OSCAR: On-board emission measurements

in Central London

P G Boulter, T Barlow, I S McCrae and S Latham (TRL)

TRL Limited, Nine Mile Ride, Wokingham RG40 3GA, United Kingdom

TRL Report: UPR/IE/034/06

January 2006

Programme name EESD: Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development

Key action & RTD Priority 4.1.2. Improving the Quality of Urban Life
Project acronym OSCAR
Contract number EVK4-CT-2002-00083
Project title Optimised Expert System for Conducting Environmental
Assessment of Urban Road Traffic
Website http://www.eu-oscar.org
 PUBLICATION DATA FORM

Deliverable Number Workpackage 5, supplementary

Deliverable Title
Deliverable version number
Workpackage
Nature of the deliverable
Dissemination level
OSCAR: On-board emission measurements in Central
London
Version number 1
WP5: Assessment of traffic parameters and emission
factors relevant to congested flows
Report
Consortium

Author(s): P G Boulter, T Barlow, I S McCrae and S Latham (TRL)

Contributors:
Reviewer(s):

Keywords: OSCAR, ON-BOARD, EXHAUST EMISSIONS

LIST OF OSCAR PARTICIPANTS

OSCAR - Optimised Expert System for Conducting

Environmental Assessment of Urban Road Traffic

Partner Number
Official Logo Organisation Name
and Country

University of Hertfordshire 1, UK (Coordinator)

Westminster City Council 2, UK

Transport Research Laboratory 3, UK

Finnish Meteorological Institute 4, Finland

Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council 5, Finland

Norwegian Institute for Air Research 6, Norway

Oslo Department of Public Health 7, Norway

National Centre for Scientific Research,

8, Greece
Demokritos

Technical University of Madrid 9, Spain

Spanish Electric Constructions Society 10, Spain

Netherlands Organisation for Applied

11, Netherlands
Scientific Research

Municipality of Utrecht 12, Netherlands

Contents

Page

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1

2 REVIEW OF ON-BOARD MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS ................................................. 1

2.1 VPEMS ____________________________________________________________ 1
2.2 MEMS _____________________________________________________________ 2
2.3 HORIBA OBS-1000 SERIES ______________________________________________ 3
2.4 SEMTECH QCM/MPS AND SEMTECH-D_____________________________________ 4
2.5 PEMS _____________________________________________________________ 5
2.6 TRL GASSCAN _______________________________________________________ 6
2.7 SELECTION OF SUITABLE SYSTEM ___________________________________________ 6
3 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................... 7
3.1 TEST VEHICLE AND MEASUREMENT SYSTEM _____________________________________ 7
3.1.1 Test vehicle ............................................................................................... 7
3.1.2 Instrumentation of test vehicle .................................................................... 7
3.1.3 OBD ......................................................................................................... 7
3.1.4 GPS.......................................................................................................... 8
3.2 TEST ROUTES ________________________________________________________ 8
4 RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 11
4.1 TRIP CHARACTERISTICS AND EMISSION FACTORS ________________________________ 11
4.2 COMPARISON WITH CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER MEASUREMENTS ________________________ 14
4.3 EMISSION MAPS ______________________________________________________ 18
4.3.1 Marylebone Road area .............................................................................. 18
4.3.2 Cromwell Road area ................................................................................. 20
5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 22

6 REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 23

7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ 24

8 ABBREVIATIONS AND GLOSSARY ....................................................................... 25

Executive summary

This report provides a summary of a study undertaken as part of the workstream 5 of the
OSCAR project. The overall objective of this workstreeam was to investigate and to provide the
most appropriate exhaust emission factors for slow moving, congested urban traffic. In part
this was achieved through the derivation of driving characteristics from 4 typical European
cities, and the use of these driving characteristics in the development of drive cycles for use
within an emission measurement programme on 20 light-duty vehicles.

The use of an on-board exhaust emission measurement survey, in London, was incorporated
into the project to provide one approach at validating these derived emission factors. The main
objectives of this sub-task were to review available on-board measurement systems, to provide
information on the spatial and temporal distribution of emissions from a typical modern car
being driven around the centre of a large city, to compare in-service emission data with those
data derived from the laboratory tests, and finally to compare emission maps with air quality
maps in an attempt to provide information on pollutant hot spots. This study concluded most of
these task, but was unable to provide a geographic and temporal comparison of emission and
air quality hotspots. This exception arose due to the omission of the pollution mapping within
other parts of the OSCAR project.

In absolute terms, emissions for the vehicle tested on the road did not match those from
vehicles tested on the chassis dynamometer (Euro III petrol). However, for OSCAR driving
cycles D1, E, F, G1 and G2, the relative effects of the different cycles were similar for both the
chassis dynamometer tests and the on-road tests, indicating that the trends relating to these
cycles are probably close to reality.

For very-low-speed driving conditions (type-H OSCAR cycles), there were large differences (in
both absolute and relative terms) between the emissions measured on the road and those
measured on the chassis dynamometer. The precise links between driving patterns and
emissions (apart from CO2) at very low speeds remain unclear, and any small differences in
vehicle operation characteristics can have a large effect upon emissions. This will clearly have
implications for the modelling of emissions at low speeds, as emission factors will have to be
selected with great care.

Emissions along Marylebone Road, which is considered to be one of the most polluted urban
roads in the UK, appear to be lower than along some of the other roads in the area. A number
of junctions in the Marylebone Road area were identified as potential emission hot spots.
1 INTRODUCTION

As part of the validation process for the OSCAR system, a series of on-board emission
measurements were conducted in Central London. The main objectives of the exercise were:
(i) To review available on-board measurement systems.
(ii) To provide information on the spatial and temporal distribution of emissions from a
typical modern car being driven around the centre of a large city.
(iii) To compare the on-board measurements with the OSCAR chassis dynamometer
measurements (Boulter et al., 2005) for the corresponding type of vehicle.
(iv) To compare emission maps with air quality maps in an attempt to provide information on
pollutant hot spots.
However, no pollution maps were made available from the OSCAR consortium for the London
survey area. Therefore objective (iv) was not progressed.

2 REVIEW OF ON-BOARD MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS

The first stage of the on-board emission measurement experiment was to review available on-
board exhaust emission measurement systems. Six different systems were reviewed, and these
are listed in Table 2.1. The systems are described in more detail in the following sections.

Table 2.1: Capabilities of reviewed on-board systems.

