| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document Title | Influence of WHVC Compensation Method on Emission Test Results: Revised | ||||||||
| Reference Number | HDH-15-08/Rev.1 | ||||||||
| Date |
1 Nov 2013
|
||||||||
| Summary | Since the system output is different between WHTC, the test cycle for conventional vehicles, and WHVC, a compensation method has been proposed. JASIC reports on its verification of the compensation method and its impact on test results. (Revised version of the original document) | ||||||||
| Source(s) | JASIC | ||||||||
| Rulemaking Area(s) | Heavy-duty Hybrids (HDH) and GTR No. 4 WHDC | ||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||
| UNECE server | .pdf format | ||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||
| HDH | Session 15 | 23-25 Oct 2013 |
Mr. Kurokawa presented an analysis by JARI on the influence of the different methods under discussion within the HDH work program on the NOx emission. Basis for the comparison was the NOx emission on the WHTC. The 30 sec moving average method came closest to the WHTC emission level (90 ). If a second-by-second slope is used the ratio is 77 mainly caused by a shift in the engine map towards lower loads. In conclusion, the 30 sec moving average slope, which shows a load frequency second closest to WHTC after the second by second slope, is preferable. Mr. Sanchez suggested that additional emission testing should be done. As regards the HILS models, it was agreed that it is not acceptable to only allow for Matlab to be used but it should at least in principle be allowed to use other software packages. As a consequence, the models have to be described in detail in the gtr. |
||||||||