rde-ldv process. icct’s views and presentation of …€™s views and presentation of pems...

RDE-LDV process. ICCT’s views and presentation of PEMS meta-study results

Vicente Franco, Peter Mock [email protected]

AECC Technical Seminar on Real-Driving Emissions (RDE)Brussels, April 29 2015

2

Real DrivingEmissions

Introduction. Vehicle emission standards worldwide

the ICCT: mission and activities

The mission of ICCT is to dramatically improve the environmental performance and efficiency of cars, trucks, buses and transportation systems in order to protect and improve public health, the environment, and quality of life.

§ Non-profit research organization

§ Air pollution and climate impacts

§ Focus on regulatory policies and fiscal incentives

§ Activity across modes including aviation and marine

§ Global outreach, with special focus on largest markets

3www.theicct.org

4

Vehicle emission standards worldwide

2 /II

3 /III

4 /IV

5 /V

6 /VI

1 /I

Grey: no standards/import standards or unknown.

Standards shown for LDVs

5

LATIN AMERICA

CHINA AND INDIA

NON-EU EUROPE AND RUSSIA

AFRICAMIDDLE EASTASIA-PACIFIC-40

BEST PRACTICEAUSTRALIA,CANADA, EU-28JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA, US

Vehicle emission standards worldwide

6

Baseline Accelerated

2010 2015 20252020 2030 2010 2015 20252020 2030

0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

NO

X (g

/km

)PM

(g/k

m)

Best Practice China & India Latin America Non-EU Europe & Russia Other Countries

Emission standards drive convergence in average emission levels…

Bars = variation in emissions (g/km)

7

-4%-83% -76%

-76%-83%

-40% -82%-71%

-55%-71%

Baseline Accelerated (%) Data labels indicate annualized growth in vehicle activity

1.3% 7.4%

3.4%3.5%

4.3%

(%) Data labels indicate percent reduction from Baseline in 2030

2010

2000

2005

2015

2025

2020

2030

2010

2000

2005

2015

2025

2020

2030

2010

2000

2005

2015

2025

2020

2030

2010

2000

2005

2015

2025

2020

2030

2010

2000

2005

2015

2025

2020

2030

Best Practice China & India Latin AmericaNon-EU Europe

& Russia Other Countries

10,000

5,000

0

Veh

icle

-km

tra

vele

d(b

illio

n)

0

300

200

100

0

10,000

5,000

PM (

met

ric

kilo

ton)

NO

X (

met

ric

kilo

ton)

…and they can make a difference in air quality…

8

...but sometimes they are not successful: NOxemissions from Euro 6 Diesel cars are (on average) worse than they should have been 15 years ago!!

9


The RDE-LDV process.ICCT PEMS metastudy

Why does RDE-LDV matter?

• Air quality problems in Europe related to NOX from road vehicles

• Driver of changes in Diesel NOX aftertreatment; implications on small Diesel PC market

• Novel use of PEMS in LDV regulations. Other regions are looking at the EU!

10

Introduction: RDE-LDV process


11


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2012 2013 2014

US

Gasoline Diesel Gasoline Hybrid

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2012 2013 2014

EU

Gasoline Diesel Others


12


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2012 2013 2014

EURO6 EURO5 EURO4 and below

Diesel passenger cars meta-studyReal-world Emissions Report 2014: Modern Diesel Cars

• Multiple data sources• 15 vehicles (3 Tier 2 Bin 5 + 12 Euro 6)• 5 different sources • 96 trips/ 140 hrs / 6,400 km of recorded data

• One multi-level analysis and reporting framework• Raw emission factors (trip averages)• Windowed emissions (‘on-road compliance’)• Situation-specific emissions• Instantaneous emissions

www.theicct.org

OCTOBER 2014WHITE PAPER

[email protected]

BEIJING | BERLIN | BRUSSELS | SAN FRANCISCO | WASHINGTON

REAL-WORLD EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM MODERN DIESEL CARSA META-ANALYSIS OF PEMS EMISSIONS DATA FROM EU (EURO 6) AND US (TIER 2 BIN 5/ULEV II) DIESEL PASSENGER CARS.

