skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Fuel Consumption Sensitivity of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles to Driving Style

Abstract

Aggressive driving is a very important topic for many reasons, one of which is higher energy used per unit distance traveled, potentially accompanied by an elevated production of greenhouse gases and other pollutants. Examining a large data set of self-reported fuel economy (FE) values revealed that the dispersion of FE values is quite large and is larger for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) than for conventional gasoline vehicles. This occurred despite the fact that the city and highway FE ratings for HEVs are generally much closer in value than for conventional gasoline vehicles. A study was undertaken to better understand this and better quantify the effects of aggressive driving, including reviewing past aggressive driving studies, developing and exercising a new vehicle energy model, and conducting a related experimental investigation. The vehicle energy model focused on the limitations of regenerative braking in combination with varying levels of driving-style aggressiveness to show that this could account for greater FE variation in an HEV compared to a similar conventional vehicle. A closely matched pair of gasoline-fueled sedans, one an HEV and the other having a conventional powertrain, was chosen for both modeling and chassis dynamometer experimental comparisons. Results indicate that the regenerative braking limitationsmore » could be a main contributor to the greater HEV FE variation under the range of drive cycles considered. Finally, the complete body of results gives insight into the range of fuel use penalties that results from aggressive driving and why the variation can be larger on a percent basis for an HEV compared to a similar conventional vehicle, while the absolute fuel use penalty for aggressive driving is generally larger for conventional vehicles than HEVs.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [1];  [1]
  1. Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Vehicle Technologies Office (EE-3V)
OSTI Identifier:
1376462
Grant/Contract Number:
AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
SAE International Journal of Fuels and Lubricants (Online)
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: SAE International Journal of Fuels and Lubricants (Online); Journal Volume: 10; Journal Issue: 3; Journal ID: ISSN 1946-3960
Publisher:
SAE International
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS; automotive; regenerative braking; fuel economy; vehicle drivers; hybrid electric vehicles

Citation Formats

Thomas, John, Huff, Shean, West, Brian, and Chambon, Paul. Fuel Consumption Sensitivity of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles to Driving Style. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.4271/2017-01-9379.
Thomas, John, Huff, Shean, West, Brian, & Chambon, Paul. Fuel Consumption Sensitivity of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles to Driving Style. United States. doi:10.4271/2017-01-9379.
Thomas, John, Huff, Shean, West, Brian, and Chambon, Paul. 2017. "Fuel Consumption Sensitivity of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles to Driving Style". United States. doi:10.4271/2017-01-9379.
@article{osti_1376462,
title = {Fuel Consumption Sensitivity of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles to Driving Style},
author = {Thomas, John and Huff, Shean and West, Brian and Chambon, Paul},
abstractNote = {Aggressive driving is a very important topic for many reasons, one of which is higher energy used per unit distance traveled, potentially accompanied by an elevated production of greenhouse gases and other pollutants. Examining a large data set of self-reported fuel economy (FE) values revealed that the dispersion of FE values is quite large and is larger for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) than for conventional gasoline vehicles. This occurred despite the fact that the city and highway FE ratings for HEVs are generally much closer in value than for conventional gasoline vehicles. A study was undertaken to better understand this and better quantify the effects of aggressive driving, including reviewing past aggressive driving studies, developing and exercising a new vehicle energy model, and conducting a related experimental investigation. The vehicle energy model focused on the limitations of regenerative braking in combination with varying levels of driving-style aggressiveness to show that this could account for greater FE variation in an HEV compared to a similar conventional vehicle. A closely matched pair of gasoline-fueled sedans, one an HEV and the other having a conventional powertrain, was chosen for both modeling and chassis dynamometer experimental comparisons. Results indicate that the regenerative braking limitations could be a main contributor to the greater HEV FE variation under the range of drive cycles considered. Finally, the complete body of results gives insight into the range of fuel use penalties that results from aggressive driving and why the variation can be larger on a percent basis for an HEV compared to a similar conventional vehicle, while the absolute fuel use penalty for aggressive driving is generally larger for conventional vehicles than HEVs.},
doi = {10.4271/2017-01-9379},
journal = {SAE International Journal of Fuels and Lubricants (Online)},
number = 3,
volume = 10,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 8
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
This content will become publicly available on August 11, 2018
Publisher's Version of Record

Save / Share:
  • No abstract prepared.
  • Abstract not provided.
  • The study investigated the impact of ethanol blends on criteria emissions (THC, NMHC, CO, NOx), greenhouse gas (CO2), and a suite of unregulated pollutants in a fleet of gasoline-powered light-duty vehicles. The vehicles ranged in model year from 1984 to 2007 and included one Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV). Emission and fuel consumption measurements were performed in duplicate or triplicate over the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) driving cycle using a chassis dynamometer for four fuels in each of seven vehicles. The test fuels included a CARB phase 2 certification fuel with 11% MTBE content, a CARB phase 3 certification fuel withmore » a 5.7% ethanol content, and E10, E20, E50, and E85 fuels. In most cases, THC and NMHC emissions were lower with the ethanol blends, while the use of E85 resulted in increases of THC and NMHC for the FFV. CO emissions were lower with ethanol blends for all vehicles and significantly decreased for earlier model vehicles. Results for NOx emissions were mixed, with some older vehicles showing increases with increasing ethanol level, while other vehicles showed either no impact or a slight, but not statistically significant, decrease. CO2 emissions did not show any significant trends. Fuel economy showed decreasing trends with increasing ethanol content in later model vehicles. There was also a consistent trend of increasing acetaldehyde emissions with increasing ethanol level, but other carbonyls did not show strong trends. The use of E85 resulted in significantly higher formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions than the specification fuels or other ethanol blends. BTEX and 1,3-butadiene emissions were lower with ethanol blends compared to the CARB 2 fuel, and were almost undetectable from the E85 fuel. The largest contribution to total carbonyls and other toxics was during the cold-start phase of FTP.« less
  • This paper presents details and results of hybrid and plug-in hybrid electric passenger vehicle (HEV and PHEV) simulations that account for the interaction of thermal transients from drive cycle demands and engine start/stop events with aftertreatment devices and their associated fuel penalties. The simulations were conducted using the Powertrain Systems Analysis Toolkit (PSAT) software developed by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) combined with aftertreatment component models developed at Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL). A three-way catalyst model is used in simulations of gasoline powered vehicles while a lean NOx trap model in used to simulated NOx reduction in diesel powered vehicles.more » Both cases also use a previously reported methodology for simulating the temperature and species transients associated with the intermittent engine operation and typical drive cycle transients which are a significant departure from the usual experimental steady-state engine-map based approach adopted often in vehicle system simulations. Comparative simulations indicate a higher efficiency for diesel powered vehicles but the advantage is lowered by about a third (for both HEVs and PHEVs) when the fuel penalty associated with operating a lean NOx trap is included and may be reduced even more when fuel penalty associated with a particulate filter is included in diesel vehicle simulations. Through these preliminary studies, it is clearly demonstrated how accurate engine and exhaust systems models that can account for highly intermittent and transient engine operation in hybrid vehicles can be used to account for impact of emissions in comparative vehicle systems studies. Future plans with models for other devices such as particulate filters, diesel oxidation and selective reduction catalysts are also discussed.« less