Alt. fuel
Diesel
Petrol

NO/
System name Organisation CO2 CO HC O2 PM Web site
NOx

VPEMS Imperial http://www.sira.co.uk/vpems.html

College/SIRA

MEMS West Virginia http://cafee.wvu.edu/capabilities_on

University board_emissions_measurement.php

Horiba OBS- Horiba

http://www.emd.horiba.com/engme
1000 Series
as/obs1000/

SEMTECH QCM Sensors-Inc http://www.sensors-inc.com

SEMTECH-D

PEMS Clean Air http://test.cleanairt.com/index.aspx

technologies diesel

TRL GasScan TRL N/A

CO2 – carbon dioxide; CO- carbon monoxide; HC – hydrocarbons; NO – nitric oxide; NOX – total oxides of
nitrogen; O2 - oxygen

2.1 VPEMS
Imperial College and SIRA have developed a prototype ‘Vehicle Performance and Emissions
Monitoring System’ (VPEMS) which includes an on-board emissions sub-system. This uses a
telematics receiver to combine measurements from the emissions analysers with vehicle
position and speed via GPS, and vehicle performance parameters from either the engine

1
management system or an array of sensors. The data are transmitted to a base station via a
GSM modem link.
The emissions sub-system was developed for use with both petrol- and diesel-fuelled vehicles,
and is based upon a commercially available five-gas analyser certified by the California Board
of Auto Repair to their BAR-97 standard.
The exhaust gas is passed through a 7Im filter, and is then dried by passing it through a
Naphion (a PTFE variant) impregnated tube to draw water out of the sample tube. Drying is
accelerated by passing some of the dried sample gas through a needle valve and returning it
past the outside of the Naphion tube. The gas is then passed to the five-gas analyser system.
The analyser system uses the principle of non dispersive infra-red (NDIR) to measure CO, CO2,
and THC concentrations in the sample. Electrochemical cells are used to measure NOx and
oxygen. The analytical system can be operated in ‘compensated’ mode, whereby it calculates
concentration values based on an internal compensation algorithm.
The prototype VPEMS has been fitted to a modern 1.8-litre turbo-diesel passenger car, and
tested on an industry-standard chassis dynamometer over standard test cycles (Noland et al.,
2004). Remote download of performance and emissions data from the vehicle was successfully
demonstrated. The instantaneous concentration measurements from the VPEMS exhaust
emissions analyser were compared with measurements from the laboratory-based chassis
dynamometer. Following a signal time alignment process, compensation coefficients were
obtained using a simple linear regression model. These allowed acceptably accurate aggregate
mass emissions of CO (+11.5% relative to the bag result), CO2 (-8.1%) and NOx (-17.7%) to
be calculated using the dynamometer CVS exhaust flow. A comparison of the raw VPEMS
signal, corrected VPEMS signal and a standard analytical reference system is shown in Figure
2.1. Further improvements in accuracy may be achieved through improved time alignment of
the datasets and the application of more detailed compensation models. While this work
confirms that a garage-grade analyser may be used for on-board measurements, significant
development work remains. In particular, the sample gas conditioning system and the long-
term durability of the system requires further investigation.

Figure 2.1: VEPMS verses the reference analytical system (North et. al., 2004).

2.2 MEMS
West Virginia University (WVU) in the United States has combined various technologies
suitable for on-board emissions measurement to develop the Mobile Emissions Measurement
System (MEMS)1. This is capable of measuring in-use power-specific emissions from heavy-
duty diesel-powered vehicles driven under real-world conditions. MEMS employs a filtered,

1 http://cafee.wvu.edu/capabilities_onboard_emissions_measurement.php

2
heated sample handling and conditioning system, a solid-state NDIR detector for CO2
measurement, and a solid state zirconium oxide (ZrO2) sensor for NOx measurement. It relies
upon engine control unit outputs for torque and engine/vehicle speed data, whilst exhaust flow
rate is measured via a differential pressure device. All data are collected with a rugged data
acquisition system, and a customized software package that allows sampling at a minimum
sampling rate of 5 Hz. WVU is exploring potential applications of MEMS, including evaluating
heavy-duty off-road and seagoing diesel emissions performance, as well as improving the
systems performance, and expanding it to include particulate measurements.

2.3 Horiba OBS-1000 Series

The Horiba OBS-1000 Series is a real-time analytical emissions system designed for the on-
board measurement and recording of raw exhaust gases and simultaneous collection of data on
the driving environment.
The OBS 1000 system consists of several instruments including:
• The Horiba MEXA-1170H analyser which is a heated NDIR instrument that
simultaneously measures wet CO, CO2 and HC concentrations in the vehicle exhaust.
• The Horiba MEXA-720 analyser, which is a ZrO2-type sensor measuring the NOx
concentration and the air:fuel ratio (AFR).
• Several flow sensors with EPA-licensed technology, which measure the exhaust gas
flow.
• Software in the data logger laptop which makes calculations and displays information in
real-time via a graphical interface, in addition to storing the system inputs for later
analysis.
In addition to these continuous measurements, the system calculates the mass of exhaust gas
generated per unit of distance, and the fuel consumption rate. A GPS receiver and a variety of
other sensors provide vehicle position data and an overview of the driving environment in real
time. The instrument does not require operating (carrier or fuel) gases, has an independent
power supply with rechargeable battery packs, and has a relatively small footprint (requiring
just 1 m2 of space inside the vehicle). The OBS 1000 series supports a wide range of
applications for a diversity of diesel and gasoline vehicles including alternative fuel vehicles
(hybrid-fuel, LPG, and CNG) heavy-duty trucks and off-road vehicles and plant. Horiba claim it
is easy to install, connect, and remove individual components and it is robust and resistant to
vibration. The system is pictured in Figure 2.2. Different versions of the OBS system are
available, the most comprehensive being the OBS 1300 which covers all legislated gaseous
emissions, excluding PM.

Figure 2.2: Installation of Horiba system in car (Oestergaard, 2005).