PART 1: AGGREGATED RESULTS

AUTHORS: Vicente Franco, Francisco Posada Sánchez, John German, and Peter Mock

http://www.theicct.org/real-world-exhaust-emissions-modern-diesel-cars

13

‘Translator’script

SourceA

Source B

SourceC

ICCTICCT

ICCT‘Calculator’functions

MATLAB environment

DBresults

‘Renderer’functions

IN: PEMS datasheets

(Excel)

OUT: standardPEMS charts/tables

Automaticoperation

Manualoperation

PEMS data analysis method

14

‘Raw’ average distance-specific emissions, by vehicle

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Overall results

A

BC

D

E

F

G

H

I

J K

L

M

NOA

vera

ge N

OX [

g/km

]

Average CO2 (as % of type−approval [g/km])

100 120 140 160 1800

0.5

1

1.5

2

SCR

SCRSCR

SCR

SCR

SCR

SCR

LNTSCR

SCR

Above type−approvalBelow or equal to type−approvalAbove Euro 5 limitAbove Euro 6, below Euro 5 limitBelow Euro 6 limit Euro 5 limitEuro 6 limit

15 test vehicles in total (6 manufacturers),ent NOX control technologies:

• 10 selective catalytic reduction (SCR) • 4 exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) • 1 lean NOX trap (LNT)

Average Euro 6 NOX conformity factors (ratio of on-road emissions to legal limits): • all cars: 7.1 • best performer (Vehicle C, SCR): 1.0 • bad performer (Vehicle H, LNT): 24.3 • worst performer (Vehicle L, SCR): 25.4

On-road emission results, by vehicle

EGR

EGR

EGR

EGR

EGR

http://www.theicct.org/real-world-exhaust-emissions-modern-diesel-cars15

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Eur

o 6

NO

x co

nfo

rmit

y fa

cto

r (a

ll w

ind

ow

s)

Euro 5/6 CO conformity factor (all windows)

On-road compliance (all CO2 windows of all trips)

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Results

16

10 20 30 40 50 60 0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%Pe

rcen

tage

of w

indo

ws

Euro 6 NOX conformity factor

Above Euro 6 limit (CF>1) Below Euro 6 limit (CF≤1)

Euro 6 conformity factor for NOX, all vehicles

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Results for NOx

Mean CF = 7.1

Best vehicle: 1.0Worst vehicle: 25

17

1 2 3 4 5 6 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%Pe

rcen

tage

of

win

dow

s

Euro 6 CO conformity factor

Above Euro 6 limit (CF>1)Below Euro 6 limit (CF≤1)

Euro 6 conformity factor for CO, all vehicles

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Results for CO

Mean CF = 0.40

18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%Pe

rcen

tage

of

win

dow

s

On−road CO2 to type−approval value ratio

Above type−approvalBelow or equal to type−approval

Real-world CO2 ratios, all vehicles

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Results for CO2

Mean on-road/type-approval ratio = 1.43

19

CO NOx THC

Ave

rag

e E

F [

g/k

m]

0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.005

0.01

CO NOx THC

Ave

rag

e E

F [

g/k

m]

0

0.5

0

1

0

0.01

CO NOx THC

0

0.5

0

1

0

0.01

0.02

CO NOx THC

0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.01

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

Idling, speed <2 km/hSpeed 2 to 50 km/hSpeed 50 to 90 km/hSpeed >90 km/h

Strong downhill (<−4%)Mild downhill (−4 to -1%)Pretty flat (−1 to 1%)Mild uphill (1 to 4%)Strong uphill (>4%)

Velocity

Gradient

Accel.*vel.

Temperature

Strong negative a*v<−9.2 W/kg)

Mild negative a*v (−9.2 to 0 W/kg)

Zero or mild positive a*v (0 to 9.2 W/kg)

Strong positive a*v (>9.2 W/kg)

Cold temperature

Medium temperature

Hot temperature

Ave

rag

e E

F [

g/k

m]

Ave

rag

e E

F [

g/k

m]

Euro 5 limit Euro 6 limit

Meta-study: Results in more detail

20

Situation-specific analysis: undemanding driving conditions

Diesel PEMS meta-study: Results by driving condition

21

NOX emission factors [mg/km]

Meta-study: Results by driving condition

22

Diesel PC meta-study: Results by aftertreatment technology

23

Aver

age E

F [g/

km] CO2

0

200

CO

0

0.5NOx

0

1

THC+NOx

0

1

CO2 CO NOx THC

Aver

age E

F [g/

km]

0100200

0

0.5

0

1

0

5

x 10−3

CO2 CO NOx THC

Aver

age E

F [g/

km]

