136. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposal for Amendment 4 to UN GTR No. 4 on WHDC (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/79 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/80) was adopted on 22 June 2021 by consensus vote of the following contracting parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, the European Union (representing Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden), India, Japan, Norway, the Russian Federation, South Africa, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.

137. The representatives from the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and Tunisia abstained from voting.

Proposal to improve the text of provisions introduced in Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

136. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposal for Amendment 4 to UN GTR No. 4 on WHDC (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/79 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/80) was adopted on 22 June 2021 by consensus vote of the following contracting parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, the European Union (representing Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden), India, Japan, Norway, the Russian Federation, South Africa, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.

137. The representatives from the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and Tunisia abstained from voting.

Proposal to improve the text of provisions introduced in Amendment 3 to UN GTR No.4.

30. The representative from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7, as amended by GRPE-82-09-Rev.1. The representative from EC highlighted an error that had been omitted, and a correction had been introduced during the meeting in GRPE-82-09-Rev.1.

31. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7 and GRPE-82-09-Rev.1 as amended by Addendum 2 to this report. GRPE also adopted the technical report (based on extracts from ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7) as reproduced in Annex V. GRPE requested the secretariat to submit Addendum 2 and Annex V to WP.29 and Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) for consideration and vote at their June 2021 sessions as draft Amendment 4 to UN GTR No. 4.

Proposal to correct the improper or confusing provisions described in Amendment 3 to UN GTR No.4.

30. The representative from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7, as amended by GRPE-82-09-Rev.1. The representative from EC highlighted an error that had been omitted, and a correction had been introduced during the meeting in GRPE-82-09-Rev.1.

31. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7 and GRPE-82-09-Rev.1 as amended by Addendum 2 to this report. GRPE also adopted the technical report (based on extracts from ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2021/7) as reproduced in Annex V. GRPE requested the secretariat to submit Addendum 2 and Annex V to WP.29 and Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) for consideration and vote at their June 2021 sessions as draft Amendment 4 to UN GTR No. 4.

Proposal to update the PMP mandate with a view to delivering the following results:

• Proposal for a new methodology for exhaust PN measurement with a d50 cut-off size reduced to 10 nm: June 2020
• Proposal for HD raw exhaust PN sampling and extension of sub-23 nm procedure to HD engines: January 2021
• Proposal for LD PN-PEMS 10 nm specifications : June 2021 (tbc)
• Proposal for a common test procedure for the measurement of particle brake emissions from conventional ICE LDVs: December 2021.

40. The Chair of the IWG on PMP introduced GRPE-81-13 on a revision of the Terms of References (ToRs) of the IWG to include on-road test procedure definitions, which are expected to be developed for light- and heavy- duty application concerning the sub-23 nm PN emissions. GRPE agreed to revise the ToRs of the IWG on PMP as proposed in GRPE-81-13.

70. The Chair introduced GRPE-80-04-Rev.1 as the GRPE list of emission topics that GRPE would regularly discuss and may decide to work on if and when resources are available. He reminded this list did not constitute a declaration of intent that the topics included would be tackled by GRPE in the future. He also recalled that keeping such a list open and regularly updated would allow GRPE to be more reactive when new issues arose and ready to cover new topics when pertinent. He reiterated GRPE-80-04-Rev.1 was to remain an GRPE internal document for its own use and information.

71. The representative from OICA requested more information about brake wear emissions topics and how to tackle this topic and by which GR. He also asked whether a more extensive definition of geofencing was available. The representative from EC thought brake emissions would preferably be considered at a vehicle scale and would preferably be considered in GRPE. The Chair emphasized that there would be close cooperation with other GRs working on brake issues, and confirmed GRPE was the appropriate GR to develop the new provisions on brake wear emissions.

72. The representative from India requested more clarity about the destination of the potential items, whether UN Regulation or UN GTR. The Chair clarified that the emission topic list was a starting point and its aim was not to contain any prescription on to which agreement each topic would go.

73. The representative from Spain asked whether the inclusion of life cycle analysis was referring to all vehicle and energy types. The Chair replied that life cycle analysis was still a nascent activity where legislative pathway still had to be defined. New energy types for vehicles needed to have a broad coverage, and he felt GRPE was not in a position to work on this yet.

74. The Chair introduced GRPE-80-05-Rev.2 as the draft list of priority for GRPE that WP.29/AC.2 requested each GR to send so that the coordination of tasks could be better overseen by WP.29/AC.2.

75. The representative from the Netherlands thanked the Chair for putting together this list and insisted that cars were more and more becoming computers on wheels and that vehicles would therefore evolve over their lifetime through software updates for example and that the issue of lifetime compliance was of high importance in his view.

76. The representative from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland insisted tyre wear particulates and heavy duty hybrids were two areas of particular concern for his country and was happy to see those topics reflected in the list.

77. GRPE adopted GRPE-80-05-Rev.2 as amended during the session (GRPE-80-05-Rev.3) and requested the Chair and secretariat to send it to WP.29 secretariat for further consideration by WP.29/AC.2.

70. The Chair introduced GRPE-80-04-Rev.1 as the GRPE list of emission topics that GRPE would regularly discuss and may decide to work on if and when resources are available. He reminded this list did not constitute a declaration of intent that the topics included would be tackled by GRPE in the future. He also recalled that keeping such a list open and regularly updated would allow GRPE to be more reactive when new issues arose and ready to cover new topics when pertinent. He reiterated GRPE-80-04-Rev.1 was to remain an GRPE internal document for its own use and information.

71. The representative from OICA requested more information about brake wear emissions topics and how to tackle this topic and by which GR. He also asked whether a more extensive definition of geofencing was available. The representative from EC thought brake emissions would preferably be considered at a vehicle scale and would preferably be considered in GRPE. The Chair emphasized that there would be close cooperation with other GRs working on brake issues, and confirmed GRPE was the appropriate GR to develop the new provisions on brake wear emissions.

72. The representative from India requested more clarity about the destination of the potential items, whether UN Regulation or UN GTR. The Chair clarified that the emission topic list was a starting point and its aim was not to contain any prescription on to which agreement each topic would go.

73. The representative from Spain asked whether the inclusion of life cycle analysis was referring to all vehicle and energy types. The Chair replied that life cycle analysis was still a nascent activity where legislative pathway still had to be defined. New energy types for vehicles needed to have a broad coverage, and he felt GRPE was not in a position to work on this yet.

74. The Chair introduced GRPE-80-05-Rev.2 as the draft list of priority for GRPE that WP.29/AC.2 requested each GR to send so that the coordination of tasks could be better overseen by WP.29/AC.2.

75. The representative from the Netherlands thanked the Chair for putting together this list and insisted that cars were more and more becoming computers on wheels and that vehicles would therefore evolve over their lifetime through software updates for example and that the issue of lifetime compliance was of high importance in his view.

76. The representative from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland insisted tyre wear particulates and heavy duty hybrids were two areas of particular concern for his country and was happy to see those topics reflected in the list.

77. GRPE adopted GRPE-80-05-Rev.2 as amended during the session (GRPE-80-05-Rev.3) and requested the Chair and secretariat to send it to WP.29 secretariat for further consideration by WP.29/AC.2.

69. The Chair introduced GRPE-83-35 as revised list of priorities to be shared with WP.29. The representative from the EC called for prior consultation within GRPE before including new element in the priority list.

70. The representative from Japan stated that carbon neutrality was now a crucial issue in the country and required the issue of life cycle analysis to be considered by GRPE as candidate to be included in the priority list, as was already the case in the GRPE emission items list (GRPE-80-04-Rev.1). the Chair agreed to consider this at the next session of GRPE in November 2021.