3
TNO has performed on-board measurements on the OBS 1300 (TNO, 2004), and concluded
that the detection limits of the CO and HC analysers were insufficient to accurately measure
emissions from Euro IV diesel and gasoline passenger cars. Furthermore, the zero calibration
was incorrect and showed drift. Euro I, Euro II and Euro III passenger cars showed that CO and
HC concentrations were lower than 1% of the analyser range for significant periods, and so the
emission measurements are questionable.
Furthermore, TNO claims that the Horiba OBS system is not able to measure NOx emissions for
petrol passenger cars due to cross-sensitivity with NH3, and the H2O interference factor needs
to be determined by conducting correlation tests on a chassis dynamometer before emission
tests on the road. TNO recommended that the emission results measured by the system should
be analysed directly after the test has been finished, taking into account zero calibration and
drift. The correlations between the Horiba system and measurements on the chassis
dynamometer were poor for HC and NOx, mainly due to the difference in measurement
principles.
The main conclusion of the evaluation exercise was that currently the OBS does not meet the
requirements that are needed for the purpose of reliably and accurately measuring emissions
in specific situations on the road with current and future technology passenger cars. This is
caused by the detection limits, accuracy and drift of the analysers. However, the system is able
to provide an indication of the types of situations in which emissions are produced; this
function can be rather valuable for engine calibration, road-worthiness testing and in-use
conformity testing purposes.
Horiba has recently introduced a new on-board exhaust gas analytical system known as the
2000 series (Oestergaard, 2005). There are two types: the OBS 2100 designed for research
and development purposes, and the OBS 2200 designed for in-use compliance and
certification. There are several significant changes relative to the 1000 series, in particular the
use of chemiluminescence for NOx measurement and flame ionisation detection for THC
measurement. This may address many of the analytical problems highlighted by TNO, since
these are well established techniques used in standard compliance and certification procedures,
although the compactness of the Horiba 2000 system could potentially introduce certain
compromises.

2.4 SEMTECH QCM/MPS and SEMTECH-D

PM measurement systems
Sensors Inc. market two products designed by Booker Systems Ltd: the SEMTECH QCM (Quartz
Crystal Microbalance) and MPS (Micro-Proportional Sampler). These allow dynamic mass
measurement of the particulate matter in engine exhaust.
The SEMTECH QCM uses the principle of electrostatic precipitation, whereby particles are
collected from a known volume of air and deposited on an oscillating piezoelectric crystal. The
natural oscillation frequency of the crystal varies in proportion to the amount of material
deposited on its surface. By measuring these shifts in frequency, the SEMTECH QCM can
calculate the mass of the particulate matter with a resolution approaching one nanogramme.
Operation of the QCM at such a high frequency also makes the system immune to shock and
vibration. The SEMTECH QCM offers several features, including:

• Traceability and precise direct mass measurement.

• Fast response with high sensitivity.
• Configurable for short, high-mass deposits or long-term sampling in workplace or
ambient outdoor environments.
• Small size and lightweight for portable applications.

To complement the QCM, the MPS was developed to permit transient in-use measurements.
The SEMTECH MPS delivers response times of 0.1s and operational speeds of greater than 5
Hz. In addition, the compact unit is powered from a 12 VDC supply.

4
Gaseous emissions measurement system
Sensors Inc. also market the SEMTECH-D, which is an on-board system that simultaneously
measures and records gaseous exhaust constituents (NO, NO2, CO, CO2 and THC) with an
accuracy of ±3-4% of the reading. The SEMTECH-D system uses non-dispersive ultraviolet
(NDUV) analysis to detect NO and NO2, NDIR to detect CO and CO2, and a FID to detect total
hydrocarbons. In electronically-controlled engines, the reporting can be also done in mass
units such as g/bhp-hr or g/mile. For engines without electronic controls, additional
instrumentation is provided to deliver g/bhp-h figures. Information can be retrieved remotely
using a wireless, cellular or satellite link or it can be taken directly from the unit’s message
centre. The SEMTECH-D can also be rack-mounted or operated on a cart, for laboratory work.

The system is offered for engine and vehicle OEMs, research organizations, and commercial
laboratories to perform such tasks as collection of engine performance data under real world
conditions, engine and vehicle sub-system development, catalyst and particulate filter testing
and vehicle compliance testing.

Use and validation

According to the manufacturer recent testing by Caterpillar with a CAT C-10 engine showed
good correlation between SEMTECH-D and laboratory results. The Environmental Protection
Agency has tested over 40 prototype and production vehicles equipped with the SEMTECH on
board system, including vehicles claiming partial zero emissions (PZEVs), or super ultra low
emission vehicles (SULEVs) and alternative fuel vehicles running on hydrogen, biodiesel, LPG
and compressed natural gas. Finally during 2003, the UK DfT funded an investigation of the
SEMTECH system application to heavy-duty vehicles, with a comparison against chassis
dynamometer-based emission measurements (Rowlands, 2004). Within this test programme,
the Semtech equipment demonstrated a very good correlation with the laboratory-based
analysers in terms of exhaust pollutant concentration. However, this investigation highlighted
several deficiencies in he prototype mass flow instrument, which resulted in significant errors
in the derivation of mass-based emissions. With subsequent improvement of this mass-flow
instrument, it was concluded that the Semtech equipment demonstrated the potential for a
suitable alternative technique for the in-service testing of heavy-duty vehicles

2.5 PEMS
Clean Air Technologies in the United States have developed a range of Portable Emissions
Measurement Systems (PEMS) for gasoline and diesel vehicles, as reported by Michal and
Allsop (2001). The unit provides HC, CO, CO2 (NDIR), NOx and O2 (electrochemical cell)
readings for gasoline vehicles, and NOx, CO, CO2, O2 and PM readings for diesel vehicles.
The gas analyzer system is typical of five-gas analyzers commonly used for emissions
inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs, with minor modifications to improve stability,
detection limit and response time. This uses NDIR (non-dispersive infra-red) analyzer, which
simultaneously measures the concentrations of hydrocarbons (measured and reported as
hexane), CO and CO2 and two electrochemical cells, one measuring nitric oxide (NO) and the
other O2.
To measure PM, condensed water is separated from the sample using a water separation bowl.
The sample is then heated and split into two parallel streams, with one stream being drawn at
a large angle from the main stream of sample flow. Each parallel stream is then passed
through two laser beams. A layer of filtered air is formed around the sample to protect the
optics. A photodetector mounted away from the path of laser beam detects the intensity of the
light scattered by the particles. The sample is then filtered and exhausted by an internal
sample pump. The correlation of the response with particle mass, total surface area or count is
dependent on the particle size distribution and the size of elemental and organic fractions.
Preliminary comparison tests show relatively good correlation of the response with total
particle mass, under a wide range of operating conditions.
Pollutant concentrations are obtained from a standard sample probe inserted into the tailpipe.
On newer vehicles, the engine operating data are obtained from the on-board diagnostics port.

