TEKA. COMMISSION OF MOTORIZATION AND ENERGETICS IN AGRICULTURE – 2014, Vol. 14, No.

3, 17–24

Prediction of the Mileage Fuel Consumption of Passenger Car

in the Urban Driving Cycle
Wawrzyniec Gołębiewski, Tomasz Stoeck

Department of Automotive Vehicles Operation, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin

17 Piastów Ave., 70-310 Szczecin, Poland, tel.+48 91 449 40 45,e-mail: wawrzyniec.golebiewski@zut.edu.pl,
tstoeck@zut.edu.pl

Received July 18.2014; accepted July 25.2014

Summary: Driving cycles obtained when using chassis dy-

namometer (NEDC, ADAC Eco test) and under real-world
driving conditions (CUEDC-P) were initially discussed in the
paper. The research aimed at creating a simulation for predic-
tion of mileage fuel consumption based on engine operational
parameters, such as fuel consumption and effective power. They
were determined for vehicle linear velocities (engine rotational
speeds considering respective gearbox ratio) used in the UDC
(this test is a sub-cycle of the NEDC test). The next parameter
required for the simulation was fuel consumption in neutral gear
(designated using engine test bench) and power to overcome
resistance to motion. The whole algorithm for argumentation
allowed determining the instantaneous fuel consumption for
constant and variable velocities and, which is related to this, the
simulated mileage fuel consumption. Considering measurement
uncertainties, it was higher by 34.8 % to 46 % than the one given
by manufacturer and vehicle users.
Key words: mileage fuel consumption; instantaneous fuel con-
sumption; passenger car; driving cycles; ECE; UDC; EUDC;
NEDC; ADAC Eco test; CUEDC-P.  test and a single EUDC test [16].
INTRODUCTION
The problem of relationships between vehicle fuel con-
sumption under real-world driving conditions and the one
obtained as a result of experimental research had already
been undertaken at the beginning of the 1970s of the 20th
century. It was difficult to make an adequate prediction since
properties of the urban traffic of cars depended on a too large
number of factors (e.g. driver’s driving style, vehicle’s tech-
nical condition and its rated performance parameters, power
transmission system efficiency [8], resistance to motion
and fuel physicochemical properties [12]). Nevertheless,
when assuming certain simplifications, efforts were made
to accomplish this task. The European Driving Cycle, being
part of the ECE vehicle regulation, was the Urban Driving
Cycle [4, 13] (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1. Urban Driving Cycle (UDC) [13]
It is worth noticing that it includes engine operation in
neutral gear and vehicle movement both with constant and
variable velocities (variable accelerations or decelerations).
It is completely possible to be accomplished under chassis
dynamometer conditions in order to calculate the mileage
fuel consumption based on measurement of the emission of
toxic compounds [1,6,18] and is still being used. It is part
of the NEDC cycle that consists of fourfold repeated UDC
Hardly reliable representation of fuel consumption ac-
cording to the NEDC resulted in the development of a cer-
tain alternative in the form of the ADAC EcoTest cycle [1,
13]. It was designed in order to evaluate ecologically in an
accurate, reliable and objective manner the performance of
motor vehicles (testing of mileage fuel consumption using
chassis dynamometer and exhaust gas analyser based on
CO2 emission) and consisted of 3 tests [1, 13]:
– NEDC cold test (35% of total cycle) – an original is the
standard NEDC test on a cold engine with real vehicle
mass, instead of generally smaller test weight;
– NEDC hot test (35% of total cycle) – test conditions
similar to those in the NEDC cold test but a difference
consists in the testing of CO2 emission with warmed
up engine and air conditioning turned on onto the set
temperature of 293 K;
– ADAC motorway test (30% of total cycle) – this test is
designed for a motorway ride at a velocity of 130 km/h.
 cycle) – this test is designed for a Another solution, different from fuel
motorway ride at a velocity of 130 consumption testing using chassis
km/h. dynamometer, was to carry out the driving
ADAC EcoTest NEDC cold test cycle under real-world conditions. It was
allowed obtaining the CO2 emission in called the CUEDC-P (Composite Urban
18 2010 within the range higher WAWRZYNIEC
by 1% than GOŁĘBIEWSKI, Emission TOMASZ Driving STOECK Cycle for Petrol
that reported by the manufacturer, whereas Vehicles), it lasted for thirty minutes and
it ADAC
was lower by 20% in cold
relation consisted of four sub-cycles: Residential,
EcoTest NEDC test to the data
allowed obtaining the OBJECTIVE AND METHODS OF EXPERIMENTS
reported by users [1,13]. Arterial, Freeway and Congested. The
CO2 emission in 2010 within the range higher by 1% than
ADAC by EcoTest NEDC hot whereas
test showed adopted model assumed the determination
that reported the manufacturer, it was lower by The objective of this study was to make the prediction
the inCO
20% 2 content
relation to thein data
exhaust gas by
reported in users to 13]. of instantaneous
2010 [1, fuel consumption based on
of mileage fuel consumption for a passenger car equipped
beADACwithinEcoTest
the range higher by 4% that that theoretical formulas as well as on the
NEDC hot test showed the CO2 content with
driving a compression-ignition
cycle test mentioned above. engineVery
with the Common Rail
inreported
exhaust gas by inthe
2010 manufacturer,
to be within thewhereas it
range higher by 4% fuel supply system according
high reliability of the estimation of to the UDC (Urban Drive
was
that 17%
that lowerby
reported in the
relation to the data
manufacturer, givenit was 17%
whereas
by users [1,13]. instantaneous fuel consumption wasusing an engine test
Cycle) based on tests. They were made
lower in relation to the data given by users [1, 13]. bed. Experiments
demonstrated, which was werebarely
performed in conformity with the
different
Some authors [7,11] determined the
Some authors [7,11] determined the mileage fuel con- from the values measured in the real-world engine standard
research methods of the piston combustion
mileage fuel consumption based on the
sumption based on the emission of carbon dioxide from the cycle PN-ISO
CUEDC-P 15550[2].[15] and made according to the requirements
emission of carbon dioxide from the
following relationship: specified therein.
In the available literature, no
following relationship:
The next
determinations of aspect
mileage was to consumption
fuel create a simulation that include
CO2 , (1)
Q (1) according to the driving cycle tobased
determination of resistance motion onand calculation of
k CO2  10   F tests instantaneous
performed onfuel an consumption
engine test bed under specific motion con-
have
where: been ditions.
reported. Usually, they were vehicle
– mileage fuel consumption [dm3/100 km],
Qwhere: “mileages” obtained on the chassis
CO – carbon dioxide emission
Q - mileage fuel consumption [dm /100
2
in exhaust3 gas [g/km],dynamometer, their examples being the
kCO – coefficient of proportionality for total and complete NEDC test, ADAC COURSEorOF
EcoTest theTESTS
real-
km],
2
combustion (= 3.15), world driving cycle test, i.e. CUEDC-P.
r FCO 2 - density
– fuel carbon [kg/dm
dioxide3].emission in exhaust
Therefore, Thethe course of tests
author consisted
decided in theup
to take creation of the exter-
gas [g/km], nal characteristics
this problem based onobtained for FIAT
the standard Panda with Multijet 1.3
driving
k CO 2
- coefficient
Another solution, of proportionality
different from fuel for consumptioncycle 16V
test, JTD engineDriving
i.e. Urban (Fig. 2).Cycle.
It was fed with a full dose of ON
testing using chassis dynamometer,
total and complete combustion (= 3.15), was to carry out the EKODIESEL fuel with the cetane number 51.1. Ambient
driving cycle under real-world conditions. It was called the parameters during the test were as follows:
CUEDC-P (Composite Urban Emission Driving Cycle for – ambient temperature Ta = 294 K,
Petrol Vehicles), it lasted for thirty minutes and consisted of – ambient pressure pa = 98.5 kPa,
four sub-cycles: Residential, Arterial, Freeway and Congest- – relative humidity = 40%.
ed. The adopted model assumed the determination of instan- The measured engine torque and its effective power
taneous fuel consumption based on theoretical formulas as were corrected according to the relations comprised in the
well as on the driving cycle test mentioned above. Very high normative reference (PN-ISO 15550, [15]).
reliability of the estimation of instantaneous fuel consump- The points created for torque, effective power and fuel
tion was demonstrated, which was barely different from consumption formed characteristic curves as mean values of
the values measured in the real-world cycle CUEDC-P [2]. 4 samples. The procedure consisted in measurements when
In the available literature, no determinations of mileage determining rotational speeds upward and then downward
fuel consumption according to the driving cycle based on and was repeated twice. For each variable, a trend curve
tests performed on an engine test bed have been report- with a high value of the square of the coefficient of cor-
ed. Usually, they were vehicle “mileages” obtained on the relation (R2) was matched, which was evidence of a good
chassis dynamometer, their examples being the NEDC test, fitting of theoretical and real values. For further simula-
ADAC EcoTest or the real-world driving cycle test, i.e. tion, approximated equations of the trend curves for fuel
CUEDC-P. Therefore, the author decided to take up this consumption and engine effective power were determined.
problem based on the standard driving cycle test, i.e. Urban They were as follows (symbols and their descriptions as
Driving Cycle. under Fig. 2):
a) fuel consumption (R2 = 0.9976):
B = -9.6582*10-14n4 + 1.0324*10-9n3
- 4.0088*10-6n2 + 7.5074*10-3n – 3.842, (2)
b) engine effective power (R2 = 0.9937):
Pd = -4.13301*10-6n2+
0.033592345n-21.64131491, (3)