GRPE to consider the proposal from the expert from OICA for corrigendum to GTR4

35. The representative from OICA introduced GRPE-80-25 containing draft amendments to UN GTR No. 4, mainly correcting errors found in some formulas in the latest version of the text. GRPE welcomed the proposal and was looking forward to receiving a working document at the next session of GRPE in June 2020.

35. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-77-08 on the harmonization of Heavy Duty Fuel Economy measurements. He proposed to organize a one-day workshop during the next session of GRPE in January 2019 to exchange information on the different approaches used by the CPs to measure fuel economy from heavy duty vehicles.

36. The expert from EC supported the idea to have a workshop organized as part of the January 2019 session of GRPE.

37. The secretariat agreed to assist in the organization of the workshop and help manage the coordination with other meetings from IWGs.

OICA proposal to pursue gradual harmonization of heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency standards, beginning with an effort to define a uniform measurement procedure through a global technical regulation.

52. The expert from OICA briefly introduced GRPE-76-20 on non-harmonized fuel economy provisions for heavy duty vehicles in various countries and regions. The expert from OICA proposed that a workshop would be organized in order to discuss this subject. The secretariat agreed to collaborate in hosting the workshop. GRPE agreed to add a corresponding item on the agenda of GRPE.

Voting form for consideration of amendment 2 to GTR 3 on motorcycle brakes and amendment 3 to GTR 4 on heavy-duty vehicle emissions test procedures.

101. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposal for Amendment 2 to draft UN GTR on motorcycle braking (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/38, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/39, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/37) was established in the UN Global Registry on 12 March 2015 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

102. AC.3 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/38 with the following typographical change by introducing a missing comma:

The amendments to page 5, para. 3.1.9, second line<§i>, correct to read:

Proposal to align the draft Amendment with the harmonized terminology and definitions developed by the informal group on Vehicle Propulsion System Definitions.

42. The Chair of the IWG on VPSD informed GRPE about the outcome of the fifth session of the group. He presented (GRPE-70-21) proposing a new Mutual Resolution (M.R.2) containing an explanatory chapter and a chapter with vehicle propulsion system definitions. The proposal received some comments. GRPE requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-70-21 with an official symbol at its June 2015 session.

43. The Chair of the IWG on GFV proposed to insert in the VPSD outcome the definitions that would emerge from his group on dual fuelled vehicles.

44. GRPE agreed to defer consideration of GRPE-70-18.

45. GRPE acknowledged the progress made by the group and noted that no meeting would be scheduled during the GRPE week in June 2015.

Status of US EPA program to validate the HILS methodology and resolve error codes.

23. The expert from the USA presented GRPE-70-15 reporting on the activities of his Country on a correlation study comparing results obtained according to Annex 9 and those obtained according to Annex 10 (in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84). He offered to share the outcome of this study with GRPE in June 2015. GRPE welcomed this offer and agreed to further exchange information on the emissions of heavy duty vehicles equipped with hybrid powertrains and their environmental performance evaluation.

Revision of the document WP.29/2014/84 (draft amendment 3 to GTR No. 4) updated with the latest harmonized terminology as developed by the VPSD informal group.

Draft Amendment 3 to Global Technical Regulation (GTR) No. 4 concerning heavy-duty hybrids as approved by the Working Party on Pollution and Energy.

[Vote postponed until the March session. The GTR allows option between semi-validated HILS and fully validated power pack methods. US EPA believes there must be a robust understanding of the correlation between the two methods and the testing to build this understanding is incomplete. Therefore, while the US is committed to the GTR amendment, the US requests a delay. Canada and Japan support this request and need for the additional data.]

109. The representative of the United States of America kindly requested AC.3 to postpone consideration of draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2014/84, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85 and the authorization to develop a corresponding amendment (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/29)) because his country was still performing tests on the potential differences between the two alternatives in the proposed Annexes 9 and 10 and on their implications. He added that the test results would probably be shared with the other Contracting Parties at the January 2015 session of GRPE. The Chair noted that another Contracting Party also requested a delay in the vote until their clearance process had been completed. The Contracting Parties welcomed the statements and agreed to postpone consideration of the amendment and the vote by AC.3 to the March 2015 session.

22. The Chair of GRPE recalled the decision of WP.29 to defer the vote of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85 at its March 2015 session.

23. The expert from the USA presented GRPE-70-15 reporting on the activities of his Country on a correlation study comparing results obtained according to Annex 9 and those obtained according to Annex 10 (in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84). He offered to share the outcome of this study with GRPE in June 2015. GRPE welcomed this offer and agreed to further exchange information on the emissions of heavy duty vehicles equipped with hybrid powertrains and their environmental performance evaluation.

103. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposal for Amendment 3 to draft UN GTR on Worldwide Heavy-Duty Certification procedure (WHDC) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/29, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/38) was established in the UN Global Registry on 12 March 2015 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

[GAR note pending publication of official session report: Amendment 3 (documents WP.29/2014/84 and WP.29/2014/85) is unanimously adopted by the Contracting Parties present, including EU, USA, Japan, China, and others. US EPA notes a number of open issues concerning discrepancies in results achieved during extensive testing which will need to be resolved in the next phase of development. Nonetheless, the US reaffirms their belief that the test methodology is essentially sound and votes to adopt the amendment.]

[Vote postponed until the March session. The GTR allows option between semi-validated HILS and fully validated power pack methods. US EPA believes there must be a robust understanding of the correlation between the two methods and the testing to build this understanding is incomplete. Therefore, while the US is committed to the GTR amendment, the US requests a delay. Canada and Japan support this request and need for the additional data.]

109. The representative of the United States of America kindly requested AC.3 to postpone consideration of draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2014/84, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85 and the authorization to develop a corresponding amendment (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/29)) because his country was still performing tests on the potential differences between the two alternatives in the proposed Annexes 9 and 10 and on their implications. He added that the test results would probably be shared with the other Contracting Parties at the January 2015 session of GRPE. The Chair noted that another Contracting Party also requested a delay in the vote until their clearance process had been completed. The Contracting Parties welcomed the statements and agreed to postpone consideration of the amendment and the vote by AC.3 to the March 2015 session.

22. The Chair of GRPE recalled the decision of WP.29 to defer the vote of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85 at its March 2015 session.

103. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposal for Amendment 3 to draft UN GTR on Worldwide Heavy-Duty Certification procedure (WHDC) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/85, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/29, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/38) was established in the UN Global Registry on 12 March 2015 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

[GAR note pending publication of official session report: Amendment 3 (documents WP.29/2014/84 and WP.29/2014/85) is unanimously adopted by the Contracting Parties present, including EU, USA, Japan, China, and others. US EPA notes a number of open issues concerning discrepancies in results achieved during extensive testing which will need to be resolved in the next phase of development. Nonetheless, the US reaffirms their belief that the test methodology is essentially sound and votes to adopt the amendment.]

Adopted technical report on the development of the draft Amendment 3 to Global Technical Regulation (GTR) No. 4.

27. The World Forum recalled the oral report of the Chair of GRPE given during the 163rd session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1110, paras. 32-36) and approved the report.

16. The secretary to the IWG on HDH introduced GRPE-69-12 and reported on the completion of the work. He presented GRPE-69-10 amending the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 introducing a novel approach for assessing the performance of the entire vehicle powertrain by a simulation (HILS) as well as the final technical report (GRPE-69-11) for the proposed Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

17. GRPE noted that the HILS method validation was only partially completed when applying the Japanese criteria but that none of the prerequisites were met for extending the mandate for further action by the IWG. Therefore, GRPE acknowledged the work done by the IWG and agreed to remove this item from the provisional agenda of the seventieth session of GRPE in January 2015.

18. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 as amended by GRPE-69-10 and GRPE-69-22 (Part A) as reproduced in Addendum 2 to the GPE 68th session report. GRPE also adopted the corresponding technical report (GRPE-69-11 as amended by GRPE-69-22 (Part B), reproduced in Addendum 2) and requested the secretariat to submit them as a proposal for draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 to WP.29 and AC.3 at their November 2014 sessions.

Overview of the status of work on the heavy-duty hybrids amendments to GTR No. 4 for the 18th HDH informal group session.

Memorandum from the US EPA providing an overview of obstacles to US adoption of the proposed heavy-duty hybrids amendment and possible remedies to overcome these concerns. This memo addresses remaining concerns beyond those presented earlier in document HDH-16-03.

Presentation on the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), a government-sponsored global effort to reduce short-lived “climate pollutants” (initially focused on methane, black carbon, and hydrofluorocarbons).

46. The expert from Sweden presented GRPE-69-19, reporting on the CCAC activities. He informed GRPE that he Coalition was focusing on methane, black carbon and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) with the objective to address short-lived climate pollutants by raising awareness, enhancing new actions, mobilizing support and improving scientific understanding of short-lived climate pollutant impacts and mitigation strategies. He reported, in particular, on one of the ten initiatives of the coalition, the heavy-duty diesel initiative with the objective to virtually eliminate fine particles and black carbon emissions from new and existing heavy duty diesel vehicles and engines (including marine vessels) by (i) steadily reducing sulphur in diesel fuel, (ii) establishing more stringent emission standards with interested nations and parties, (iii) cleaning up existing fleets, (iv) cleaning up ports and marine transport and (v) developing a global green freight initiative. GRPE commented that WP.29 was in a position to contribute to these objectives.

16. The secretary to the IWG on HDH introduced GRPE-69-12 and reported on the completion of the work. He presented GRPE-69-10 amending the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 introducing a novel approach for assessing the performance of the entire vehicle powertrain by a simulation (HILS) as well as the final technical report (GRPE-69-11) for the proposed Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

17. GRPE noted that the HILS method validation was only partially completed when applying the Japanese criteria but that none of the prerequisites were met for extending the mandate for further action by the IWG. Therefore, GRPE acknowledged the work done by the IWG and agreed to remove this item from the provisional agenda of the seventieth session of GRPE in January 2015.

18. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 as amended by GRPE-69-10 and GRPE-69-22 (Part A) as reproduced in Addendum 2 to the GPE 68th session report. GRPE also adopted the corresponding technical report (GRPE-69-11 as amended by GRPE-69-22 (Part B), reproduced in Addendum 2) and requested the secretariat to submit them as a proposal for draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 to WP.29 and AC.3 at their November 2014 sessions.

Draft report on the development of the amendment to introduce provisions for heavy-duty hybrid powertrains and vehicles into GTR No. 4 on heavy-duty vehicle emissions and fuel consumption.

16. The secretary to the IWG on HDH introduced GRPE-69-12 and reported on the completion of the work. He presented GRPE-69-10 amending the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 introducing a novel approach for assessing the performance of the entire vehicle powertrain by a simulation (HILS) as well as the final technical report (GRPE-69-11) for the proposed Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

17. GRPE noted that the HILS method validation was only partially completed when applying the Japanese criteria but that none of the prerequisites were met for extending the mandate for further action by the IWG. Therefore, GRPE acknowledged the work done by the IWG and agreed to remove this item from the provisional agenda of the seventieth session of GRPE in January 2015.

18. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 as amended by GRPE-69-10 and GRPE-69-22 (Part A) as reproduced in Addendum 2 to the GPE 68th session report. GRPE also adopted the corresponding technical report (GRPE-69-11 as amended by GRPE-69-22 (Part B), reproduced in Addendum 2) and requested the secretariat to submit them as a proposal for draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 to WP.29 and AC.3 at their November 2014 sessions.

Document GRPE/2014/11 was prepared by the GRPE informal working group on heavy duty hybrids (HDH) to add the test procedure on heavy-duty hybrids to GTR No. 4.

This informal document revises and supplements GRPE/2014/11 in order to align GTR No. 4 and GTR No. 11 (NRMM) in accordance with the latest work of the HDH group. The renumbering of equations, tables and figures, the corresponding references, and the symbols list in paragraph 3.2 has not been completed in this document. This will be done during the final editing of GRPE/2014/11.

16. The secretary to the IWG on HDH introduced GRPE-69-12 and reported on the completion of the work. He presented GRPE-69-10 amending the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 introducing a novel approach for assessing the performance of the entire vehicle powertrain by a simulation (HILS) as well as the final technical report (GRPE-69-11) for the proposed Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

17. GRPE noted that the HILS method validation was only partially completed when applying the Japanese criteria but that none of the prerequisites were met for extending the mandate for further action by the IWG. Therefore, GRPE acknowledged the work done by the IWG and agreed to remove this item from the provisional agenda of the seventieth session of GRPE in January 2015.

18. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 as amended by GRPE-69-10 and GRPE-69-22 (Part A) as reproduced in Addendum 2 to the GPE 68th session report. GRPE also adopted the corresponding technical report (GRPE-69-11 as amended by GRPE-69-22 (Part B), reproduced in Addendum 2) and requested the secretariat to submit them as a proposal for draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 to WP.29 and AC.3 at their November 2014 sessions.

Decision tree for determining the powertrain family of a given vehicle under the proposed heavy-duty hybrids emissions and fuel consumption test procedures.

Status report on research and validation programs concerning:

• HILS Model Library
• WHVC Test Cycle
• System Work Concept
• Rated Power Determination for a Hybrid Vehicle
• Family Concept-Validity of Certification
• Validation Test Phase 2 (VTP2) Validation Results−Sub-presentations of VOLVO, MAN and IVECO
• VTP2 conclusions & discussion of further actions

93. The representative of EU reported on the IWG which had completed its mandate in due time. The representative of the United States of America proposed that some additional work should be envisaged. AC.3 agreed to first consider, at its November 2014 session, the draft Amendment 3 adopted by GRPE in June 2014 and, then, to investigate remaining issues to define a mandate for a second phase for the IWG. AC.3 reconfirmed the adoption of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/38 on the extension of the IWG mandate.

The HILS method currently used in Japan does use a cold-start test in hybrid testing; however, GTR No. 4 will use a cold-start test. This presentation discusses Japan’s proposal for a “predicted temperature method” that inputs the temperature profile of each component in advance.

Discussion presentation from Japan towards harmonizing the provisions for testing hybrid vehicles in the kokujikan and the proposed GTR to avoid divergent interpretations.

Review of Korean results using the heavy-duty hybrid vehicle mode on a chassis dynamometer per the proposed amendment to enable hybrid vehicle testing under GTR No.4

Working draft of Annex 9 (Test procedure using the HILS method) and Annex 10 (test procedure using the powertrains method) of the amendment to GTR No. 4 (heavy-duty vehicle emissions and fuel consumption) to introduce provisions for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles, prepared by the drafting subgroup of the HDH informal working group.

Text prepared by the GRPE working group on HDH to add the test procedure on heavy duty hybrids. The text has been prepared as a consolidated version of the GTR.

16. The secretary to the IWG on HDH introduced GRPE-69-12 and reported on the completion of the work. He presented GRPE-69-10 amending the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 introducing a novel approach for assessing the performance of the entire vehicle powertrain by a simulation (HILS) as well as the final technical report (GRPE-69-11) for the proposed Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4.

17. GRPE noted that the HILS method validation was only partially completed when applying the Japanese criteria but that none of the prerequisites were met for extending the mandate for further action by the IWG. Therefore, GRPE acknowledged the work done by the IWG and agreed to remove this item from the provisional agenda of the seventieth session of GRPE in January 2015.

18. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2014/11 as amended by GRPE-69-10 and GRPE-69-22 (Part A) as reproduced in Addendum 2 to the GPE 68th session report. GRPE also adopted the corresponding technical report (GRPE-69-11 as amended by GRPE-69-22 (Part B), reproduced in Addendum 2) and requested the secretariat to submit them as a proposal for draft Amendment 3 to UN GTR No. 4 to WP.29 and AC.3 at their November 2014 sessions.

Proposal to extend the mandate of the informal working group on heavy-duty hybrids to allow for the adaptation of the hybrid provisions developed for GTR No. 4 (WHDC heavy-duty emissions test cycle) to GTR No. 11 (Non-road vehicle emissions).

34. GRPE endorsed the proposal of the HDH Chair to widen the mandate of the group to include amendments aligning UN GTR No. 4 with UN GTR No. 11. GRPE requested the sponsor (EU) to submit an informal document illustrating the choice to widen the mandate to the March 2014 session of WP.29 and AC.3, amending document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/29.

89. The representative of EU confirmed that the IWG would present a formal proposal for amendments to the UN GTR for consideration by GRPE at its June 2014 session and expected that AC.3 would adopt it at its November 2014 session. He presented WP.29-162-08 requesting an extension of the GRPE mandate on developing amendments to the UN GTR including the alignment of UN GTRs Nos. 4 and 11. AC.3 adopted the request and invited the secretariat to prepare the corresponding AC.3 authorization.

Working draft of the annex to specify the hybrid heavy-duty vehicle engine emissions and fuel efficiency measurement procedure using the hardware-in-the-loop method.

EC presentation reviewing the interest in and concern over the prospects for integrating the HDH procedures into the Euro VI legislation.

Review of the goals and status of the heavy-duty hybrid HILS test model validation program.

Presentation providing a summary of 15th HDH meeting, status of HDH validation test programs, topics for 16th HDH meeting, status of the amendment drafting group, revised project roadmap & planning, and plans for next meetings.

Presentation on the status of the work, including a new HILS-GTR v0.5 simulation model release, Validation Test Program 2 (VTP2) model verification and drive cycle development, the definition of rated power of hybrid system, and review of major open issues.

Memorandum from the US Environmental Protection Agency on the proposed addition of test procedures for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles to the global technical regulation on heavy-duty vehicle emissions and fuel consumption (WHDC) identifying “a number of open issues that are causing concern for the United States and require resolution prior to considering the Annex for adoption”.

Amendment proposal to add test procedures for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles to the global technical regulation on eavy-duty road vehicle emissions (WHDC).

31. [The HDH Chair] focused on the draft amendment to UN GTR No. 4 (GRPE-68-12) by providing details on the definitions, the concept of hybrid powertrain family, the approach considered, the content of Annex 8 (hardware in the loop simulation method) and 9 (powertrains method), as well as amendments aligning UN GTR No. 4 with UN GTR No. 11. The endorsement of GRPE was needed on this last point, since this is beyond the original HDH mandate.

Version 6 of the draft amendment to introduce provisions for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles and engines into Global Technical Regulation No. 4.

(Please note that there were web conference meetings that appear to have confused the meeting numbering. According to the minutes of the 15th HDH informal group session, this meeting in Brussels would be the 8th rather than the 7th session of the drafting group.)

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)

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.

HDH drafting group working document.

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.

Mr. Silberholz presented the TU Graz analysis on the WHVC weighting factors, which is an open task remaining from the initial research program. The method was introduced in working paper HDH-08-04. In conclusion, the use of weighting factors is not recommended.

The Group agreed that weighting factors will not be used for hybrid emissions testing.

Discussion of vehicle characteristics to be taken into account (or left out) in order to ensure an optimally harmonized set of heavy-duty vehicle test procedures for worldwide use.

Mr. Danczyk presented the OICA proposal for vehicle parameters for the HILS modelling. Background for the proposal are the different vehicle categories in the regional legislation of the Contracting Parties. The vehicle parameters under consideration are summarized on page 4. For the driving resistance parameters (test vehicle weight, curb weight, rolling resistance, air resistance), calculation formulae based on engine power are being proposed. Ratio related parameters, losses and inertia moments would be based on OEM specific values.

The proposal was agreed by the Group. The institutes were asked to integrate the equations into the models.

Japan analysis of JRC chassis dyno test results under the Validation Test Program 2.

Mr. Osaki presented working paper HDH-15-05. A new analysis was made after it was reported at the 14th HDH meeting that the Japanese approach deviated significantly from the target work. This re-analysis showed a good correlation between the minicycle and the 30 sec moving average approaches. Mr. Osaki informed that contrary to the minicycle approach presented by Mr. Six, the JASIC proposal does not include negative slopes. A summary of the different methods is shown on pages 17 and 22. It was concluded that the 30 sec moving average with fixed slope was the best approach for certification purposes.

The IWG agreed that a fixed slope approach was superior to an individual slope approach with regard to certification. However, Dr. Kawai supported in principle the institutes’ proposal to include negative slopes. The institutes and JASIC were asked to develop a compromise solution for the fixed slope method including negative slopes.

Presentation of the results of the validation test program 1 and status of test program 2 (Chassis dyno test program at JRC, HDH drive cycle investigation, and HILS/SILS model verification) and review of open issues for drafting the GTR text.

Mr. Silberholz gave a brief summary of the work achieved during validation test program 1 (pages 3 to 10 of HDH-15-04). He reported that extensive changes on models and model structure have been made. The new structure is component library based and enabled implementation of a flexible signal data bus, which allows adding more signals on the data bus. There was positive feedback from and good cooperation with the OEMs. The next model release is planned for the end of October, and would need to be tested again by the OEMs.

It was agreed that the additional testing of the models should not be a show-stopper for the drafting work. Mr. Silberholz confirmed that the models are described well enough for the drafting process, and could be inserted in their current stage.

Mr. Six presented a detailed analysis of the HDH drive cycle (WHVC with road gradients) on pages 11 to 33 of HDH-15-04. Parts of the investigations were done in conjunction with the chassis dyno tests at JRC. He concluded that the minicycle approach very well aligns WHVC and WHTC. This is considered a solid basis for the new test cycle. The approach considers added and removed payloads for positive and negative work, thereby matching of positive WHTC work independent of test weight (i.e. slopes will adjust work). A great benefit is that negative work is independent of test weight, so that adequate recuperation energy is always available. This better reflects real world operation for different payloads. A summary of the methods analyzed (minicycle, 30 sec average, individual slope, fixed slope) is shown on page 32. The final test cycle proposal of the institutes is a minicycle approach with positive and negative WHTC work, which is a clear improvement over the flat WHVC approach.

The detailed test results are shown on pages 36 to 48 for the Volvo bus and on pages 50 to 59 for the MAN bus. An analysis of the Iveco results is not available, since HILS modelling is still under construction. Additional chassis dyno tests are planned for early 2014.

Mr. Silberholz presented open issues for the drafting on pages 61 to 75 of HDH-15-04. Those issues were discussed in detail and will be taken into account during the further drafting process. The most prominent ones are listed below:

• Handling of gearboxes and shift algorithms; the Japanese regulation allows both generic and OEM specific model for automatic transmission.
• Definition of the rated power of a hybrid system; institutes were asked to check the US EPA approach and to make a proposal.
• How to deal with vehicles which by design cannot reach the maximum WHVC speed; it was suggested to scale power down, but EPA raised some concerns; Japanese approach should be checked.
• Work (engine or system) to be used for the emissions calculation. Mr. Dekker made clear that NL have concerns about the systems approach. The chairman concluded that there seems to be some diverging views within the group and that this will be an important topic to be discussed at 16th HDH meeting.
• Equivalency between post-transmission powertrain test, HILS with verification on chassis dyno and HILS with verification on system bench (pre-transmission powertrain test).