5
On older vehicles, the engine operating data are obtained through a set of temporarily
mounted sensors. On spark ignited engines, the engine speed is measured by an inductive
pickup clamped around a spark plug wire. On diesel engines, the engine speed is measured by
a piezoelectric sensor clamped around a fuel line between the injection pump and injector
which senses pressure pulses corresponding to individual injections.
The system is available in a weather-tight case for outdoor off-road applications in a portable
20 kg unit which can be quickly installed, in 5-20 minutes, without and physical modification to
the vehicle. The system uses power directly from a vehicle's 12V or 24V electrical system,
consuming 8 A at 12V DC, or can be powered by AC in the case of stationary testing. The
power necessary to run PEMS can be obtained either from the vehicle electrical system, or from
an independent source, typically a battery bank or an on-board generator. The system samples
raw, undiluted exhaust using an unheated sample line running from the sample probe attached
to the tailpipe using a hose clamp, and into the vehicle, typically through a partially open
window.
Data collected simultaneously collected using PEMS and laboratory-standard equipment and
the portable system. The laboratory PM equipment included a tapered element oscillating
microbalance (TEOM), as well as a filter-based system. For PM, there was a good correlation
between the PEMS light-scattering method and the TEOM, but not when comparing the light
scattering results with the filter-based measurements. Comparison of the portable system and
traditional laboratory results for three full-size diesel pickups shows a strong correlation
between both modal and total NOx and CO2 emissions.

2.6 TRL GasScan

TRL has developed an on-board system for measuring vehicle emissions (Barlow, 2005). The
system consists of the following:

• An Emissions analyser. This is a 5-gas emissions analyser from Crypton that runs on 12
volts DC power supply. It is a portable version of the type of analyser used in the UK
MOT test which measures CO, CO2, HC, NO and lambda. The precision for CO is in the
region of 0.01%.
• A GPS, which is fixed near the rear of the vehicle and is connected directly to the USB
port of a laptop PC.
• An OBD interface: this connects the EOBD port on the vehicle, routinely located below
the vehicle’s steering wheel to a PC, and allows the continuous logging of vehicle speed,
engine speed and relative load.
Two laptop PCs are used to log these data – one for the emissions analyser and one for the
GPS and OBD data. Pollutant concentration values are logged continuously. To obtain mass
emissions, data were used from the vehicle's On Board Diagnostics (OBD) system which either
outputs mass air flow directly or engine speed and manifold air pressure from which air flow
may be estimated. Mass emissions were then calculated from the concentration and flow rate.
The OBD system is also used to log vehicle speed. This gives a "plug & play" system without
requiring any modifications to the vehicle or exhaust.

2.7 Selection of suitable system

Initial investigations of equipment availability and hire costs were undertaken. Within the
available project funding, the ability to hire the Horiba and Semtech systems was found to be
outside the project resources. However, as part of a separate study for the Highways Agency,
TRL was commissioned to evaluate the Horiba, VPEMS and TRL on-board systems through field
trails and emission model comparison for a section of the M42 motorway (McCrae et. al.,
2005). Therefore the use of the low cost TRL system was justified, given that the comparison
between the TRL system and two main-stream systems was being undertaken elsewhere.

6
3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Test vehicle and measurement system

3.1.1 Test vehicle

A petrol-fuelled car (Ford Mondeo 2000cc) conforming to Euro III standards was used for the
tests. The vehicle was instrumented with the TRL on-board measurement system (Figure 3.1).
An example of the typical output from the system is shown in Figure 3.2. Prior to starting the
test work, the emissions analyser was serviced and calibrated by an approved Crypton
technician.

A B C

Figure 3.1: The test vehicle equipped with the on-board emission measurement system. Figure A
shows the position of the gas analyser unit, Figure B shows a typical front display and Figure C
provides a view of the exhaust sampling probe.

3.1.2 Instrumentation of test vehicle

Recent technological developments in vehicle on-board diagnostics (OBD) and global

positioning systems (GPS) have made possible the efficient collection of real-world driving
pattern data, and allow the continuous logging of operational parameters and location. These
technologies were exploited in OSCAR.

3.1.3 OBD

Equipment is available which can read the OBD output from a Euro III (or later) petrol car
compliant with European on-board diagnostics (EOBD) standards. On-line data acquisition is
achieved via a simple OBD interface that is connected to the serial port of a standard PC,
having OBD-scanning software. A cable is required to connect the car to the computer. EOBD-
compliant vehicles must be fitted with a standard connector which is located in an accessible
area, such as between the steering column and the central console of the car. Vehicles must
also be capable of communicating according to one of the approved EOBD protocols - ISO
9141, J1850, KWP2000 or CAN, and must provide a minimum quantity of information. All new
spark-ignition light-duty vehicles manufactured after 1 January 2002 should have been fitted
with EOBD.

The software used in OSCAR for reading the OBD output (called Vehicle Explorer Scan Tool
Browser, Version 1.06) is available free of charge on the internet at: http://www.obd-
2.com/#view. The software scans a variety of vehicle operation parameters in real time, and
the live data to be scanned and stored to disk for later analysis. The parameters scanned
include, for example:

7
 • fuel system status (open loop, closed loop) • vehicle speed (km/hr)
• percentage engine load • intake air temperature (°C)
• engine coolant temperature (°C) • mass air flow rate (g/sec)
• intake manifold absolute pressure (kPa) • oxygen sensor output (volts)
• engine speed (rpm) • throttle position

However, if many parameters are selected simultaneously, the logging frequency decreases. A
desirable logging frequency from driving pattern measurements is around 2Hz. Preliminary
tests at TRL indicated that a logging frequency of just less than 2 Hz could be achieved if only
four parameters were logged. The four most useful parameters in the context of OSCAR were
taken to be:

• Vehicle speed (resolution 1 km/h2)

• Engine speed (resolution 1 rpm)
• Percentage engine load
• Percentage throttle position

3.1.4 GPS

A GPS receiver was used to log the location and operation of the instrumented vehicle. The
receiver was used to determine information such as speed, bearing, trip distance, and altitude.
The GPS receiver was powered directly from the laptop computer. TRL has developed a
computer program that allows points to be selected on a latitude/longitude plot and then
automatically extracts the appropriate speed data corresponding to the sections of road
between the points. Once the points have been defined, then the data for the same sections
can be automatically extracted from similar trips.

3.2 Test routes

Seven different test routes were driven in Central London. The routes, which are shown in Figures
3.3 and 3.4, passed the sites used for the OSCAR air pollution studies. One set of routes (A, B, C)
was driven in the vicinity of the Marylebone Road monitoring site. The other set of routes (D, E,
F, G) was driven in the vicinity of the Cromwell Road site. The objective was to pass the
monitoring stations from different directions (North, South East and West). However, practical
limitations, such as the presence of one-way streets, required some of the routes to pass the
monitoring stations on the nearest road.
The testing was performed over a period of three days, between the 12th and 14th of July 2005.
Two testing sessions were undertaken each day, running from 06:30 to 11:00 and 13:00 to
19:00. Multiple circuits were driven of each route so the test times covered traffic flows over a
variety of periods, traffic flows and different levels of congestion. However, no dedicated traffic
data were available for the quantification of congestion.