Determination of the resistance to motion and the power

Fig. 2. External characteristic of FIAT Multijet 1.3 JTD engine
where: Ttq – engine torque, Pd – engine effective power, B – fuel
consumption, n – engine rotational speed
required to overcome it as well as the dependence of fuel
consumption on
effective power for specific linear velocities required
the use of vehicle details and set motion conditions (Tab.1).
 dimensionless air where:
cx 0.3 -
resistance coefficient v - vehicle linear velocity [m/s],
P 0.9 - fill factor w- wheel angular velocity [1/min],
bk 1.578 m wheel track rk - wheel kinematic radius [m],
nw - wheel rotational speed [min-1],
PREDICTION H OF THE MILEAGE
1.540 m FUELheight
vehicle overall CONSUMPTION OF PASSENGER
n - engine rotational speed [min-1CAR 19],
F 2.190 m2 vehicle frontal area iG - gearbox ratio (selectable),
0 basic rolling resistance iFD - final drive ratio (constant).
Ta b l e 1 . FIAT Panda – basicfR details0.012
and vehicle - motion conditions
coefficient Total power transmission system ratio is as follows
variable value unit A 0.00005 where:
s2/m2
additional rolling [3,16]: After transformation, it was as follows:
resistance coefficient 60  v  iG  i FD
MV 1549 kg totaliGI vehicle mass- first gear ratio
n (5)
3.909 i 2=r i i . (6)
power transmission system effi- PT k G FD
η PPT 0.9 - iGII 2.158 - second gear ratio
T
ciency Total power transmission system ratio is as
iGIII 1.345 - third gear ratio
rk 0.270 m wheel kinematic radius Engine rotational
follows [3,16]:speeds and fuel consumption and ef-
iFD 3.438 - final drive ratio
dimensionless air resistance coef- fective power values were
iPT=icalculated
G iFD from Equations
(6) (5),
cx 0.3 -
ficient (2) and (3).
Basic assumptions referring to the selection
Engine rotational speeds and fuel
γP 0.9 - offill factorfor vehicle details are as follows
values
Ta b l e 2consumption
. Rotational andspeedseffective
(n), fuel power values (B) and
consumption
bk 1.578 m [3,16]:
wheel track were calculated from Equations (5), (2) and
 vehicle was loaded to its permitted effective power (P ) d
H 1.540 m vehicle overall height (3).
gross mass (M V), gear v v iPT n n B Pd
F 2.190 m vehicle
2
 power frontaltransmission
area system power Table 2. Rotational speeds (n), fuel
fR0 0.012 - basic rolling resistance coefficient km/h m/s (B) and
consumption - effectives power
-1
min(P ) g/s
-1 d
kW
efficiency value was adopted as for
additionala rolling
passenger resistance
car, coef- I 15
ge
4.17 13.439 33.01 1980 1.84 28.7
A 0.00005 s2/m2 v 8.89v 7.419 iPT n n 2332 B 2.10 Pd 34.2
 wheel kinematic radius resulted II
ficient 32
ar 38.87
-1 -1
iGI 3.909 - first gear from tyre size (tyre inflated to theIII
ratio 35 km/h9.72 m/s 4.624 - 26.50
s min1590g/s 1.49 kW 21.3
pressure being given by III 50I 1513.89 4.17 13.439
4.624 33.01
37.86 19802271 1.84 2.06
28.7 33.3
iGII 2.158 - second gear ratio
manufacturer) and wheel rim taking II 32 8.89 7.419 38.87 2332 2.10 34.2
iGIII 1.345 - third gear ratio III 35 9.72 4.624 26.50 1590 1.49 21.3
into consideration static loads
iFD 3.438 - final drive during ratio
motion, III 50 13.89 4.624 37.86 2271 2.06 33.3
 fill factor  P value was adopted as PREDICTION
PREDICTION OF MILEAGE
OF MILEAGE FUEL
FUEL
Basic assumptions referring forto a passenger
the selection car, of values CONSUMPTION CONSUMPTION AT CONSTANT AT CONSTANT VELOCITIES
for vehicle details are as follows  vehicle [3, 16]: frontal area was calculated VELOCITIES
based on the following relationship: In extrapolate
order to extrapolate the instantaneous
– vehicle was loaded to its permitted gross mass (MV), In order to the instantaneous fuel consump-
F=  P bk H, fuel consumption,
– power transmission system power efficiency value was tion, vehicle motion resistances vehicle(rolling resistancemotion
and air
 basic rolling resistance coefficient resistances (rolling resistance and air
adopted as for a passenger car, resistance) had to be determined.
resistance) had to be determined. The first The first one was deter-
fR0 value was adopted as for smooth
– wheel kinematic radius resulted from tyre size (tyre in- mined in one the following manner [3,16]:
was determined in the following
asphalt road pavement,
flated to the pressure being given by rolling
 additional manufacturer)
resistanceand manner [3,16]:
wheel rim taking into consideration coefficient static A valueloads
was during
adopted as FR  f R M V  9.81  fR0(1+Av2) M V  9.81 , (7)
motion, for most road pavements being (7)
– fill factor γ P value was adopted applied. as for a passenger car, where: where:
– vehicle frontal area wasBased calculatedon the basedexternal
on thecharacteristics,
follow- FR – rolling FR -resistance [N],
rolling resistance [N],
ing relationship: the values of fuel consumption and engine fR PREDICTION
fR – rolling resistance OF THE
coefficient,
- rolling resistance MILEAGE FUEL CONSUMPTION OF PASS
coefficient,
effective power were specified for the M - vehicle mass[kg], URBAN DRIVING CYCLE
F= γ P bk H, MV – vehicle V mass [kg],
PREDICTION OF THE MILEAGE FUEL CONSUMPTION OF PASSE
– basic rolling resistance coefficient fR0 value was adopted fR0 – basicfRrolling 0
- basic resistance coefficient,
rolling resistance URBAN DRIVING CYCLE
coefficient,
as for smooth asphalt road pavement, A – additionalA - rolling resistance coefficient
additional rolling resistance [s2/m2],
coefficient 
fR0[s-2/m basic
2
], rolling resistance coefficient,
– additional rolling resistance coefficient A value was v – vehicle A v- linear velocity [m/s]. B
WRZYNIEC GOŁĘBIEWSKI, adoptedTOMASZas for most STOECK
road pavements being applied. -additional