0

500

0

0.5

012

0

5

x 10−3

CO2 CO NOx THC

Aver

age E

F [g/

km]

0

1000

00.5

1

0

5

0

0.05

CO2 CO NOx THC

Aver

age E

F [g/

km]

0

200

0

0.5

0

1

0

0.01

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

Distance

Time

All CO2 windowsNormalized CO2 windowsAverage EF after normalization

Idling, speed <2 km/hSpeed 2 to 50 km/hSpeed 50 to 90 km/h

Strong downhill (<−4%)Mild downhill (−4 to −1%)Pretty flat (−1 to 1%)Mild uphill (1 to 4%)Strong uphill (>4%)

Strong deceleration (<−1 m/s2)Mild deceleration (−1 to 0 m/s2)Zero or mild acceleration (0 to 1 m/s2)Strong acceleration (>1 m/s2)

Cold temperaturea

Medium temperatureb

Hot temperaturec

Type−approval CO2Euro 5 limitEuro 6 limit

aBelow percentile 25 of exhaust temperature (calculated for individual trips)bBetween percentiles 25 and 75 of exhaust temperaturecAbove percentile 75 of exhaust temperature (calculated for individual trips)

Distance−specific emission factorsCO2 windows*

*Error bars indicate standard deviation of all CO2 windows

Speed

Gradient

Acceleration

Temperature

EFsdistance−specific

Gray background marks ʼrawʼ distance−specific emissions over the trip

vehicleM

Idling, speed <2 km/hSpeed 2 to 50 km/hSpeed 50 to 90 km/h

Strong downhill (<−4%)Mild downhill (−4 to −1%)Pretty flat (−1 to 1%)Mild uphill (1 to 4%)Strong uphill (>4%)

Strong deceleration (<−1 m/s2)Mild deceleration (−1 to 0 m/s2)Zero or mild acceleration (0 to 1 m/s2)Strong acceleration (>1 m/s2)

Cold temperaturea

Medium temperatureb

Hot temperaturec

Time [s]

NOx [

g/s]

1000 2000 3000 40000

0.05

0.1

0.15

CO2

facto

r*

35.1

Time [s]

NOx [

g/s]

1000 2000 3000 40000

0.05

0.1

0.15

Spee

d [km

/h]

2

50

90

Time [s]

NOx [

g/s]

1000 2000 3000 40000

0.05

0.1

0.15

Acce

lerat

ion [m

/s2]

−1

0

1

Time [s]

NOx [

g/s]

1000 2000 3000 40000

0.05

0.1

0.15

Tem

pera

ture

[°C]

7089

Time [s]

NOx [

g/s]

1000 2000 3000 40000

0.05

0.1

0.15

Grad

ient*

[%]

−4−114

Distance

Time NOx

Distance

Time NOx

Distance

Time NOx

Distance

Time NOx

Speed binsAver

age

NOx [

g/s]

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

Acceleration bins0

0.02

0.04

Temperature bins0

0.01

0.02

Gradient bins0

0.010.020.03

Type−approval=1

Instantaneous NOx emission profile assessmentInstantaneous NOx emissions [g/s], by binning criterion

Signal shares

Average NOx emissions [g/s]

NOx[g/s]

aBelow percentile 25 of exhaust temperature (70 °C)bBetween percentiles 25 and 75 of exhaust temperaturecAbove percentile 75 of exhaust temperature (89 °C)

*Gradient and CO2 factor estimated at consecutive 500−meter windows

(gray background marks average instantaneous emissions over the trip; yellow line is the effect of NOx normalization)

tripM1

C1

C02C3

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

C10C11C12

C13

C14

C15

E1E2

E3

E5 E6E7

E8 E9

E10E12

E13E15E16

E17E18E19

E20

E21

E22E24E25E26

M1

M2M3M4

M5

M6M7M8 M9C

M

Aver

age N

Ox [g

/km]

Average CO [g/km]0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.6

E23E14

E11E4E

C1C02 C3

C4

C5C6

C8C9

C10C11

C12 C13C14

E1E2

E3E4

E5 E6

E7

E8E9

E10

E11E12

E13E15E16

E17E18

E19 E20

E21

E22

E23E25 E26

M1M2M3M4

M6M7M9C

E

M

Aver

age n

orma

lized

NOx

[g/km

]