2 High greater speed resolution would have been desirable, though the resolution of 1 km/h is defined in EOBD
protocols. This limitation was not considered to be problematic, as filtering (smoothing) of driving cycles is required
anyway prior to analysis.

8
 TRL GasScan emissions - OSCAR on-board tests
Files: 5071420.CSV Date: 14/07/2005 Start Time: 18:37:18
40 GScan-050714_020.xls Thursday End Time: 19:00:03

CO emissions

14 50
Emissions (mg/s)

12
40

Speed (km/h)
10
8 30
6 20
4
10
2
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (s)

CO 2 emissions

10000 50
Emissions (mg/s)

8000 40

Speed (km/h)
6000 30
4000 20
2000 10
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (s)

HC*6*1.66 emissions

1.4 50
Emissions (mg/s)

1.2 40

Speed (km/h)
1.0
0.8 30
0.6 20
0.4
10
0.2
0.0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (s)

NO emissions

14 50
Emissions (mg/s)

12
40
Speed (km/h)
10
8 30
6 20
4
2 10
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (s)

Fuel consumption

4 50
Fuel Cons (ml/s)

40
Speed (km/h)

3
30
2
20
1 10
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (s)

Figure 3.2: Example output from TRL GasScan system.

9
 *

Route A: Baker Street /

Gloucester Place

Route B: Marylebone Road

eastbound

Route C: Marylebone Road

westbound
Marylebone Road air
* pollution monitoring site

Figure 3.3: Routes A, B and C (Marylebone Road area).

Route D: Queens Gate

clockwise

Route E: Queens Gate anti-

clockwise

Route F: Cromwell Road

clockwise

Route G: Cromwell Road

anti-clockwise

Cromwell Road air pollution

* monitoring site

Figure 3.4: Routes D, E, F and G (Cromwell Road area).

10
4 RESULTS

4.1 Trip characteristics and emission factors

Measurements were made over a total of 19 trips in the Marylebone Road area, and 12 trips in
the Cromwell Road area. For each trip in the Marylebone Road area, the route, date, start time,
duration, distance covered, average trip speed and average emission factors are shown in
Table 4.1. summary statistics are provided in Table 4.2. the corresponding results for the
Cromwell Road area are given in Tables 4.3 and 4.4.
For a small number of runs the data set was incomplete due to either a failure of the GPS
system or a failure of the gas measurement equipment, and no valid runs were obtained at all
for route G. Nevertheless, a reasonably high rate of data capture was attained given the rather
restricted nature of the experiment.

Table 4.1: Trip characteristics: Marylebone Road area.

Trip Trip Average
Start EF CO EF CO2 EF NO EF HC FC
Date Trip Route duration distance speed
time (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km)
(s) (km) (km/h)
14/7/05 03 A 07:55 617 2.68 15.6 0.054 398.3 0.003 0.025 125.5

04 A 08:07 663 2.70 14.7 0.114 436.5 0.025 0.031 137.6

07 A 09:37 1024 2.41 8.5 0.087 627.0 0.027 0.059 197.6

08 A 09:56 781 2.70 12.4 0.091 463.1 0.029 0.046 146.0

09 A 10:12 941 2.58 9.9 0.251 548.8 0.063 0.107 173.1

11 A 14:56 880 2.72 11.1 0.494 619.4 0.079 0.137 195.5

12 A 15:12 735 2.29 11.2 0.715 601.4 0.049 0.139 189.9

15 A 17:02 1158 2.23 6.9 0.418 813.8 0.106 0.104 256.7

16* A 17:23 506 0.97 6.9 0.307 872.5 0.108 0.110 275.1

19* A 18:35 1351 1.65 4.4 0.259 970.4 0.152 0.132 306.0

14/7/05 01 B+C 07:08 1017 4.35 15.4 0.165 396.4 0.019 0.015 125.0

02 B+C 07:28 1126 3.42 10.9 0.137 540.7 0.012 0.033 170.4

05 B+C 08:47 1300 3.64 10.1 0.085 577.8 0.010 0.045 182.1

06 B+C 09:10 1041 3.50 12.1 0.099 463.7 0.037 0.029 146.2

10 B+C 10:40 1850 3.42 6.6 0.130 686.5 0.108 0.075 216.4

13 B+C 15:38 1405 3.14 8.0 0.420 773.5 0.053 0.131 244.0

14 B+C 16:03 1681 3.39 7.3 0.420 814.6 0.072 0.114 257.0

17 B+C 17:45 1394 3.89 10.1 0.153 497.7 0.079 0.046 156.9

18 B+C 18:12 1042 2.83 9.8 0.144 510.9 0.041 0.111 161.1
*incomplete.
EF: Emission factor.

11
 Table 4.2: Summary statistics: Marylebone Road area.
Average
EF CO EF CO2 EF NO EF HC FC
speed
(g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km)
(km/h)
Route A Mean (unweighted) 10.2 0.279 635.1 0.064 0.089 200.3

Route B+C Mean (unweighted) 10.0 0.195 584.6 0.048 0.067 184.4

Overall Mean (unweighted) 10.1 0.239 611.2 0.056 0.078 192.8

St.dev. 3.1 0.179 168.4 0.041 0.044 53.1

95% c.i. 1.4 0.080 75.7 0.018 0.020 23.9

†
Weighted mean 10.4 0.224 586.4 0.051 0.072 184.9

† Weighted for distance travelled.

Table 4.3: Trip characteristics: Cromwell Road area.

Trip Trip Average
Start EF CO EF CO2 EF NO EF HC FC
Date Trip Route duration distance speed
time (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km)
(s) (km) (km/h)
12/7/05 01 D 17:26 1028 3.00 10.5 0.125 558.1 0.038 0.008 175.9

13/7/05 02 D 16:22 879 3.12 12.8 0.127 496.5 0.009 0.031 156.5

03* D 16:41 364 1.35 13.3 0.083 519.2 0.021 0.062 163.7

04 D 17:17 627 2.66 15.3 0.192 477.1 0.035 0.057 150.5

05 D 17:29 531 2.37 16.1 0.291 457.8 0.041 0.030 144.4

12/7/05 06 E 14:54 646 2.44 13.6 0.275 451.1 0.026 0.014 142.3

07 E 15:08 932 2.65 10.2 0.198 550.9 0.021 0.040 173.7

13/7/05 08* E 15:32 349 0.90 9.3 0.066 673.3 0.032 0.029 212.2

09 E 17:55 1209 3.54 10.5 0.140 560.5 0.057 0.068 176.7

12/7/05 10 F 06:55 1025 5.99 21.0 0.126 323.3 0.014 0.015 101.9

11 F 08:42 996 4.63 16.7 0.099 351.1 0.030 0.026 110.7

12 F 16:48 573 2.68 16.8 0.119 396.4 0.041 0.069 125.0

*incomplete.

