Date / 5 July 2011
Title / DTP E-Lab Process Subgroup 11th Meeting — Minutes
Working Paper Number / WLTP-DTP-E-Lab Proc-038
Date: 9:30-17:30(MET) 5 July 2011
Loacation: Scandic Hasselbacken, Stockholm
Minutes 11th meeting
Introduction
The agenda is approved. The meeting minutes from the last meeting is approved.
1. Open Issues
Utility factor OIL No. 1-> SAE procedure
At the 6th DTP meeting the E-lab subgroup reported the need to clarify what traffic data to be used for the calculation of the UF.
One issue is if the UF should be harmonised, it should be based on worldwide traffic data or based on regional traffic data.
The proposal can be to develop a method to calculate a harmonised UF based on worldwide traffic data. And if a contracting party does not agree with this UF, there should be an option to calculate a regional UF based on regional traffic data.
There are two steps which have to be considered. The first is how to determine the UF, and the second is how to calculate the CO2 value.
US EPA has a method to determine the UF where an individual UF is calculated for each sequential cycle. The calculation of the CO2 value is then done, principally as the sum of all individual UF.
Still an open issue is the method to determine the UF. That is to use the US EPA method or to use the present Japanese method.
There is agreement in the group regarding the formula to calculate the CO2. The only difference is that the US EPA method to determine the UF gives one UF for each sequential cycle. While the Japanese method to determine the UF gives one UF.
Road Load OIL No. 3 and 3 bis
The E-lab group has received a question and a proposal from the ICE subgroup regarding the coast down mode. A first proposal from ACEA is discussed and justified during the meeting. The E-Lab group will send in the justified proposal to the ICE subgroup. To be discussed on the next DTP meeting in September.
The justified proposal means that paragraph two of the proposal is deleted for also conventional vehicles. And in paragraph three the first sentence is replace by the possibility for the technical service to require from the manufacturer of proof that the parasitic losses behave in a reproducible manner between coast down on road and on chassis dynamometer.
Run in Battery /ICE operation ratio OIL No. 6 bis
A Japanese proposal is presented. If a default mode is present, the run in is to be performed in default mode. If no default mode, perform the run in according to manufacturer’s recommendation.
There is a proposal from ACEA to perform the run in CS mode for PHEV. The reason is to not charge and discharge the battery too many times during run in.
Charging condition OIL No. 7
The proposal is that charging is performed indoors and at 25 ±5 °C.
Watt-hour meter ammeter measurement OIL No. 15-17
Japan presents a proposal, which will be evaluated during validation 2.
Regarding OI 16 ACEA propose that the value for the ammeter accuracy should be ± 1 % for the whole measurement chain. There is a discussion about this and ACEA will provide information and results from calculation of tolerances from measurement equipment, probes etc. The issue will be discussed during the next meeting.
Regarding OI 15, which relates to the measurement accuracy of the watt hour meter. There is a question if the proposal, taken from the current Japanese regulation, of ± 2 % is for the measurement equipment only or for the whole measurement chain. Japan will check and report at next meeting.
Regarding OI 17 the group agrees on the proposal from Japan.
OIL No. 11 Interruption condition
The OI regards EV. This issue depends on the driving cycle. If the cycle is about 30 minutes then 3 minutes interruption is acceptable. Only for the range test since only valid for EV.
Regarding PHEV this issue will be discussed at a later time.
OIL No. 12 Test termination condition
The proposal from Japan is a deviation of 4 seconds or more from the speed trace with tolerance. One issue is vehicles that cannot follow the driving cycle, for example low power vehicles. But there will also be exemptions for low power vehicles, they will not run the complete cycle. For example a low power vehicle might only run the low and/or mid phase of the WLTC. The Japanese proposal would therefore still be applicable to low power vehicles.
ACEA have the opportunity to send a counter proposal. Otherwise the Japanese proposal will be accepted by the group.
Mr.Ploumen sent his opinion as below by email.
He does not agree Japanese proposal. It should be discussed when the driving cycle is definitive.
" This in fact defines the WLTP as a performance cycle that vehicles have to be designed to, which is not its purpose (FE/emissions/energy consumption/range).
Therefore I propose to have this discussion when the drive cycle is definitive."
CD test procedure OIL No. 20
Regarding the calculation. There is no proposal yet. ACEA will discuss further internally. And the issue will be discussed at a later meeting.
EAER determination OIL No. 21
ACEA is of the opinion that this issue needs information from the validation 2. This will be further discussed at ACEA. A proposal will be presented in September.
An editorial correction in the OIL is requested, delete “CO2 compensation for range test”.
For detection of CS condition OIL No. 25 and 25 bis
There are two questions that need to be solved, the criteria and the value. ACEA has presented a proposal. The Japanese proposal is based on the percentage of the fuel consumption. On one hand there is a need for information from validation 2. But validation 2 also needs a value and a method to detect CS condition. This will be added to the parameter list for validation 2 which has been distributed by DTP. The final value will be decided during validation 2.
Regarding OI 25 bis. If the NEC is measured in Ah, there is no need for OI 25 bis and it can be deleted.
RCB correction OIL No. 26 and 26 bis and 27
In Japan the manufacturer needs to provide data to show that there is no correlation between RCB and pollutant emissions. ACEA states that there is a general requirement that vehicles always should comply with the emissions limit. There is no meaning to correct for pollutant emissions. Still an OI until the Japanese government states their position.
Regarding OI 27 the driving cycle needs to be known. This will be decided during validation 2.
Calculation of electric consumption of CD range OIL No. 30
On a previous meeting the group decided to present example of calculations. This will be done at a later time.
AER CITY OIL No. 31
The issue is related to the driving cycle and low power vehicles. This will be discussed on a coming meeting.
OIL No. 35 and 36?
The ICE subgroup has presented a proposal regarding 12 voltage battery. The E-lab group has no counter proposal to present. It is not completely clear if this is a question for the ICE subgroup or the E-lab subgroup. This will be discussed at a later meeting.
2. Test sequence for Validation Phase 2
Japan proposed an actions for gtr development. This proposal is agreed provided that agreement of the DTP group is obtained.
Japan will prepare a test sequence for validation 2. If there are OI in the test sequence they will be as an option.
Information
"Parameter List for Validation 2" must be submitted to DTP chair by 15th July.
("End of July " which Kobayashi said was misinformation.)
3. Review 2nd draft GTR
There are still parts missing in order to present a second draft GTR. The draft will be presented within 8 months. This should be ok as long as the validation 2 can be performed according to plan.
4. Next action
Proposal for a phone/web conference to be conducted the 6 of September 9:00 AM to 12:00 AM. The agenda will include discussion of the test sequence for validation 2.