Air resistance vehicle was
rolling
linear
described
resistance
velocity by[m/s]. coefficient where:
the following equationB - volumetric
[s2Air
/m2], resistance was described by the v
Based on the external characteristics, the values of fuel [16]: v -following vehicle linear velocity where: [dm3/s],
equation [16]:[m/s]. Bv B- - mass volumetric
cWAWRZYNIEC consumption
details and vehicleGOŁĘBIEWSKI, vehicleand engine
velocity
TOMASZ effective
equal to 15, power
STOECK 32, 35 were and 50 specified for Air resistance was described by the2 3 fuel cons
[16]: c F v ,
m
itions following equation FA  c x Fp [dmdensity
/s], [g
the vehicle
km/hvelocity
used in equal
the UDC. to 15, 32, 35rotational
Engine and 50 km/h used d x (8) (8)  F - fuel
22 B m - mass fuel consum
speedsEngine
in the UDC. were calculated
rotationalfrom speeds thewerefollowing
calculated from v In Table 3 below
a – basicwhere:details and vehicle relationship vehicle for
velocity
vehicleequallinear
to 15, 32, 35 and 50
velocity FA  c x Fp d  c x F (8) Fneutral
- fuel gear
densitywas[g/dm
det
total vehicle mass
n conditions the following relationship
km/h used in for
the vehicle
UDC. linear
Engine velocity
rotational[3,16]: where: where: 2 In Table 3 below,
[3,16]:
power transmission speeds were2calculated FA – air resistance[N],
FA - air resistance[N], neutral Table
gear3.was
Fueldeter
cons
unit where: rk n w 2from  rk  the
n following where:
system efficiency relationship
v=wrk = for vehicle
= velocity (4) cx – air resistance
linear, (4) coefficient,
cx - air resistance coefficient, nTable 3. Fuel
Bm consum 
kg
wheel total vehicle
kinematic radiusmass 60 60iG i FD FAF - air resistance[N],
- vehicle frontal 2 NG
[3,16]: F – vehicle frontal area [m2],area [m ],
power transmission c - air resistance coefficient, 2 min -1
Bmg/s g/d
- dimensionless air where: where: 2rk n w 2  rk  n
xp
pd – dynamic d -pressure
dynamic [N/m pressure2
].3 [m[N/m
2 ]. nNG F
resistance system efficiency
coefficient v=velocity
wrk = = (4) F  -- vehicle
air frontal
density area ], 800 0.06 820
v - vehicle linear [m/s], 3 [kg/m ],
m wheel kinematicv –radius
vehicle linear velocity [m/s],60 60 i i r – air density
p - [kg/m
dynamic ],
pressure [N/m 2
]. min -1
g/s g/dm
fill factor w- wheel angular velocity [1/min], G FD d
v - vehicle and air3 (wind) relative velocity where: nNG– engine r
dimensionless ww- air wheel angular velocity [1/min],
where: v – vehicle
 - and air (wind)
air[m/s].
density [kg/mrelative
], velocity [m/s]. 800 gear. 0.06 820.1
- wheel track coefficient rk - wheel kinematic radius [m], where: nNG– engine rot
resistance rk - wheel kinematic
v - radius
vehicle linear [m],
nw - wheel rotational speed [min ],velocity -1[m/s], v - vehicle and air (wind)
Air density was determined from the relative velocity
[m/s].wasrelationship b) fuel efficiency ra
gear.
vehicle
- overall nw – wheel
fillheight
factor rotational
w- wheel
n - engine speed
angular
rotational [min
speed ], ],[1/min],
-1 -1
velocity
[min Air density
following determined [3]:from the following rela-
the following functi
mvehicle frontal wheel arean – iG engine
track rk - wheel
- gearbox ratiokinematic
rotational speedradius
(selectable), [min-1[m], ], -1 tionshipAir[3]: density was determined 0.46 pb
from the b) fuel efficiency rate
basic rolling resistance wheel
nw - drive
- final rotational speed [min ], following relationship  [3]:
- iFDgearbox
iGheight ratioratio (constant).
(selectable), the following function 
m coefficient
vehicle overall n - engine rotational speed [min-1], 0.46 T pb (9)
B
m2additional iFD – final
After drive ratio (constant).
transformation, it was as follows: where:   , (9)
vehicle frontal
rolling area iG - gearbox ratio (selectable), T (9) where: 
resistance
basiccoefficient
rolling resistance 60  v  i  i FD (constant).
iFD - final  - air density 2
[N s m ], -4
P
-
first gearcoefficient
ratio
n  driveitGratio
After transformation, was as follows: (5) where: where: BC v - volumetric
2  r p - barometric pressure 2 [1-4 mm Hg = where:
After transformation,
k it was as follows:  - air [N
b
density [N s m ], [mdm3
2 second
/m2
additional
gear ratio rolling r – air density
133.33 Pa],s2 m-4], Bconsumption
C v d- volumetric
resistance coefficient Total power transmission 60  v  i  i
system FD , ratio is as p - barometric pressure [1 mm Hg = PC - engine pow
third gear ratio n G
(5) (5) pb – barometric
bT - airpressure
temperature[1 mm [K].Hg = 133.33 Pa], consumption [mdm3/s
- first gear ratio follows [3,16]: 2rk 133.33 Pa],
final drive ratio T – air temperature
T When - air bringing[K].
temperature the [K].
air density to reference volumetric
d
PC - engine powe instantan
- second gear ratio iPT=iG iFD (6) [kW].
Total power transmission system ratio is as conditions (pressure pt = 100 kPa = 750 mm volumetric
- third gear ratio
ng to the selection When bringing the Tair= density
Hg, temperature 298 K) to
thereference
following In Tableinstantane
4, fuel
- are asfinal drive ratio Enginefollows [3,16]: speeds and fuel
rotational conditions (pressure p
r
= 100 kPa = 750 mm [kW].
determined, taking
ails follows value was obtained: t
consumption and effective power values (6)
iPT=iG iFD Hg, temperature Tr = 298 K) the following Indata
Table
from 4,
Tablefuel
3.
were calculated from Equations (5), (2) and value
0.46  pb 0.46  750 determined, taking in
referring
ed to the selection
to its permitted Engine rotational speeds and fuel
 was obtained:  1.16 [kg/m3] Table 4. Fuel ef
(3). data from Table 3.
le details are as follows
consumption and effective power values
0.46 Tpb 0.46 298
750
   1.16 [kg/m3] n TableB4. Fuel effic