Table 4.4: Summary statistics: Cromwell Road area.

Average
EF CO EF CO2 EF NO EF HC FC
speed
(g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km)
(km/h)
Route D Mean (unweighted) 13.6 0.164 501.7 0.029 0.038 158.2

Route E Mean (unweighted) 10.9 0.170 559.0 0.034 0.038 176.2

Route F Mean (unweighted) 18.2 0.115 356.9 0.028 0.037 112.5

Route G Mean (unweighted) - - - - - -

Overall Mean (unweighted) 13.9 0.153 480.8 0.030 0.037 151.6

St. dev. 3.4 0.072 95.9 0.013 0.022 30.2

95% c.i. 1.9 0.041 54.3 0.007 0.012 17.1

†
Weighted mean 14.8 0.151 451.0 0.029 0.035 142.2

† Weighted for distance travelled.

12
From Tables 4.1 and 4.2 it can be seen that the average speeds of the trips driven in the
Marylebone Road area were very low, including during ‘off-peak’ periods. There was no strong
correlation between CO or HC emissions and average speed. For NO and CO2, however, the
fitting of second-order polynomial functions to the data gave R2 values of 0.71 and 0.87. Table
4.2 shows that the overall average speeds on route A and routes B/C were very similar, but
fuel consumption and emissions on route A were slightly higher (~9% higher in the case of fuel
consumption, ~30-40% for CO, HC and NO). Differences in the driving dynamics on the two
routes may have contributed to the differences in fuel consumption and emissions, although
the average maximum speed on the two routes was also similar. No detailed examination of
traffic characteristics and driving dynamics was possible within the scope of the study.
For the Cromwell Road area, Tables 4.3 and 4.4 again indicate that average speeds were quite
low, though not quite as low as in the Marylebone Road area. Fuel consumption in the
Marylebone Road area was about 25% higher than in the Cromwell Road area, and pollutant
emission factors were much higher (~60% for CO, ~85% for NO, and more than twice as high
for HC). In the Cromwell Road area, only CO2 emissions were closely correlated with speed
(R2=0.88).
Figure 4.1 shows emissions of CO, HC, NO and CO2 plotted as a function of average trip speed
for both the Marylebone Road and Cromwell Road areas.

CO HC
0.80 0.16
Marylebone road area Marylebone road area
0.70 0.14
Cromwell Road area Cromwell Road area
0.60 0.12

0.50 0.10
CO (g/km)

HC (g/km)

0.40 0.08

0.30 0.06

0.20 0.04

0.10 0.02

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)

NO CO2
0.16 1200.00
Marylebone road area Marylebone road area
0.14 Cromwell Road area 1000.00 Cromwell Road area
0.12
800.00
0.10
CO2 (g/km)
NO (g/km)

0.08 600.00

0.06
400.00
0.04
200.00
0.02

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)

Figure 4.1: Emissions of CO, HC, NO and CO2 as a function of average trip speed.

13
4.2 Comparison with chassis dynamometer measurements
The on-board measurements, which were conducted using a petrol-engined car conforming to
the Euro III standard, were compared with the average OSCAR chassis dynamometer
measurements for the equivalent vehicle category, as reported by Boulter et al. (2005). For
each driving pattern obtained during the on-board measurement programme, the
corresponding OSCAR driving cycle was selected, based upon average speed alone. The
vehicles tested on the chassis dynamometer are shown in Table 4.5, and the characteristics of
the OSCAR driving cycles are summarised in Table 4.6. For the chassis dynamometer tests, the
results represented the averages for the three vehicles tested.

Table 4.5: Petrol-engined Euro III vehicles tested on the chassis dynamometer
(Boulter et al., 2005).

Engine
Veh Weight Odometer Fuel Max. Aftertreat- Trans-
Make Model Size Cylin- Valves
no. (kg) (km) inj. power ment mission
(cc) ders /cyl.
type (kW)
1 Suzuki Alto 775 14,182 1081 4 4 Multi 46 TWC 5 gear
point man.
2 Volvo V40 1275 52,816 1948 4 4 Multi 100 TWC 5 gear
point man.

3 Peugeot 307SW 1299 16,440 1587 4 4 Multi 80 TWC + pre- 5 gear

point cat man.

Table 4.6: Characteristics of OSCAR driving cycles (Boulter et al., 2005).

Operational ranges Average

Dynamics Average Maximum % of
Distance Duration driving RPA
Cycle relative to speed speed time
Traffic density Average (km) (s) speed (m/s2)
range mean (km/h) (km/h) idling
(veh/km/lane) link speed (km/h)
(km/h)
C 0-35 30-45 Average 3.98 402 35.6 39.6 70.8 0.212 12
D1 0-40 15-30 Low 2.70 430 22.6 27.9 46.7 0.163 21
D2 0-40 15-30 Average 2.33 364 23.0 28.2 54.7 0.224 20
E 40-70 15-30 Average 2.05 372 19.9 28.9 54.7 0.247 33
F 15-40 <15 Average 1.60 424 13.6 25.4 49.0 0.244 50
G1 40-70 <15 Average 1.56 456 12.3 18.5 40.2 0.221 38
G2 40-70 <15 High 1.12 351 11.5 15.9 51.5 0.277 32
H1 70-125 <15 Low 0.80 371 7.8 11.0 31.0 0.169 35
H2 70-125 <15 Average 0.95 425 8.1 12.9 30.6 0.242 42
H3 70-125 <15 High 0.85 375 8.2 12.4 38.6 0.270 41

The results are presented for CO, HC, NO and NOx and CO2 in Figures 4.2 to 4.5. It should be
noted that in each of these Figures the error bars for the on-board measurements are
calculated from multiple values for the same vehicle, whereas for the chassis dynamometer
measurements the error bars are calculated from the values for the three different vehicles
tested. Little quantitative insight can be gained from comparisons between emissions from
such small numbers of vehicles, and the results should primarily be considered qualitatively.

14
 CO
0.8
0.7 On-board measurements

0.6 OSCA R chassis dynamometer

0.5
0.4
CO (g/km)

0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
0 D1
1 E2 F3 G1
4 G2
5 H1
6 H2
7 H38 9

OSCAR driving cycle

Figure 4.2: Emissions of CO from petrol Euro III vehicles on

the chassis dynamometer over the OSCAR driving cycles and
emissions over driving patterns having a similar average
speed during the on-board measurements.

