
36.4
36.6
22.6
22.7 Urban
Extra-high Time (seconds)
323
323
Average speed（km/h)
92.0
92.0
46.4
46.5
28.8
28.9 High way
Total WLTC Time (seconds)
1800
1800
Average speed（km/h)
46.4
46.5
28.8
28.9 Urban
urban<38.41mph
Same as SAE　J2841
Phase
Low
region
Number of vehicle * driving
distance
JAPAN
EU
US
total
urban,rural
6.54E+11
3.25E+12
4.77E+12
motorway
6.54E+11
3.25E+12
3.33E+12
weighting
ratio
1
5
5
1.4376E+12
Harmonized UF for L,M,H
Exponential fitting equation by weighting ratio of Japan, EU ,US urban.
y =1-EXP(14.703*(Rcda/400)^6-52.463* (Rcda/400)^5+71.349*(Rcda/400)^4-49.240*(Rcda/400)^3+21.592*(Rcda/400)^2-11.081*(Rcda/400)-0.020)
Harmonized UF for exH
Same as US high way UF
y =1-EXP(-(4.89*(Rcda/1.609/399.9)+5.49*(Rcda/1.609/399.9)^2-23.3*(Rcda/1.609/399.9)^3+28.3*(Rcda/1.609/399.9)^4-11.5*(Rcda/1.609/399.9)^5))
Harmonized Utility Factor
Japanese proposal
Red line: harmonized
UF(L-H)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
fleet UF
fleet Urban
fleet Hwy
JAPAN
ECE
harmonize
統一UF案
d UF
UF
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Harmonized UF
(exH)
0.1
0
0
50
100
150
200
Rcda(km)
250
300
350
400
Item
No
Issue
Solution
Status
Impact for
confirmation
test
27
Break time between
cycle for CD test
Solution1
Rolling measuring bag to analyze during
test.
Solution 2
Span check, zero check and calibration
before and after charge depleting test.
Between the test cycle, only bag
analyzing. Needed time for analysis about
15 minutes without calibration.
Still open
To be discussed
Can start
=>Both solutions
are accepted as
an option.
ACEA reported
Break time between two WLTC´s during Charge Depleting test
The break time between two WLTC´s in CD is too short
Reasons: In the break time bag 4 has to be analyzed, after this all bags have to
be evacuated and purged, after this all analyzers gets a calibration longer than 10
min!
The certification mode (that means a calibration before all bag measurements)
need a break time around 40 min.
In case of a diesel measurement in which the Hot-FID is measuring modal the
THC, there is no possibility to use this to measure the background THC-emission
in the sample bag.
This case ensures break times of over 40 min.
Furthermore there are bag holding times in the procedure > 20 min
Additional comment

Pointed out by Korea, it is necessary to consider
vehicle selection issue as ICE subgroup.
Thank you for your attention!