 0.46 pb T (9)
 (13)
 BC v PCd
where: T (9)
 (13)
where: PCd
where: - air density [N s2 m-4],
BC v - volumetric instantaneous fuel
- barometric pressure where:
 - pairb density [N s2 m-4],[1 mm Hg = 3
B - consumption
volumetric[mdm /s],
instantaneous fuel
pb - 133.33
barometric Pa], pressure [1 mm Hg = Cv
d
20 T
133.33 Pa], - air temperature WAWRZYNIEC
[K]. GOŁĘBIEWSKI,
consumptionP C - engine
TOMASZ
[mdm 3 power
/s], STOECK corresponding to
T - When
air temperature
bringing [K]. the air density to reference PC
d
- volumetric
engine instantaneous
power fuel
corresponding consumption
to
[kW]. instantaneous fuel consumption
When conditions
bringing
Hg,
(pressure
the
temperature
air
T
pt = 100
density
= 298
to
K)
kPa = 750 mm volumetric
reference
When bringing the air density to reference conditions In Table
the following [kW].
PT = P4,R +fuel PA =efficiency
FR ⋅ v + Frate (
A ⋅ vwas )
= FR + FA ⋅ v , (14)
(pressureconditions (pressure 750ptmm = 100 kPa = 750 mm Tr = 298 determined, taking into consideration the
r
pt = value
100 kPa was =obtained: Hg, temperature
Hg, temperature Tr = 298 K) the following In Table 4, fuel efficiency rate was
K) the following value
0.46was  pb obtained:
0.46  750 where:
data from
determined, Tableinto
taking 3. consideration the
value was obtained:
   1.16 [kg/m ] data from
3
– Table
t

PT Table 3.otal 4. Fuel
power efficiency
requiredrate to(gear I)
overcome rolling resistance
0.46  pb T 0.46  750 298
   1.16 [kg/m3], (10) Table 4. and airefficiency
Fuel resistance rateby vehicle
(gear I) [kW],
T 298 n Bm F Bv BC V PCd 
(10) PR – power required to overcome rolling resistance by ve-
Thus,(10)
equation (8) took the following form: n B m 
hicle [kW],
F B B
kg/dv dm3C/ V mdmC3/
P d
 mdm
min-1 kg/s 3 kW 3
Thus, equation (8) took the following form: P – p
 ower m
required 3 s
to 3s
overcome air /kJ
resistance by vehicle
A kg/d dm / mdm / mdm
2 min-1 kg/s kW 3
F  0 .579 c Fv
Thus, equationA(8) took thex following form: , (11) (11) 1980 [kW], m 3
0.82s s
0.00 2.2387 /kJ 0.07
28.7 81
FAPrediction
 0.579c x Fv of2 the mileage (11) fuel 1980 FR – 0.00184 rolling 01 2239[kN],
0.82 resistance
0.00 2.2387
82
0.07
Prediction of the mileage
consumption
Prediction of wasthefuel consumption
determined
mileagebased fuelwas
on thedeter- 0.00184 FA – air resistance
01 2239 [kN], 82 28.7 81
value c) power required to overcome rolling
mined based on
consumption the ofvalue
was instantaneous
of instantaneous
determined fuel consumption.
based fuel
on theconsump- resistance v – vehicle linear velocity [m/s].
and air
tion. To value To
determine determine this
this value, knowing
of instantaneous value, knowing
fuel consumption. the value c) power
the value of fuel an example Inrequired to resistance
Table 5forbelow, overcome
the power
(determined
rolling
required
as
to overcome rolling
of fuel consumption in neutral gear the
resistance and air resistance (determined as velocity of 15 km/h)
To determine
consumption in neutral this
gearvalue, knowing
(Multijet 1.3 the
JTD value
engine), fuel resistance
[3,16]: and air resistance was calculated (resistance to
(Multijet 1.3 JTD engine), fuel gear
efficiency an example for the velocity of 15 km/h)
efficiencyofrate
fuel
and
rate 1.3
consumption
power
andJTD required
power
in toneutral
required overcome resistance
to overcome [3,16]: T motion
P  P was
 P determined
 F  v  based
F  v on
 F  F 
relationships  v (7) and (11)).
(Multijet engine), fuel efficiency R A R A R A
to vehicle motion (FIATtoPanda)
resistance vehicle wasmotionrequired.
(FIAT The process
Panda) PT  PR  PA  FR  v  FA  v  FR  FA   v
(14)
rate and power required to overcome
of calculating theseto
was
resistance functions
required.
vehicle The is presented
motion (FIATofbelow.
process calculating (14) Ta b l e 5 . Power required to overcome rolling resistance and
Panda) where:
For example, theseforfunctions
was required. theThe is presented
velocity
process of 15 ofkm/h, below. it is as follows: air resistance
calculating
where: PT - total power required to overcome
MILEAGE FUELa) these For
fuel consumption
CONSUMPTION example,
OF
functions PASSENGERfor the
inisneutral
presented gear velocity
CAR
below. INofTHE
a (constant 15 km/h,
value)it was v resistance
F PR air resistance
FA PAby FR+FA PR+PA
is as follows: P - rolling
total power Rrequired and to overcome
URBAN DRIVING CYCLE
For
determined example,
from the for following
the velocityrelationship
of 15 km/h, [2]: it T
m/s kN kW kN kW kN kW
a) fuel consumption in neutral gear  rolling resistance and air resistance by vehicle [kW],
is as follows:
nce coefficient, (constant value)
a) fuel consumption inBmneutral was determined gear from the vehicle [kW], 4.2 0.179 0.75 0.01 0.028 0.2 0.77
sistance coefficient following
(constant
 was Bv determined
value)relationship
 [2]: , (12)
from
(12)
the
F d) instantaneous fuel consumption fc when driving with
following relationship [2]:
y [m/s]. where: where: constant velocity (for v = 15 km/h) was obtained from
bed by the Bv - volumetric
Bv – volumetric fuel3 consumption fuel consumption
[dm3/s], the following relationship [2]:
[dm /s],
Bm – mass fuel consumption
Bm - mass fuel consumption
[g/s], [g/s],
v 2 f c = α + β ⋅ PT = 0.073 + 0.078 ⋅ 0.7 = 0.133 [mdm3/s], (15)
cx F (8)rF – fueldensity [g/dm3].
F - fuel density [g/dm ].
3