A word (.doc) version of the text is available here.

Presentation concerning heavy-duty hybrids.

Mr. Danczyk presented the OICA proposal for plug-in hybrids, as announced at the 14th HDH meeting. The principle proposed is derived from the approach chosen for passenger cars within the WLTP work program. The group concluded that unlike for passenger cars it would be very difficult to develop the UFs for heavy duty vehicles. This is not considered feasible within the current HDH mandate. Mr. Dekker noted that the approach presented is used for passenger cars only with respect to CO2, not for criteria pollutants. This was also confirmed by Mr. Öhlund. Japan made clear that for emission the “worst” case should apply as the driver can choose to drive different modes but emission limits should apply anyhow. The chairman suggested to not handle plug-in hybrids now even though it is in the mandate of the HDH IWG.

It was agreed to not consider a special procedure for plug-in hybrids.

This report is the final report of the work done by the Universities of Technology in Chalmers, Graz and Vienna and research institute TNO performed within the research program on an emissions and CO2 test procedure for Heavy Duty Hybrids (HDH). This report specifically refers to Validation Test Program 1 (VTP1) under the contract for “Developing the Methodology for Certifying Heavy-Duty Hybrids based on HILS”.

The draft agenda was adopted.

Final report on the work performed by Institute for Internal Combustion Engines and Thermodynamics of the Graz University of Technology (TUG) to assess the Japanese HILS certification method within the research program on an emissions and CO2 test procedure for Heavy Duty Hybrids (HDH).

The draft minutes of the 13th meeting were approved.

Overview of current US Environmental Protection Agency heavy-duty hybrid powerpack testing activites.

Mr. Sanchez (EPA) gave an overview of the current EPA activities.

He emphasized that transmissions are becoming more important in the evaluation of hybrid vehicles. A post-transmission powerpack method therefore is suitable test method. He indicated that EPA will give their input to the HDH drafting group. EPA is willing to test within their internal programs the WHVC with slopes, but powerpack validation will likely be used instead of chassis dyno validation.

The draft minutes of the 14th meeting were approved.

31. The secretary of the HDH group introduced GRPE-66-23 and GRPE-66-24, containing information on the HDH work progress. He summarized the thirteenth and fourteenth group meetings, underlining the decision to include a new annex in UN GTR No. 4, amending it. Having explained the status of validation test programmes, he required further input from Contracting Parties, by October 2013, on the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing. He acknowledged that the Environmental Protection Agency of the USA requested to include powertrain testing and verification in the UN GTR and expressed the interest to take part in the second validation test programme. A drafting group for the UN GTR has been established, although the nomination of a technical secretary is still outstanding. A draft will be submitted to the next ordinary GRPE session, in January 2014, when a final report will also be submitted. The official submission of the text amending UN GTR No. 4 is expected for June 2014.

31. The secretary of the HDH group introduced GRPE-66-23 and GRPE-66-24, containing information on the HDH work progress. He summarized the thirteenth and fourteenth group meetings, underlining the decision to include a new annex in UN GTR No. 4, amending it. Having explained the status of validation test programmes, he required further input from Contracting Parties, by October 2013, on the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing. He acknowledged that the Environmental Protection Agency of the USA requested to include powertrain testing and verification in the UN GTR and expressed the interest to take part in the second validation test programme. A drafting group for the UN GTR has been established, although the nomination of a technical secretary is still outstanding. A draft will be submitted to the next ordinary GRPE session, in January 2014, when a final report will also be submitted. The official submission of the text amending UN GTR No. 4 is expected for June 2014.

UNECE “background note” providing information on developments in air pollution, the results of recent studies on the harmful effects of diesel exhausts, policy developments in the reduction of pollutant emissions to address health and environmental concerns.

78. The secretariat introduced GRPE-66-09-Rev.1, a revised draft paper looking at diesel vehicles and engines in the context of air quality, impacts of the emission of pollutants on the environment and health. The secretariat explained that the paper, based on GRPE-65-05, incorporates the comments received by the end of March 2013, as agreed during the GRPE session of January 2013. In particular, it includes an update of information related with WP.29 activities, a reorganization of the contents to improve the presentation of the policy discussion, an extension of the geographical scope to include information on North America and Japan, and the inclusion of conclusions and recommendations.

79. Canada, the Russian Federation and OICA welcomed the improvements in the document. A number of comments were addressed to the secretariat by these delegations and Euromot. They concerned the importance of fuel quality as enabler of cleaner vehicle technologies, the opportunity to consider particulate emissions from tyres, the need to update the information on the PMP activities – taking into account the updated scope of the PMP group, the correction of specific statements, as well as other issues addressing the WHO decisions. Having reiterated the need to restrict the paper to technical matters without questioning the WHO conclusions, the secretariat welcomed the comments and invited interested stakeholders to provide constructive contributions in a written form within a week, in order to have the time to include them in an updated version of the document for consideration by WP.29 in its June 2013 session. The GRPE Chair underlined the need to make sure that the comments provide constructive contributions to improve the paper. The expert from Germany supported the inclusion of a recommendation concerning cleaner fuels as enablers of technologies allowing the emission mitigation.

80. GRPE supported the document. Taking into account of the tight schedule needed for the consideration of the document in the UN framework, GRPE agreed that the secretariat should submit an updated version of the document to WP.29 for consideration at its next session (June 2013), taking into account the comments that will be received.

The secretary presented working paper HDH-14-05. The roadmap agreed at the 12th HDH meeting remains unchanged, for the time being. The HDH IWG intends to submit the final report of the work program and the informal document of the GTR at the 68th GRPE in January 2014. The official document will be submitted at the 69th GRPE in June 2014 for adoption. WP.29 adoption is foreseen in November 2014. The road map is shown on page 11 of working paper HDH-14-05. This timing is in jeopardy, if the nomination of Technical Secretary is further delayed due to non-availability of the budget. EU-COM was urged to submit the budget a.s.a.p.

Status of validation test program 2

Dr. Perujo presented working paper HDH-14-04. Test program and timetable were set up between the participating OEMs and JRC before the start of the test program. The input parameters rolling resistance coefficient, air resistance coefficient and total weight were determined and selected in accordance with Kokujikan No. 281, paragraph 10-5. It was decided to carry out the tests with as many auxiliaries as possible shut down and to measure/estimate the power consumption of the auxiliaries required for the proper operation of the vehicle. In order to get repeatable results, a daily test sequence was agreed.

Validation test program 2 at JRC started with the Volvo parallel hybrid bus in May. Preliminary results are shown on pages 9 and 10. The Iveco vehicle is about to start, the MAN bus will follow by the end of June. Data processing will be done during July, August and September. The final report is planned to be released by mid September 2013.

Update on development and validation of the new hybrid heavy-duty vehicle test cycles.

4.1 Presentation by research institutes on validation test program 1

Working paper HDH-14-03e is a joint presentation of the three institutes tasked with conducting validation test program 1.

Prof Fredriksson started with an overview of the new model structure (pages 4 to 12). Rationale for the new model structure was a greater flexibility of the modeling approach that allows various combinations of engines, gear boxes and energy storage systems. The new model structure for serial and parallel hybrids was made available for testing at the end of April. It includes a comprehensive component model library, a new signal naming convention based on AUTOSAR and the restructuring of the vehicle models. Relevant powerpack components were included in the library toolbox, while previously developed models were transferred into the model library. The models will be further developed until the end of June 2013 based on feedback from OICA members and other stakeholders.

Mr. Silberholz reported on positive feedback from OEMs on the new model structure. Open issues from the discussions are the actuation of different brake systems in the driver model and time vs. distance based slope pattern. He continued with a detailed analysis of the road slope calculation methods (30 sec moving average method vs. minicycle approach, pages 15-19). The two options are considered not directly comparable due to big deviations in resulting reference power pattern. Reason is that the WHTC denormalization method leads to operation points at lower loads and speeds for hybrid powertrains. Therefore, the WHDHC calculation tool may be not suitable any longer. Further investigations on this item will continue.