HC
0.14
On-board measurements
0.12
OSCA R chassis dynamometer
0.10

0.08
HC (g/km)

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00

-0.02
0 1D1 2E 3F G1
4 G2
5 H1
6 H2
7 H3
8 9

OSCAR driving cycle

Figure 4.3: Emissions of HC from petrol Euro III vehicles on

the chassis dynamometer over the OSCAR driving cycles and
emissions over driving patterns having a similar average
speed during the on-board measurements.

15
 NO or NOx
0.5
On-board measurements (NO)

0.4 OSCA R chassis dynamometer (NOx)

0.3
NO/NOx (g/km)

0.2

0.1

0.0

-0.1
0 D1
1 2E F3 G1
4 G2
5 H1
6 H2
7 H3
8 9

OSCAR driving cycle

Figure 4.4: Emissions of NOx from petrol Euro III vehicles on

the chassis dynamometer over the OSCAR driving cycles and
emissions of NO over driving patterns having a similar
average speed during the on-board measurements.

CO2
1000
On-board measurements
900
OSCA R chassis dynamometer
800

700
CO2 (g/km)

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 D1
1 E2 F3 G1
4 G2
5 H1
6 H2
7 H38 9

OSCAR driving cycle

Figure 4.5: Emissions of CO2 from petrol Euro III vehicles on

the chassis dynamometer over the OSCAR driving cycles and
emissions over driving patterns having a similar average
speed during the on-board measurements.

16
It can be seen from Figure 4.2 that CO emissions from the vehicles tested on the dynamometer
were close to zero for all OSCAR cycles except those at very low speeds (type-H cycles), where
as emissions from the vehicle tested on the road were between around 0.1 and 0.25 g/km,
values which are still rather low. Figure 4.3 shows that HC emissions from the vehicles tested
on the chassis dynamometer (which were again close to zero) were systematically lower than
those from the vehicle tested on the road. Systematic offsets of this type are to be expected
when small samples of vehicles are compared. For CO and HC emissions from both the vehicles
on the dynamometer and the vehicle tested on the road tended to be higher over the cycles
having the lowest speeds, although on-road emissions at speeds similar to those of OSCAR
cycle H3 were not especially elevated. It is possible that the driving dynamics on the road were
less severe than those in cycle H3. From Figure 4.4, it can be seen that the best agreement
was obtained for NO/NOx. Emissions of NO from the vehicle driven on the road were of a
similar magnitude to the average emissions of NOx from the vehicles tested on the
dynamometer. Figure 4.5 shows that CO2 emissions were again systematically lower for the
vehicles tested on the chassis dynamometer.
Figure 4.6 shows the results normalised to the conditions associated with OSCAR cycle D1. The
Figure shows that for cycles D1, E, F, G1 and G2, the relative effects of the different cycles
were similar for both the chassis dynamometer tests and the on-road tests, indicating that the
trends relating to these cycles are probably close to reality. However, it is clear that there are
large discrepancies over the low-speed type-H cycles (with the possible exception of CO2). The
results generally suggest that the precise links between driving patterns and emissions (apart
from CO2) at very low speeds remain unclear, and any small differences in vehicle operation
characteristics can have a large effect upon emissions. This will clearly have implications for
the modelling of emissions at low speeds, as emission factors will have to be selected with
great care, and in many cases the ‘correct’ emission factors will simply not exist.

CO HC
80.0 9.00
On-board measurements On-board measurements
70.0 8.00
OSCAR chassis dynamometer OSCAR chassis dynamometer
7.00
CO (normalised to D1)

HC (normalised to D1)

60.0
6.00
50.0
5.00
40.0
4.00
30.0
3.00
20.0
2.00
10.0 1.00

0.0 0.00
0 1
D1 2E 3F 4G1 5 G2 6 H1 7 H2 8 H3 9 0 1D1 2E 3F 4 G1 5 G2 6 H1 7 H2 8 H3 9

OSCAR driving cycle OSCAR driving cycle

NO or NOx CO2
9.0 3.0
On-board measurements (NO) On-board measurements
8.0
2.5
NO/NOx (normalised to D1)

OSCAR chassis dynamometer (NOx) OSCAR chassis dynamometer

CO2 (normalised to D1)

7.0

6.0 2.0

5.0
1.5
4.0

3.0 1.0

2.0
0.5
1.0

0.0 0.0
0 D1
1 2E 3F 4G1 5 G2 6 H1 7 H2 8 H3 9 0 D1
1 2E 3F 4G1 5G2 6 H1 7 H2 8 H3 9

OSCAR driving cycle OSCAR driving cycle

Figure 4.6: Emissions normalised to results corresponding to OSCAR cycle D1.

17
4.3 Emission maps
One of the main objectives of the on-board emission measurement work was to compare
emission maps with air quality maps in an attempt to provide information on pollutant hot
spots. However, as no air pollution maps were actually available for the locations of the on-
board measurements, this objective could not be achieved. Nevertheless, emission maps were
produced in order to identify potential hot spots.

4.3.1 Marylebone Road area

The emission maps for CO, HC and NO in the Marylebone Road area are shown in Figures 4.7
to 4.9. In each map all the valid emission measurements – between 10,000 and 18,000 in
each map, depending on the pollutant - are divided into arbitrary ranges and plotted spatially.
All time periods are included. Many zero emission values were obtained – these are not shown.
Although these data are quite limited, it is worth noting that emissions along Marylebone Road,
which is considered to be one of the most polluted urban roads in the UK, appear to be lower
than along some of the other roads in the area. This observation is broadly consistent with the
results presented in Table 4.2. For example, for CO and HC relatively few peaks in emissions
were observed on Marylebone Road itself. Higher emissions were recorded on Gloucester Place
and, to a lesser extent, Baker Street. The peaks in NO emissions were more isolated, with
potential emissions hot spots including the junction between Gloucester Place and Marylebone
road, and the junction between Baker Street and Marylebone Road.

Marylebone Road

Baker Street

Gloucester Place

Figure 4.7: Spatial distribution of non-zero CO emissions (mg/s) in Marylebone Road area.

18
 Marylebone Road

Baker Street

Gloucester Place

Figure 4.8: Spatial distribution of non-zero HC emissions (mg/s) in Marylebone Road area.

Marylebone Road

Baker Street

Gloucester Place

Figure 4.9: Spatial distribution of non-zero NO emissions (mg/s) in Marylebone Road area.