2 In Table 3 below,
In Table fuel consumption
3 below, fuel consumption in neutral in gear was
determined.
neutral gear was determined. e) mileage fuel consumption Q (v = 15 km/h = 4.2 m/s):
Table 3. Fuel consumption in neutral gear f c 0.134
cient,
Ta b l e 3 . Fuel consumption in neutral gear Q= = = 0.0319 [mdm3/m], (16)
nNG Bm F Bv   Bv v 4.2
[m2], nNG Bm r Bv α = Bv
[N/m2]. min-1 g/s g/dm3 3 F dm3/s mdm3/s After changing the units from [mdm3/m] to [dm3/100km],
min-1 g/s g/dm dm3/s mdm3/s
800 0.06 820.1 0.00007 0.0731 the mileage fuel consumption for the constant velocity of 15
d) relative velocity800 0.06
where: nNG– engine820.1 in neutral0.0731
0.00007
rotational speed km/h amounted to 3.2 [dm3/100 km].
gear.
where:
rmined from the b) fuelrotational rate  inwas
efficiencyspeed determined
nNG – engine neutral gear. by
]:
the following function [2]: PREDICTION OF MILEAGE FUEL
46 pb BC vdetermined by the following
b) fuel efficiency rateβ was (13)
CONSUMPTION AT VARIABLE VELOCITIES
T (9) function [2]: PCd
where: The author of this paper has found out that determination
[N s2 m-4], BC v
BC v - volumetric , (13)
β = instantaneous fuel of the simulated mileage fuel consumption both for constant
ure [1 mm Hg = P d
consumption [mdm /s], 3 C velocities (similarly as in section 4) and variable ones, taking
]. where: P d - engine power corresponding to into consideration vehicle inertia resistance, was possible.
C
BC v – volumetric
volumetric instantaneous
instantaneous fuel
fuel consumption
consumption [mdm /s],
3
Instantaneous fuel consumption at variable velocities
density to reference d
100 kPa = 750 mm C
P – engine
[kW]. power corresponding to volumetric instanta- 15, 32, 35 and 50 km/h was defined in a similar manner as
8 K) the following neous fuel consumption
In Table [kW]. rate was
4, fuel efficiency in the case of predicting the mileage fuel consumption at
determined,
In Table taking intorate
4, fuel efficiency consideration the
was determined, taking constant velocities, taking into account the value of vehi-
into data from Table
consideration the 3. from Table 3.
data cle accelerations and, which is related to it, vehicle inertia
750
 1.16 [kg/m3] Table 4. Fuel efficiency rate (gear I)
resistance. At the time when vehicle decelerated (negative
8
Ta b l e 4n . FuelBefficiency
 rateB(gearBI) PCd  acceleration value – delay), engine braking (instantaneous
m F v CV
fuel consumption equal to zero) and engine running time
n rF kg/d Bdm
B 3 BC3/V PCdmdm β
min kg/s -1 m
3
v / mdm
kW 3
in neutral gear (after pressing the clutch pedal) were taken
he following form: min kg/s
-1 m
kg/dm dm /s
3 3 s s
mdm 3
/s kW /kJmdm3/kJ into consideration.
2
(11)1980 1980
0.00184 0.82010.82
0.002239
0.00 2.238782
2.2387 28.70.070.0781 Instantaneous fuel consumption at variable velocity (for
e mileage fuel 0.00184 01 2239 82 28.7 81
example for v = 15 km/h = 4.2 m/s and a = 1.04 m/s2) was
mined based on thec) power required to overcome rolling resistance and air calculated in the following manner [2]:
fuel consumption. c) power required to overcome rolling
resistance (determined
resistance as an example
and air resistance for theasvelocity of
(determined
knowing the value
in neutral gear 15 km/h)
an [3,16]:
example for the velocity of 15 km/h) f c = α + β ⋅ ( PT + PI ) + β ⋅ PI , (17)
ne), fuel efficiency [3,16]:
red to overcome PT  PR  PA  FR  v  FA  v  FR  FA   v
otion (FIAT Panda) (14)
cess of calculating
where:
ted below.
ocity of 15 km/h, it PT - total power required to overcome
 PREDICTION OF MILEAGE FUEL
17
MV  a  v
CONSUMPTION AT VARIABLE PI gear
 change (18) 2 135
18 1000
speeding up 35 50 8 143 0.52
VELOCITIES
where:
The author of this paper has found out 19 constant velocity 50 50 12 155
PI - power required to overcome inertia
that determination of the simulated mileage 20
resistance braking [kW], 50 35 8 163 -0.52
fuel consumption both for constant 21
PREDICTION OF THE MILEAGE FUEL 4) CONSUMPTION MV – OF vehicle
constant mass = 1520 [kg],
velocity
PASSENGER CAR 21 35 35 13 176
velocities (similarly as in section and
22 a – vehicle gear acceleration [m/s2],
change 2 178
variable ones, taking into consideration
23 v – vehicle linear velocity [m/s].32
braking 10 7 185 -0.86
vehicle inertia resistance, was possible.
where: For forexample for FIAT Panda, it was (a=1.04
as
Instantaneous fuel consumption For at 24 example FIAT
braking,
Panda,
clutch
it was
disengaged
2
as follows
10 0 3 188 -0.92
f c – instantaneous fuel consumption [mdm3/s], follows (a=1.04 m/s): m/s , v= 15 km/h= 4.2
15, 32, 35 and 50 m/s
km/h, v=2515 km/h= 4.2neutral
2
variable velocities gear 7 195
m/s):
α – fuel consumption in neutral gear [mdm
was defined 3
/s], manner as in the
in a similar
case3/kJ],
of predicting the mileage fuel
1520  1.04  4.2
β – fuel efficiency rate [mdm where:
PvI   6.59[kW ] . (19)
i – initial 1000
velocity, vf – final velocity, t – phase length, tsum – total time o
consumption
PT – power required to overcome at resistance
rolling constant velocities,
and air taking vehicle acceleration, fc – instantaneous fuel consumption (19)
resistance by vehicle into
[kW],account the value of vehicle motion phase. This
PI – power required to overcome inertia resistance by ve- The The
value value
of function (18) allowed
of function (18) determining
allowed the calculation
in- of a
hicle [kW]. determining
stantaneous the
fuel consumption instantaneous
according to formula fuel instantaneous fuel con
(17):
Fuel consumption in neutral gear and fuel efficiency rate consumption according to formula (17): account all phases).
f      ( P  P )    P  Total simulate
were determined based on the above-presented relationships c T I I
consumption was d
in section prediction of mileage fuel consumption at constant 0.073  0.078  (0.77  6.59)  0.078  6.59 (20) following relationship
velocities a and b, while the power required to overcome
rolling resistance and air resistance by vehicle was deter-
 1.162 [mdm3/s].
Q
 ( f c  t ) 77.