As a conclusion of validation test program 1, extensive changes on models and model structure were made, the next model release (including stakeholder remarks) will be available shortly, the comprehensive model and work program documentation will start, and drive cycle modifications need further investigation.

The Chairman welcomed the participants.

The draft minutes of the 13th meeting were approved.

The draft agenda was adopted.

Report on the examination of methods for matching integrated power values of WHTC and WHVC by using HILS

4.2.1 Calculation of slopes on WHVC

Mr. Morita (JARI) presented working paper HDH-13-08e on methods for matching integrated power values of WHTC and WHVC. At the 11th HDH meeting, it was shown that calculation of instantaneous slopes resulted in very steep slopes of up to 40% and could therefore not be used for the HILS simulation. When applying a 3 second moving average for curve smoothing, slopes could be reduced, but slopes of approx. 30 % were still present (page 7). Only by applying a 30 second moving average, slopes could be reduced to realistic levels of max. 10 % (page 8). Another approach is the calculation of a constant slope, which resulted in this example as 1.13 %. However, a constant positive slope is neither realistic nor favorable for hybrid vehicles. It was concluded that a 30 second moving average would be the best approach.

Mr. Osaki (JASIC) presented working paper HDH-13-06e. This presentation also deals with the calculation of slopes for the WHVC, but used a slightly different method than JARI. The method is described on pages 3 to 5, and was tested for two different vehicles (26 t / 317 kW and 5 t, 96 kW). Like with JARI, a constant slope approach was compared to a 30 second moving average approach. The constant slope was 0.35 %, while the 30 second moving average resulted in slopes between – 1.9 % and + 3.9 % for the heavy vehicle and + 6.5 % for the light vehicle, respectively. The correlation between power patterns and torque patterns on the traction side is slightly better with the 30 second moving average, while the traction and braking cycle work is slightly better with the constant slope (pages 6, 7). Overall, JASIC considers the 30 second moving average as the more favorable approach.

The difference between the constant slopes of 1.13 % vs. 0.35 % was considered to be due to the different calculation methods. From the test results it became clear that the slopes vary depending on the vehicle. It was therefore discussed whether the slope should be fixed in the gtr or calculated for the individual vehicle. No conclusion could be reached on this topic, but the IWG members agreed that slopes need to be added to the WHVC.

4.2.3 Consideration on cold start

Mr. Morita presented working paper HDH-13-07. In order to cope with the cold start test required in the gtr, TU Graz developed thermal models that may be used in the HILS process. JARI is proposing a simpler approach, which is based on adding a predicted temperature profile to the interface model. This would not require any changes to the current model, but cannot be used for temperature changes of battery or motor/generator.

4.2.1 Calculation of slopes on WHVC

Mr. Morita (JARI) presented working paper HDH-13-08e on methods for matching integrated power values of WHTC and WHVC. At the 11th HDH meeting, it was shown that calculation of instantaneous slopes resulted in very steep slopes of up to 40% and could therefore not be used for the HILS simulation. When applying a 3 second moving average for curve smoothing, slopes could be reduced, but slopes of approx. 30 % were still present (page 7). Only by applying a 30 second moving average, slopes could be reduced to realistic levels of max. 10 % (page 8). Another approach is the calculation of a constant slope, which resulted in this example as 1.13 %. However, a constant positive slope is neither realistic nor favorable for hybrid vehicles. It was concluded that a 30 second moving average would be the best approach.

Mr. Osaki (JASIC) presented working paper HDH-13-06e. This presentation also deals with the calculation of slopes for the WHVC, but used a slightly different method than JARI. The method is described on pages 3 to 5, and was tested for two different vehicles (26 t / 317 kW and 5 t, 96 kW). Like with JARI, a constant slope approach was compared to a 30 second moving average approach. The constant slope was 0.35 %, while the 30 second moving average resulted in slopes between – 1.9 % and + 3.9 % for the heavy vehicle and + 6.5 % for the light vehicle, respectively. The correlation between power patterns and torque patterns on the traction side is slightly better with the 30 second moving average, while the traction and braking cycle work is slightly better with the constant slope (pages 6, 7). Overall, JASIC considers the 30 second moving average as the more favorable approach.

The difference between the constant slopes of 1.13 % vs. 0.35 % was considered to be due to the different calculation methods. From the test results it became clear that the slopes vary depending on the vehicle. It was therefore discussed whether the slope should be fixed in the gtr or calculated for the individual vehicle. No conclusion could be reached on this topic, but the IWG members agreed that slopes need to be added to the WHVC.

4.2.2 Presentation by OICA

Mr. Berg presented working paper HDH-13-05. He confirmed that three vehicles will be available for validation test program 2, a serial hybrid bus from MAN, a parallel hybrid bus from Volvo, and a parallel hybrid medium heavy duty truck from Iveco. The verification criteria of the Japanese regulation will be used. Due to the tight time frame, SILS will be used in this program, as agreed at the 12th HDH meeting.

OICA supports the re-structuring of the models, as proposed by the institutes. For the OEMs, it is essential that the generic HILS models may be replaced with OEM specific models for better accuracy and better compatibility with OEM specific control units. OICA also supports the option of powerpack testing in the gtr. Finally, a procedure should be defined to convert high frequency HILS output signals into lower frequency engine dyno input signals.

Presentation concerning the Vehicle Energy Consumption Calculation Tool (European tool for heavy-duty vehicle CO2 testing) within the context of heavy-duty hybrid testing.

Prof. Hausberger presented working paper HDH-13-04. The model was developed by TU Graz in the context of the EU heavy duty CO2 program. It was generally agreed that a generic gearbox model should be included in the gtr that might be replaced with an OEM specific model. Feedback on the VECTO approach is requested by the end of April.

Working paper HDH-13-03e is a joint presentation of the three institutes tasked with conducting validation test program 1.

Mr. Six started with a general overview of the progress achieved (pages 3 to 12). He then presented the structure of the thermal models. The battery model was optimized and can be used for capacitor, as well.

Prof. Fredriksson presented the new model structure (pages 13 to 27). Task was to set up a data bus system in the model that allows various combinations of engines, gear boxes and energy storage systems. With the current Japanese open source model, it is difficult to set up such data bus system. Therefore, the models need to be restructured. Two types of interfaces are proposed, the physical interface that is related to how different components are connected physically, and the signal interface that is related to the control/sensor signals needed for the ECUs. For the gtr, the physical interface should be specified, while for the signal interface only a minimum set of signals can be specified. If other signals or more complex models are needed for the simulation, it will be possible for OEMs to include those without affecting the model structure.

The new model structure will be made available by the end of April for testing. Comments are essential to improve the model.

Mr. Six then went on with the drive cycle investigations (pages 28 to 38). Rationale was to develop a method for the WHVC with slopes (also proposed by Japan in 4.2.1) to produce similar emissions results than on the WHTC for conventional vehicles. The method divides the WHVC into mini-cycles and calculates for each mini-cycle the WHTC/WHVC work difference and transforms it into average mini-cycle slopes (page 32). Emissions results based on simulation look promising. It was decided to check both the 30 sec average slope according to Japanese proposal and mini-cycles approach during validation test program 2. The mini-cycle calculation tool will be uploaded to the HDH website.

Mr. Silberholz presented under test methodology investigations the major items that need to be decided for the gtr (pages 39 to 48). He proposed that OEM specific models should be permitted. He further proposed to use on-road measurements for model verification rather than chassis dyno tests. Another item is the gear shift duration that is not included in the Japanese model. EPA is concerned that the HILS cycle might be less transient than in the vehicle. Since most of the issues are questions/proposals for further evaluation, they are handled under 7.2.