Average normalized CO [g/km]0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.6

M5

M8

E14

C7C15

E24

C1

C02C3

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

C10C11 C12

C13

C14

C15

E1E2

E3E4 E6

E7E8E9

E10

E11E12

E13E14E15 E16

E17E18

E20E22E24E25 E26

M1

M2M3M4

M6M7M9C

E

M

Aver

age N

Ox [g

/km]

Average CO2 [as % of type−approval (g/km)]100 150 200 250

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

M5

M8

E5

E21E23E19

C1C02

C4

C5C6C7

C8C9

C10C11C12

C13C14C15

E1E2

E3E4

E5 E6

E7E8E9

E10

E11E12

E13E14

E15

E16

E17E18

E19E20E22E24

E25 E26

M1M3M4M5

M6M7M9C

E

M

Aver

age n

orma

lized

NOx

[g/km

]


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

M8

M2

C3E21E23

C1 C02C3

C4C5C6C7

C8

C9

C10C11 C12

C13

C14C15

E1

E2

E3

E4 E5

E6

E7

E8

E9E10

E11

E12

E13

E14E15E16

E17E18

E19

E20E22

E23

E24E25

E26 M1

M2

M3

M5

M6M7

M8

M9

CE

M

Aver

age C

O [g/

km]


0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

M4

E21

C1 C02C4

C5C6C7

C8

C9C10

C11 C12C13

C14C15

E1

E2

E4 E6

E7

E8

E9

E10

E11E12

E13E14

E15E16

E17E18

E19

E20 E21E22

E23

E24E25

E26

M1

M2M3M4

M5

M6M7

C

E M

Aver

age n

orma

lized

CO

[g/km

]


0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

All vehicle trips

all trips+averages

vehiclesC,E,MWhole−trip distance−specific emissions

M9M8C3

E5

E3

Above or equal to type−approvalBelow type−approvalAbove Euro 5 limitAbove Euro 6, below Euro 5 limitBelow Euro 6 limit

Euro 5 limitEuro 6 limit

Trip averageVehicle average (all trips) C

C3

Normalized value

Diesel PC meta-study: Part 2

Coming soon, with additional vehicles anda detailed analysis of real-world emissions

24

25


Final thoughts

26

From laboratory to road: PEMS makes it possible to accurately measure real-world emissions

Road tests with PEMS

Chassis dyno measurements

Photo credit: AVL / ERMES GroupVehicle photos unrelated to the results shown

http://www.theicct.org/use- emissi ons-testi ng-li ght-duty-di esel-vehicl es-us

27

Trust is good – control is better!Vehicle emissions certification/testing in the EU and US

Pre-production testingCertificate of Conformity

Manufacturer

Conformity testsabout 10% of vehicles

EPA

vehicle design and build 0 km 100,000 km50,000 km

Selective Enforcement Audit +Confirmatory Road Load Testing

EPA

In-use verificationtests on random sample

Manufacturer

In-use surveillancerandom / selected sample

EPA

1

2

3

4

5

Pre-production testingCertificate of Conformity

Manufacturer 1

http://www.theicct.org/bl ogs/s taff /bought-ti ger- got-hello-ki tty- how-fix-vehicl e-fuel-econom y-fraud-china

28

A chain is onlyas strong...

...as its weakestlink

A robust pollutant / CO2 regulationrequires:• A modern test procedure• Independent retests• On-road testing• Transparency of test results

In a nutshell

Photo credit: http://photoopi a.com /vi ew/6856-Schw aches+ Glied+in+ der+Kette.html

http://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/trend-that-cant-continue-europes-car-co2-emissions-gaphttp://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/will-new-test-procedure-solve-problem-latest-developments-eu-vehicle-testinghttp://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/art-cooking-popcorn-and-2013-eu-statistical-pocketbookhttp://www.theicct.org/wltp-how-new-test-procedure-cars-will-affect-fuel-consumption-values-euhttp://www.theicct.org/laboratory-road-2014-updatehttp://www.theicct.org/real-world-exhaust-emissions-modern-diesel-carshttp://www.theicct.org/wltp-november2013-update

More info:

Thank you for your attention!

Vicente Franco, Peter Mock [email protected]

AECC Technical Seminar on Real-Driving Emissions (RDE)Brussels, April 29 2015

rde-ldv process. icct’s views and presentation of …€™s views and presentation of pems...

Documents