[mdm3/s] (20)
l 10
mined based on Equation (14). VariableVariable
instantaneousinstantaneous
fuel consumptionfuel for variable
The power required to overcome inertia resistance was velocities consumption
15, 32, 35 and for variable
50 km/hvelocities
at specific15, 32, acceler-
vehicle where:
determined from relationship [2]: 35 and 50 km/h at specific
ations was determined in a similar manner. In Table 6 above, vehicle Q - mileage fuel c
accelerations was determined in a similar [mdm3/m],
a simulated instantaneous fuel consumption
manner. In Table 6 above, a simulated
in the UDC was
l - distance “cove
M ⋅a⋅v
PI = V , (18) calculated for respective
instantaneous fuelvehicle
consumptionmotion in phase.
the UDC This was =the1017 [m].
1000 basis forwascalculation of aggregate simulated instantaneous
calculated for respective vehicle
where: fuel consumption (taking into account all phases).
PI – power required to overcome inertia resistance [kW], Total simulated mileage fuel consumption was deter-
MV – vehicle mass = 1520 [kg], mined from the following relationship:
a – vehicle acceleration [m/s2],
v – vehicle linear velocity [m/s]. Q=
∑(f c ⋅ t)
=
7 .682
= 0.0764 , (21)
l 1017
Ta b l e 6 . Simulated instantaneous fuel consumption according to the UDC [13]
Phase
Action vi vf t tsum a fc fc t
No.
km/h km/h s s m/s2 mdm3/s mdm3
1 neutral gear 11 11 0.073 0.805
2 speeding up 0 15 4 15 1.04 1.162 4.649
3 constant velocity 15 15 9 23 0.134 1.202
4 braking 15 10 2 25 -0.69 0.000 0.000
5 braking, clutch disengaged 10 0 3 28 -0.92 0.073 0.219
6 neutral gear 21 49 0.073 1.536
7 speeding up 0 15 5 54 0.83 0.955 4.773
8 gear change 2 56 0.073 0.146
9 speeding up 15 32 5 61 0.94 2.114 10.572
10 constant velocity 32 32 24 85 0.213 5.105
11 braking 32 10 8 93 -0.75 0.000 0.000
12 braking, clutch disengaged 10 0 3 96 -0.92 0.073 0.219
13 neutral gear 21 117 0.073 1.536
14 speeding up 0 15 5 122 0.83 1.003 5.017
15 gear change 2 124 0.073 0.146
16 speeding up 15 35 9 133 0.62 1.817 16.349
17 gear change 2 135 0.073 0.146
18 speeding up 35 50 8 143 0.52 2.046 16.371
19 constant velocity 50 50 12 155 0.394 4.732
20 braking 50 35 8 163 -0.52 0.000 0.000
21 constant velocity 35 35 13 176 0.252 3.279
22 gear change 2 178 0.073 0.146
23 braking 32 10 7 185 -0.86 0.000 0.000
24 braking, clutch disengaged 10 0 3 188 -0.92 0.073 0.219
25 neutral gear 7 195 0.073 0.512
Total 77.682