The draft agenda was adopted.

The draft minutes of the 12th meeting were approved.

25. The secretary of the informal group on HDH introduced GRPE-65-25 and GRPE-65-26, containing summaries of the eleventh and twelfth HDH meetings, information on the status of HDH work programme, as well as an updated roadmap and planning of the activities. He mentioned that driver models are completed, that thermal models for battery and electric motor are being completed, and that the power-take-off (PTO) work is excluded from the current programme. He explained that it was not possible to meet the original deadline to submit a final report, including the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing (originally planned for the current GRPE session). Seeking GRPE approval, he proposed a submission of the final report, as well as an informal document with the draft UN GTR (including the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing), to the GRPE session of January 2014. He stated that the draft UN GTR (which should be based on Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation (HILS) and not on Software-in-the-Loop Simulation (SILS)) could then be submitted as an official document at the GRPE session of June 2014.

26. Following a request for additional information from the expert from the Netherlands on the evaluation of the HILS, the Chair and the secretary of the HDH group clarified that the issue will be addressed in the minutes of the thirteenth HDH meeting.

27. GRPE agreed with the revision of the time schedule and the submission of the UN GTR in June 2014. The next group meeting will take place in Sweden on 21 and 22 March 2013. The HDH group should also meet in conjunction with the next GRPE session, in June 2013.

25. The secretary of the informal group on HDH introduced GRPE-65-25 and GRPE-65-26, containing summaries of the eleventh and twelfth HDH meetings, information on the status of HDH work programme, as well as an updated roadmap and planning of the activities. He mentioned that driver models are completed, that thermal models for battery and electric motor are being completed, and that the power-take-off (PTO) work is excluded from the current programme. He explained that it was not possible to meet the original deadline to submit a final report, including the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing (originally planned for the current GRPE session). Seeking GRPE approval, he proposed a submission of the final report, as well as an informal document with the draft UN GTR (including the assessment of chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing), to the GRPE session of January 2014. He stated that the draft UN GTR (which should be based on Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation (HILS) and not on Software-in-the-Loop Simulation (SILS)) could then be submitted as an official document at the GRPE session of June 2014.

26. Following a request for additional information from the expert from the Netherlands on the evaluation of the HILS, the Chair and the secretary of the HDH group clarified that the issue will be addressed in the minutes of the thirteenth HDH meeting.

27. GRPE agreed with the revision of the time schedule and the submission of the UN GTR in June 2014. The next group meeting will take place in Sweden on 21 and 22 March 2013. The HDH group should also meet in conjunction with the next GRPE session, in June 2013.

Status report presentation for the Working Party on Pollution and Energy.

The secretary presented working paper HDH-12-06. The secretary had proposed at the 11th meeting to submit the final report at the 67th GRPE in January 2014, which consequently would delay GRPE adoption to June 2014. The updated roadmap, which is shown on page 7 and had been agreed at the 11th HDH meeting, was confirmed by the larger group of this meeting, and will be reported to GRPE 65 for approval.

The secretary suggested to hold the 15th HDH meeting during the week of 21 October 2013. The proposal was agreed. The secretary will ask the ICCT for confirmation.

Korea
Working paper HDH-12-05e was uploaded to the HDH website, but not presented by Korea at the meeting. The secretary drew the attention to the summary slide (page 16), in which Korea indicated to adopt the HILS approach as the second step in the national fuel economy regulation.

Comments on the HDH work program
No input was received.

The original working paper HDH-12-05e was uploaded to the HDH website, but not presented at the 12th meeting. Mr. Lee (KATRI) presented a revised version at this meeting. Korea is currently investigating to replace the existing fuel economy regulation, which is based on a 60 km/h constant speed driving on a chassis dyno, with the WHVC cycle. Analysis of driving conditions showed a good correlation between typical Korean driving patterns and the WHVC. As a first step, Korea plans to introduce the WHVC chassis test into the national fuel economy regulation. As a second step, Korea intends to adopt the HILS method as an option upon completion of the gtr.

Mr. Hygrell (OICA) expressed OICA’s support for the validation test program 1 by giving input for the interface signal list and the component list, and to validation test program 2 by providing at least two vehicles, one serial and one parallel hybrid. He requested to accept SILS for the OEM in-house validation phase due to timing and cost issues.

USA and NL insisted that a real HILS validation must be conducted during validation test program 2. In order to not delay the validation test program, the Chairman suggested to accept the OICA proposal, but to conduct a HILS validation later during the program. OICA agreed to respond to the request as to whether it was possible to provide the modules and I/O, and if not why.

In order to not delay the validation test program, the Chairman suggested to accept the OICA proposal, but to conduct a HILS validation later during the program. This proposal was agreed by the group.

Working paper HDH-12-03e is a joint presentation of the three institutes tasked with conducting validation test program 1.

Mr. Six started the presentation with a general overview of the progress achieved. Development of the driver models for the different approaches (WHVC and WHDHC) has been finished. Inclusion of non-electric components has been largely finalized, and the development of the thermal models will be completed within the next two weeks. From meetings with OEMs (see page 7), it was reported that a fully vehicle independent approach does not seem to be feasible, and that some OEMs considered that a SILS approach would be preferred over HILS. Most commonly used powerpack components are already included in the component library with a planetary gearbox model added recently. The component list will be checked, if vehicles for validation test program 2 are identified.

Mr. Silberholz continued with the description of the thermal models (task 1.6). Details of task 1.6 are shown on pages 9 to 17. The thermal model for the aftertreatment system (ATS) has been finished, the models for the coolant and lube oil circuit will be finished by the end of January, and the models for battery and electric motor will be finished within the next week and validated by the end of January.

Investigation into the different drive cycle options (WHVC vs. WHDHC) is an important part of validation test program 1. The results are shown on pages 18 to 34 for the serial hybrid. The two options only lead to comparable positive traction work, if the WHVC is accompanied with slopes. Even then, the power distribution over rotational speed at the wheel hub is different between the two options, as shown on page 27. Using the WHTC as basis leads to highly fluctuating torque signals that may cause ECU errors, as already indicated by Japan at the 11th HDH meeting. In order to solve the problem, curve smoothing is necessary. Curve smoothing was demonstrated to have no significant impact on the positive work (page 31) nor on the power distribution (page 32).

The major focus of Task 2 is currently the restructuring of the models, which is a prerequisite for setting up the data bus system needed for the component library. The results are shown on pages 37 to 44. The restructuring requires two types of interfaces (page 39). The physical interface is related to how different components are connected together, physically. The signal interface is related to control/sensor signals needed for the ECU. The proposed solution is the port based approach shown on pages 40 to 42. This approach allows easy interchanging of components including integration of OEM subsystems.

The draft minutes of the 11th meeting were approved.

The draft agenda was adopted.

Voting table prepared for the November session of the World Forum’s 1958 Agreement general session. The Executive Committee of the 1958 Agreement will consider amendments to GTR No. 4 and GTR No. 5.

93. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed Corrigendum 2 to Amendment 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/112) to UN GTR No. 4 was established in the Global Registry on 15 November 2012 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Turkey and United States of America.

94. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed Amendment 1
(ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/113) to UN GTR No. 5 was established in the Global Registry on 15 November 2012 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Turkey and United States of America.

95. The technical report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/118) and the adopted proposal for the development of the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/30) will be appended to the established amendment to the UN GTR.

GRPE-adopted corrections to paragraph cross-references within GTR No.4 which were identified during transposition of the GTR into UN Regulation 49.

93. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed Corrigendum 2 to Amendment 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/112) to UN GTR No. 4 was established in the Global Registry on 15 November 2012 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Turkey and United States of America.