19
4.3.2 Cromwell Road area

The emission maps for CO, HC and NO in the Cromwell Road area are shown in Figures 4.10 to
4.12. In general, fewer emission peaks than in the Marylebone Road area were observed, and
emissions appeared on the whole to be lower. This is consistent with the results presented in
Tables 4.2 and 4.4.
For CO, the junctions of main roads appeared to be potential emissions hot spots, such as the
following: Kensington Road/Queens Gate, Cromwell Road/Queens Gate, Queens Gate/Old
Brompton Road, Gloucester road/Old Brompton Road. The peaks in HC emissions, on the other
hand, did not generally occur at these locations, but were rather concentrated on the western
section of Cromwell Road and on Warwick Road. Peaks in NO were infrequent, and appeared to
be randomly located.

Kensington Road

Queens Gate

Cromwell Road

Gloucester Road

Warwick Road Old Brompton Road

Figure 4.10: Spatial distribution of non-zero CO emissions (mg/s) in Cromwell Road area.

20
 Kensington Road

Queens Gate

Cromwell Road

Gloucester Road

Warwick Road Old Brompton Road

Figure 4.11: Spatial distribution of non-zero HC emissions (mg/s) in Cromwell Road area.

Kensington Road

Queens Gate

Cromwell Road

Gloucester Road

Warwick Road Old Brompton Road

Figure 4.12: Spatial distribution of non-zero NO emissions (mg/s) in Cromwell Road area.

21
5 CONCLUSIONS

The main conclusions for this work are as follows:

(i) Speeds in the Marylebone Road area were generally lower, and emissions generally
higher, than those in the Cromwell Road area. However, for the exhaust pollutants
measured, only CO2 exhibited a close correlation with vehicle speed.
(ii) In absolute terms, emissions for the vehicle tested on the road did not match those from
vehicles tested on the chassis dynamometer (Euro III petrol). However, for OSCAR driving
cycles D1, E, F, G1 and G2, the relative effects of the different cycles were similar for
both the chassis dynamometer tests and the on-road tests, indicating that the trends
relating to these cycles are probably close to reality.
(iii) For very-low-speed driving conditions (type-H OSCAR cycles), there were large
differences (in both absolute and relative terms) between the emissions measured on the
road and those measured on the chassis dynamometer. The precise links between driving
patterns and emissions (apart from CO2) at very low speeds remain unclear, and any
small differences in vehicle operation characteristics can have a large effect upon
emissions. This will clearly have implications for the modelling of emissions at low
speeds, as emission factors will have to be selected with great care.
(iv) Emissions along Marylebone Road, which is considered to be one of the most polluted
urban roads in the UK, appear to be lower than along some of the other roads in the area.
A number of junctions in the Marylebone Road area were identified as potential emission
hot spots.
(v) The on-board emission measurements could not be used to test the predictions of the
OSCAR Assessment system as no air pollution maps were available for the studied
locations.

22
6 REFERENCES

Boulter P G, Barlow T, McCrae I S, Latham S, Elst D and van der Burgwal E (2005).
Road traffic characteristics, driving patterns and emission factors for congested situations.
Deliverable 5.2 of the European Commission 5th Framework project OSCAR. Transport Research
Laboratory, Wokingham, United Kingdom.

McCrae I S, Barlow T J and Latham S L (2005). Instantaneous vehicle emission

monitoring. TRL report UPR/IE/040/06. Transport Research Laboratory, Wokingham,
United Kingdom.

Michal V L and Allsop J E (2001). Development Of heavy-duty diesel portable, on-board

mass exhaust emissions monitoring system with NOx, CO2 and qualitative PM capabilities,
Clean Air Technologies International, Inc. 2001. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Noland R B, Washington Y, Ochiengm A Q, North R J and Polak J W (2004). The Vehicle

Emissions and Performance Monitoring System: Analysis of Tailpipe Vehicle Emissions and
performance Monitoring System: Analysis of tailpipe emissions and vehicle performance,
Transportation Planning and Technology Volume 27, Number 6, p 431 – 447, Routledge,
December 2004.

North R J, Hawley J G, Ochieng W Y and Brace C J (2004). On-board measurements of

exhaust emissions from a low-cost analyser. Presented at the Internal Combustion Engines
Performance and Emissions Conference for the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, December
2004.

Oestergaard K (2005). Personal communication with S Latham TRL Ltd.

Rowlands S C (2004). Development of on track chassis dynamometer drive cycles and

subsequent evaluation of Sensors Europe on-board emissions sampling system. Millbrook
report number MBK 03 / 0592. Millbrook, Bedford

TNO (2004). Evaluation on onboard emission measurement system: Horiba-OBS1X00 and

Sensors Inc.-SEMTECH. TNO Automotive. Report 97R04-039 DE. TNO Delft.

23
7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work described in this report was carried out in the Energy, Emissions and Air Pollution
Team of TRL Limited. It was jointly funded under the European Commission 5th framework
programme by DGTREN, contact number EVK4-CT-2002-00083 and the UK Department for
Transport, contract number PPAD 09/099/064, project reference UG575.

24
8 ABBREVIATIONS AND GLOSSARY

APA average positive acceleration

ARTEMIS ARTEMIS (Assessment and Reliability of Transport Emission Modelling and

Inventory Systems). European Commission 5th Framework project which will
develop a harmonised emission model for road, rail, air and ship transport to
provide consistent emission estimates at the national, international and
regional levels. http://www.trl.co.uk/artemis/introduction.htm

CADC Common ARTEMIS Driving Cycle

CO carbon monoxide

CO2 carbon dioxide

CNG compressed natural gas

CVS constant-volume sampler

COPERT COmputer Program to calculate Emissions from Road Transport

DGV Digitised Graz Method

EUDC Extra-Urban Driving Cycle

GDI gasoline direct-injection

GPS global positioning system

HBEFA Handbook of emission factors

HDV heavy-duty vehicle

LDV light-duty vehicle

LPG Liquified petroleum gas

NAEI National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (UK)

NEDC New European Driving Cycle

NOx oxides of nitrogen

NO2 nitrogen dioxide

OBD on-board diagnostics

OSCAR Optimised Expert System for Conducting Environmental Assessment of Urban

Road Traffic

PM particulate matter

PM10 Mass concentration of particles passing through a size-selective inlet designed

25
 to exclude particles greater than 10 µm aerodynamic diameter.

PM2.5 Mass concentration of particles passing through a size-selective inlet designed

to exclude particles greater than 2.5 µm aerodynamic diameter. These are
sometimes referred to as ‘fine’ particles.

RPA relative positive acceleration

THC total hydrocarbons

UDC Urban Driving Cycle

VOCs volatile organic compounds

26