where:
vi – initial velocity, vf – final velocity, t – phase length, tsum – total time of respective phases, a – vehicle acceleration,
fc – instantaneous fuel consumption
22 WAWRZYNIEC GOŁĘBIEWSKI, TOMASZ STOECK
where:
Q–m  ileage fuel consumption age fuel consumption was equal to 7.28 dm3/100 km (high-
[mdm3/m],
l – distance “covered“ during the cycle = 1017. [m].
For FIAT Panda, total simulated mileage fuel consump-
tion after changing the units from [mdm3/m] to [dm3/100km]
amounted to 7.64 [dm3/100km] and was higher by 41.45
% than real-world mileage fuel consumption (analysis of
measurement uncertainties see section 7).
Real-world mileage fuel consumption under deter-
mination was based on the type-approval tests accord-
ing to the guidelines of European Commission Directive
1999/100/EC amounted to 5.4 dm3/100 km in the urban
driving cycle [4, 5, 19]. Opinions of the users of vehicles
equipped with Multijet 1.3 JTD engine report the same
average fuel consumption under urban traffic conditions
[14, 17].
ANALYSIS OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTIES
Table 7 (next page) shows the values of measurement
uncertainties (A type standard uncertainty, B type standard
uncertainty, expanded standard measurement uncertainty)
for the values of fuel consumption obtained in the external
characteristics (Fig. 2). They were calculated based on the
relationships described in the Guide to the Expression of
Uncertainty in Measurement [9]. Expanded standard meas-
urement uncertainties for engine effective power (external
characteristics in Fig. 2) were calculated in a similar manner.
Table 8 presents the percentage deviations for the observed
values. The values of measurement uncertainties for fuel
consumption and effective power for the engine rotational
speed obtained by approximations used in the UDC are
presented below (Tab. 9). Owing to the fact that the values
of fuel consumption and engine effective power for the UDC
rotational speeds were determined based on the trend curve
bit and not measurements, the author of this paper found out
that the maximum measurement deviation resulting from
two measurement deviations of adjacent rotational speeds
had to be adopted for each value. For example, for the rota-
tional speed of 1980 min-1, adjacent speeds were 1900 and
2000 min-1 with the value of deviations being respectively
1.6 and 1.1 % for fuel consumption and 1.1 and 0.7 % for
effective power. Then, a deviation of 1.6% was chosen for
fuel consumption and 1.1% for effective power. This was
reflected in the ranges of measurement uncertainties for fuel
consumption equal to 1.84 ± 0,03 g/s and engine effective
power equal to 28.7 ± 0.4 kW.
When assuming the lower value of measurement, mile-
er by 34.8 % than real-world mileage fuel consumption),
whereas for the upper value of measurement the mileage
fuel consumption amounted to 7.88 dm3/100 km (higher by
46 % than real-world mileage fuel consumption).
CONCLUSIONS
The performed extrapolation of mileage fuel consump-
tion allowed for the following conclusions:
a) mileage fuel consumption determined by simulation
according to the reported scheme ranges from 7.28 to
7.88 dm3/100 km (value given be vehicle’s manufactures
is to 5.4 dm3/100 km);
b) the method included calculation of fuel consumption
for the permitted gross vehicle mass; in the chassis
dynamometer test, this weight could be lower, hence
the lower value of mileage fuel consumption given by
manufacturer;
c) the real-world mileage fuel consumption is affected
by a great deal of factors not included in this paper or
simplified (e.g. variable fuel density, driving conditions
– external pressure and temperature, rolling resistance
coefficient, tyre inflation pressure, elevations, degree of
engine warming up, power transmission system efficiency
resulting from changes in the viscosity of gear oils, etc.);
d) fuel consumption according to the type-approval tests
carried out when using chassis dynamometer is also
loaded by its own error (resulting for instance from in-
accuracies of the measuring instruments for emissions
of toxic compounds), not given by manufacturer;
e) the UDC is not the best cycle that reflects the simulated
mileage fuel consumption in the urban driving cycle for
passenger cars being equipped with a compression-igni-
tion engine with the Common Rail fuel supply system;
f) inconsistency of the cycle with the method being assumed
results, among other, from high values of accelerations
that increase the instantaneous fuel consumption even
nine-fold (for example for FIAT Panda: constant v = 15
km/h, constant fc = 0.134, variable v = 15 km/h, a = 1.04
m/s2, fc = 1.162);
g) the arguments being mentioned allow treating the pre-
diction as an initial one and moving in this research
direction in order to possibly modify this method and
apply another test than the UDC (or apply its modified
version) that will allow reflecting the real-world mileage
fuel consumption in the best manner.
 PREDICTION OF THE MILEAGE FUEL CONSUMPTION OF PASSENGER CAR 23

Ta b l e 7 . Values of measurement uncertainties for particular Ta b l e 8 . Deviations for fuel consumption and engine effec-
engine rotational speeds tive power

n B uA(B) uB(B) U(B) B+-U(B) (U(B)/B) (U(Pd)/Pd)

n B+- U(B) Pd+-U(Pd)
*100 % *100 %
min-1 g/s g/s g/s g/s g/s min-1 g/s % kW %
1000 0.59 0.006 0.0163 0.59 ± 0.02 1000 0.59 ± 0.02 3.3 7.5 ± 0.2 2.7
1500 1.39 0.007 0.0183 1.39 ± 0.02 1500 1.39 ± 0.02 1.4 19.5 ± 0.3 1.5
1700 1.65 0.016 0.0337 1.65 ± 0.04 1700 1.65 ± 0.04 2.4 24.9 ± 0.3 1.2
1900 1.78 0.009 0.0208 1.78 ± 0.03 1900 1.78 ± 0.03 1.6 27.9 ± 0.3 1.1
2000 1.85 0.005 0.0153 1.85 ± 0.02 2000 1.85 ± 0.02 1.1 29.0 ± 0.2 0.7
2200 2.01 0.003 0.0129 2.01 ± 0.02 2200 2.01 ± 0.02 1.1 31.7 ± 0.2 0.7
0.006
2400 2.08 0.046 0.0922 2.08 ± 0.10 2400 2.08 ± 0.10 4.8 34.1 ± 0.2 0.6

2500 2.20 0.007 0.0183 2.20 ± 0.02 2500 2.20 ± 0.02 1.0 35.2 ± 0.2 0.6

3000 2.75 0.009 0.0208 2.75 ± 0.03 3000 2.75 ± 0.03 1.1 42.3 ± 0.3 0.7

3500 3.08 0.012 0.0271 3.08 ± 0.03 3500 3.08 ± 0.03 1.0 45.6 ± 0.2 0.4

4000 3.38 0.004 0.0141 3.38 ± 0.02 4000 3.38 ± 0.02 0.6 48.3 ± 0.2 0.4

4500 3.25 0.010 0.0224 3.25 ± 0.03

4500 3.25 ± 0.03 1.0 44.7 ± 0.3 0.7

where:
B – engine fuel consumption (mean value of 4 measure-
ments), uA – A type standard uncertainty, uB – B type
standard uncertainty, U – expanded standard measurement
uncertainty