4. GFV20-07 rev 1. The revised minutes were circulated. The corrections are adopted. The minutes of the last meeting (GFV-21-10) also are adopted. Mr. Seisler will ensure that the revised minutes and that the document with comments from AECC are on the GFV UN website.

Presentation on the status of work on the introduction of provisions for heavy-duty hybrid vehicle emissions and power consumption testing into GTR No. 4

26. The Secretary of the informal group on HDH introduced GRPE-64-07, GRPE-64-13 and GRPE-64-14. He illustrated the results of the ninth and tenth HDH informal group meetings and summarized the results of the research programme on an emissions and CO2 test procedure for HDH (now finalized). Underlining that more work is needed before a worldwide test procedure can be drafted, he stated that the discussion on chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing is expected to continue on the basis of inputs from ongoing programs by the Contracting Parties (with the delivery of inputs expected by the end of 2012), that the validation step 1 based on SILS (Software-in-the-loop simulation) is expected to start in June 2012, and that the validation step 2 with real heavy duty vehicles should start around March 2013.

27. Illustrating an updated roadmap, the HDH Secretary announced a delay of a few months with respect to the original plan. Following some considerations on financial issues related to validation step 1, he outlined the agenda of the next meetings of the HDH group.

28. GRPE acknowledged the work progress of the HDH informal group, endorsed validation 1 and the revised roadmap, and agreed that a formal request to WP.29 to extend the mandate of the HDH group is not necessary for the time being. GRPE agreed that the group should meet in conjunction with its session in January 2013.

Progress report on the effort to introduce heavy-duty hybrid emissions and related performance requirements into GTR No. 4.

26. The Secretary of the informal group on HDH introduced GRPE-64-07, GRPE-64-13 and GRPE-64-14. He illustrated the results of the ninth and tenth HDH informal group meetings and summarized the results of the research programme on an emissions and CO2 test procedure for HDH (now finalized). Underlining that more work is needed before a worldwide test procedure can be drafted, he stated that the discussion on chassis dynamometer and power-pack testing is expected to continue on the basis of inputs from ongoing programs by the Contracting Parties (with the delivery of inputs expected by the end of 2012), that the validation step 1 based on SILS (Software-in-the-loop simulation) is expected to start in June 2012, and that the validation step 2 with real heavy duty vehicles should start around March 2013.

27. Illustrating an updated roadmap, the HDH Secretary announced a delay of a few months with respect to the original plan. Following some considerations on financial issues related to validation step 1, he outlined the agenda of the next meetings of the HDH group.

28. GRPE acknowledged the work progress of the HDH informal group, endorsed validation 1 and the revised roadmap, and agreed that a formal request to WP.29 to extend the mandate of the HDH group is not necessary for the time being. GRPE agreed that the group should meet in conjunction with its session in January 2013.

Progress report on the effort to establish provisions for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles in GTR No. 4, prepared for presentation to the June session of the Working Party on Pollution and Energy (GRPE).

Overview of TU Graz and TNO evaluation of hardware-in-the-loop simulation methodologies covering the test cycle and vehicle related parameters, harmonisation with CO2 test methods, inclusion of power take-off, and worldwide harmonized vehicle cycle weighting factors.

Report of the informal group session held in Tokyo during March 2012. This group is working to add provisions for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles to GTR No. 4 (WHDC).

The Chairman welcomed the participants and thanked JASIC for the invitation and the organization of the meeting.

The full list of attendees is attached to the meeting report provided above.

Corrections to paragraph cross-references within GTR No.4 which were identified during transposition of the GTR into UN Regulation 49.

36. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/10/Rev.1, containing a proposal to correct the wrong references to a few paragraphs in UN GTR No. 4.

37. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/10/Rev.1 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.3 for consideration at their November 2012 sessions as Corrigendum 2 to Amendment 1 to UN GTR No. 4.

Notification that the Government of Japan is considering the details of the test procedures of the Worldwide Harmonized Heavy-duty Vehicle Emissions Certification Procedures (GTR No. 4) in order to decide whether to transpose the provisions into its national regulations.

Notifications concerning the establishment of UN Global Technical Regulations and the status of their application among the Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement.

This proposal would correct editorial errors detected in GTR 4 during the transposition of the GTR provisions into UN Regulation 49 (6 series of amendments).

38. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-63-15, containing a proposal to correct the wrong references to a few paragraphs in UN GTR No. 4.

39. GRPE requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-63-15 as an official document for consideration at its June 2012 session.

40. The expert from the UK withdrew GRPE-63-03, since the amendments included in it were already incorporated in GRPE-63-22.

41. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-63-17 (developed in close cooperation with Japan), clarifying ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2011/15 on an amendment to UN GTR No. 5. He explained that GRPE-63-17 improves the disablement conditions of OBD system monitors.

42. GRPE requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-63-17 for consideration as an official document at the next session of GRPE (June 2012).

117. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed Corrigendum 1 to Amendment 1 to the UN Global Technical Regulation No. 4 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/142) was established in the UN Global Registry on 17 November 2011 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, People’s Republic of China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

14. Recalling the discussion at the previous session of GRPE, the expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2011/9 proposing some minor editorial corrections to Global Technical Regulation (GTR) No. 4 on the Worldwide harmonized Heavy Duty Certification procedure (WHDC).

15. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2011/9, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.3, for consideration at their November 2011 sessions, as Corrigendum 1 to Amendment 1 to GTR No. 4.

7. The Secretary of the informal group on Heavy Duty Hybrids (HDH) reported on the work progress made by the informal group (GRPE-61-16) at its third and fourth meetings. He presented the roadmap and the time-schedule for the development of new provisions for HDH (GRPE-61-17). He welcomed the offer by OICA to devote 200,000 euros for this project and invited all Contracting Parties to contribute, as well. He sought the support of GRPE to extend the mandate of the informal group (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/60, Annex 3 [GRPE-60 meeting report annex containing the HDH group terms of reference]) to also include a power pack test procedure. GRPE agreed on the roadmap and the project planning and endorsed the request to extend the mandate to power pack testing.

8. The expert from Japan shared his country’s experience on testing HDH. He mentioned that the power pack test method could result in an expensive test procedure, due to necessary additional test equipment. He considered the “hardware in the loop (HILS)” as the most appropriate test procedure and suggested working on the HILS method with the highest priority.

9. GRPE noted that the informal group on HDH would meet again in Ann Arbor from 16 to 18 March 2011. The Chair reminded the informal group to also include definitions for HDH. He invited the informal group to also meet in conjunction with the next session of GRPE in June 2011.

7. The Secretary of the informal group on Heavy Duty Hybrids (HDH) reported on the work progress made by the informal group (GRPE-61-16) at its third and fourth meetings. He presented the roadmap and the time-schedule for the development of new provisions for HDH (GRPE-61-17). He welcomed the offer by OICA to devote 200,000 euros for this project and invited all Contracting Parties to contribute, as well. He sought the support of GRPE to extend the mandate of the informal group (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/60, Annex 3 [GRPE-60 meeting report annex containing the HDH group terms of reference]) to also include a power pack test procedure. GRPE agreed on the roadmap and the project planning and endorsed the request to extend the mandate to power pack testing.

8. The expert from Japan shared his country’s experience on testing HDH. He mentioned that the power pack test method could result in an expensive test procedure, due to necessary additional test equipment. He considered the “hardware in the loop (HILS)” as the most appropriate test procedure and suggested working on the HILS method with the highest priority.

9. GRPE noted that the informal group on HDH would meet again in Ann Arbor from 16 to 18 March 2011. The Chair reminded the informal group to also include definitions for HDH. He invited the informal group to also meet in conjunction with the next session of GRPE in June 2011.