Ta b l e 9 . Values of measurement uncertainties

n n1 n2 d1 d2 d=max(d1,d2) B U(B)=Bd B-U(B) B+U(B)
[min-1] [min-1] [min-1] [%] [%] [%] [g/s] [g/s] [g/s] [g/s]
800 1000 1000 3.3 3.3 3.3 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.07
1980 1900 2000 1.6 1.1 1.6 1.84 0.03 1.81 1.87
2332 2200 2400 1.1 4.8 4.8 2.10 0.10 2.00 2.20
1590 1500 1700 1.4 2.4 2.4 1.49 0.04 1.45 1.53
2271 2200 2400 1.1 4.8 4.8 2.06 0.10 1.96 2.16
n n1 n2 d1 d2 d=max(d1,d2) Pd U(Pd)=Pdd Pd-U(Pd) Pd+U(Pd)
[min ] -1
[min ] -1
[min ] -1
[%] [%] [%] [kW] [kW] [kW] [kW]
1980 1900 2000 1.1 0.7 1.1 28.7 0.4 28.3 31.1
2332 2200 2400 0.7 0.6 0.7 34.2 0.3 33.9 34.5
1590 1500 1700 1.5 1.2 1.5 21.3 0.4 20.9 21.7
2271 2200 2400 0.7 0.6 0.7 33.3 0.3 33.0 33.6
where:
n1 – adjacent lower engine rotational speed for which measurements were made, n2 – adjacent higher engine rotational
speed for which measurements were made, d1 – measurement deviation for speed n1, d2 – measurement deviation for speed
n2, d – maximum deviation selected from among d1 and d2.
24 WAWRZYNIEC GOŁĘBIEWSKI, TOMASZ STOECK
REFERENCES
 1. ADAC, Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil Club,
2009: EcoTest – testing and assessment protocol – re-
lease 2.1.
 2. Akcelik, R., Smit, R. and Besley, M., 2012: Calibrating
fuel consumption and emission models for modern ve-
hicles. IPENZ Transportation Group Conference. March
2012. Rotorua, New Zealand.
 3. Dębicki, M, 1976: The theory of motor car. The theory
of drive, WNT, Poland.
 4. EU, 2009: Regulation (EC) No. 443/2009 – Setting
emission performance standards for new passenger cars
as part of the Community’s integrated approach to reduce
CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles. Brussels.
 5. European Commission Directive 1999/100/EC of 15
December 1999 adapting to technical progress Council
Directive 80/1268/EEC relating to the carbon dioxide
emissions and the fuel consumption of motor vehicles.
 6. European Environmental Agency, 2011: Monitoring
the CO2 emissions from new passenger cars in the EU:
summary of data for 2010, Copenhagen Denmark.
 7. Gao, Y. and Checkel, M.D., 2007: Experimental meas-
urement of on-road CO2 emission and fuel consumption
functions. SAE World Congress & Exhibition, Session,
Life Cycle Analysis/Energy or Emissions Modelling,
SAE, USA.
 8. Gołębiewski W., Stoeck T., 2012: Effect of high – speed
traction gearbox ratio on vehicle fuel consumption.
TEKA Commision of Motorization and Energetics in
Agriculture.. Vol. 12, No 1. Polish Academy of Scienc-
es Branch in Lublin. The Volodymyr Dahl and East
– Ukrainian National University in Lugansk. Lublin–
Lugansk.
 9. ISO, 1995: Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in
Measurement. Switzerland.
10. JRC, 2011: Parameterisation of fuel consumption and
CO2 emissions of passenger cars and light commercial
vehicles for modelling purposes. In G. Mellios, S. Haus-
berger, M. Keller, C. Samaras, L. Ntziachristos, P. Dila-
ra & G. Fontaras (Eds.), JRC Scientific and Technical
Reports. Ispra: European Commission Joint Research
Centre (JRC) Institute for Energy.
11. Kropiwnicki, J., 2010: Evaluation of the reference fuel
consumption and CO2 emission of vehicle with using of
the map of operating conditions for selected agglomer-
ation’, Journal of KONES Powertrain and Transport,
Vol. 17, No.3, 239-246.
12. Lisowski, M., 2008: An analysis of fuel consumption by
a lorry with the compression ignition dynamic charged
engine. TEKA Commission of Motorization and En-
ergetics in Agriculture. Polish Academy of Sciences
Branch in Lublin, Vol. VIIIA, 118-125.
13. Mock, P., German, J., Bandivadekar, A. and Rie-
mersma, I., 2012: Discrepancies between type-approval
and “real-world” fuel-consumption and CO2 values. The
International Council of Clean Transportation, Washing-
ton – Berlin – San Francisco.
14. Moje auto [online] http.:// www.testy.mojeauto.pl/spala-
nie (Accessed 11 April 2013)
15. PN-ISO 15550 standard, 2009: Combustion piston
engines, Determination and method of engine power
measurement, General requirements, PKN, Poland.
16. Prochowski, L., 2007: The mechanics of motion, WKL,
Poland.
17. Spritmonitor [online] http.:// www.spritmonitor.de (Ac-
cessed 11 April 2013)
18. TÜV Nord Mobilität by the order of the German Fed-
eral Environmental Agency, 2010: Future development
of the EU directive for measuring the CO2 emissions of
passenger cars – investigation of the influence of different
parameters and the improvement of measurement accuracy.
19. Zembowicz, J., 2005: FIAT Panda, WKL, Poland.
PROGNOZOWANIE PRZEBIEGOWEGO
ZUŻYCIA PALIWA SAMOCHODU OSOBOWEGO
W CYKLU MIEJSKIM
S t re s z c z e n i e . W artykule wstępnie omówiono cykle jazdy
uzyskiwane przy wykorzystaniu hamowni podwoziowej (NEDC,
ADAC EcoTest) oraz w warunkach rzeczywistych (CUEDC-P).
Celem publikacji było stworzenie symulacji prognozującej prze-
biegowe zużycie paliwa na podstawie parametrów operacyjnych
silnika takich jak: zużycie paliwa oraz moc użyteczna. Wartości
tych wielkości zostały wyliczone przy użyciu równań krzywych
trendu dobranych do punktów pomiarowych charakterystyki ze-
wnętrznej silnika. Zostały wyznaczone dla prędkości liniowych
pojazdu (prędkości obrotowych silnika uwzględniając określone
przełożenia skrzyni biegów) wykorzystywanych w cyklu UDC
(test ten jest podcyklem testu NEDC). Pozwoliło to na uzyskanie
wskaźnika efektywności paliwa dla prędkości 15,32,35, i 50
km/h. Kolejnym parametrem niezbędnym do symulacji było
zużycie paliwa na biegu jałowym (wyznaczone przy użyciu ha-
mowni silnikowej) oraz moc potrzebna na pokonanie oporów
ruchu. Opory toczenia i powietrza sprecyzowano relacjami wy-
korzystując dane pojazdu oraz warunki ruchu. Cały algorytm
rozumowania pozwolił na wyznaczenie chwilowego zużycia pa-
liwa dla stałych i zmiennych prędkości, a co jest z tym związane,
symulacyjnego przebiegowego zużycia paliwa. Uwzględniając
niepewności pomiarowe było one od 34,8 % do 46 % wyższe niż
to podane przez producenta i użytkowników pojazdu.
S ł o w a k l u c z o w e : przebiegowe zużycie paliwa; chwilowe
zużycie paliwa; samochód osobowy; cykle jezdne; ECE; UDC;
EUDC; NEDC; ADAC Eco test; CUEDC-P.