1. Lab Process Internal Combustion Engines
Progress Report
DTP Subgroup
Lab Process Internal Combustion Engines
(LabProcICE)
Bern,

2. Overview State of the working progress Issues on DTP level
Input for validation 2
4) Work in progress items / proposals / open issues
5) Next steps

3. 1.1) Meetings since DTP 8 January 2012
several dates Draft working team meetings
Telephone Conference minutes: LabProcICE-114
13. – Brussels workshop minutes: LabProcICE-125

4. 1.2) LabProcICE / DTP roadmap
slide 4

5. Open roadmap issues affecting LabProcICE
Duration of validation 2 until October 2012 (6 months)?
Evaluation of results and reporting to DTP 11 in Sept 2012?
Evaluation of road load data applying gtr until Sep/Oct (responsibility?)
Beginning of confirmation tests (when?)
Decision of issues on DTP level before confirmation test required?
Need for detailed DTP roadmap / milestones
Validation relevant input, gtr drafting (incl. definitions), …
 coordinated meeting schedule (e. g. necessary conferences with DC & other subgroups)
slide 5

6. 1.3) OIL, gtr draft, definitions
Open issues list
LabProcICE-111 (will be updated soon)
gtr draft
DC Master draft out-dated LabProcICE-112 (see DC documents)
 updated in tel/web conferences with DC
Annex 6 (Test procedure & conditions)
Annex 5 (Test Equipment & Calibration) …
slide 6

7. Definitions
Current status: - LabProcICE gtr draft (LabProcICE-112) - Gaseous Fuel definitions (GFV-18-02)
- DC documents (WLTP /-003 /-004) (replacing LabProcICE-049 /-050)
WP.29: Task Force Group under GRPE to develop a frame system of terms, definitions and classifications regarding vehicle propulsion systems (see WP )
Next steps:
- Separate meetings with DC and representatives from all subgroups will be scheduled by DC
- Definitions will be imported into a database.
slide 7

8. Overview State of the working progress Issues on DTP level
Input for validation 2
Work in progress items / proposals / open issues
Next steps 
slide 8

9. Vehicle test mass & inertia classes DTP8 status: see WLTP-DTP-08-02 / -04
Combined approach includes:
improved definition of vehicle test mass (incl. optional equipment, luggage/payload)
step-less inertia approach
optional body parts influencing the aerodynamics
Testing worst case and in addition best case (if requested by manufacturer)
slide 9

10. General concern: Payload factors (M1 15%, N1 35%)
Vehicle test mass during Validation phase 2: (see parameter setting list)  mandatory testing with TMH (mass with all optional equipment)
testing TMH and TML (without optional equipment) at some labs.
Note: If the maximum mass of options is not known, the actual options mass of the vehicle should be derived by weighing it and subtracting the unladen mass.
_____________________________________________________________
General concern: Payload factors (M1 15%, N1 35%)
 see LabProcICE-117 by Japan and LabProcICE-118 by PSA/Renault
slide 10

11. Discussion at DTP9:
Combine current proposal with RLD tyre selection criteria?  test TMH/TML with worst/best aerodynamic and worst/best tyre class roadload data
see DTP-09-13, DTP by NL, T&E, icct
Current DTP proposal: selection of tyre according to rolling resistance classes  choose tyre from worst class (2nd worst if more than 3 classes).
Japanese proposal (see LabProcICE-126):
 tyre selection class independent
slide 11

12. Influence of tyre selection?
slide 12

13. Approach needs to be discussed in connection with family concepts
see initial discussion document by Bill Coleman (DTP-09-02)
 Analysis of family concepts in ECE R test families - definitions - modifications of the vehicle type - extensions to type approval
slide 13

14. Multimode gear boxes
Emissions testing proposal:  Test agreed worst case  Compliance with emissions standards in all modes  Exemptions for modes used in very limited conditions
CO2 / FE testing proposal:
(a) Single default mode  test default mode
(b) No default mode or multi default modes  test best and worst case, average results of both modes
Additional provisions:
Manufacturer shall give evidence to authority about the emission and fuel economy in the different modes - Tested options be provided in test report, e.g. for In-Service-testing
slide 14

15. Japan proposal (LabProcICE-119) … for excluded modes:
- Reverse position (transmission) - Special off-road modes
- Low position (auto. transmission)
… for definition of default mode:
Selectable switch design
The specific mode always returned to, when the ignition key is turned on from off. (In case of mode A, B, and C, if A is always activated when the ignition key is turned on from off, the A mode is “default mode.”
Selectable shift lever design
The position appeared initially to drive the vehicle forward, after started the engine. (In case of [P-R-N-D-S-L], D is default mode.)
slide 15

16. Reservation with regard to default mode procedure
COM and NL:
Reservation with regard to default mode procedure
 proposal: average best and worst case even in case of a single default mode
Validation phase 2:  some labs will test all modes of single default mode vehicles
 decision on how to handle these vehicles afterwards
___________________________________________________
GSI
To be tested in validation 2 (if available).
slide 16

17. Overview State of the working progress Issues on DTP level
Input for validation 2
4) Work in progress items / proposals / open issues
5) Next steps
slide 17

18.  Parameter setting list: Major amendments since DTP 8:
VTF documents which are continously reviewed/ updated by LabProcICE: (note: current revisions are provided by VTF manager)
 Parameter setting list:
Major amendments since DTP 8:
Test mass and inertia approach – provision for missing data TMH/TML
Position of temperature sensor precised (“outlet” of the cooling fan instead of „in the vicinity”).
Excel data sheet for reporting of results
 Mode Construction
- review of DHC proposals by DTP experts (LabProcICE/EV)
- amendment of UTAC/JRC to allow subsequent testing
slide 18

19.  Evaluation Issues for Validation 2
 Global Test Matrix
New:
 Evaluation Issues for Validation 2
(DTP-09-10: Guidance document by ACEA)
___________________________________________________
Road Load Determination
- excluded from validation phase 2 - Japan requires validation of RLD procedure, ACEA agrees.
- gtr changes to ISO are relevant for regional correlation exercises
 RLD Validation to be included in WLTP roadmap
slide 19

20. Overview State of the working progress Issues on DTP level
Input for validation 2
4) Work in progress items / proposals / open issues
5) Next steps
slide 20

21. Road Load Determination
Japanese proposals (see LabProcICE-120rev1) on:
- Vehicle preperation
- Preconditioning
- Analysis of test result
Table of Running resistances (see LabProcICE-121 by PSA)
- Default running resistance table values changed to cope with actual values
More data from heavier “light duty vehicles” would be needed.
Reservation by COM: Default factors should be representative of worst case
 use of table should not be incentivised
JRC will scrutinize the proposal
slide 21

22. Measurement Equipment
40 CFR Part 1066 (see LabProcICE-124)
Succeeding legislation for current US regulation (40 CFR part 86)
Issues of the HDV legislation (40 CFR part 1065) shall be adopted for LDV
Final rulemaking planned for late 2012
Conclusion from ME experts:
 PM weighing room specifications have to be discussed with EPA
 Requests concerning analytical gases have to be clarified with EPA
 1066 compliant test cells are WLTP compliant as well
slide 22

23. Measurement methods of HC emissions acc. to R 83
Measurement methods of HC emissions acc. to R (see DTP by Poland)
Comments were reviewed by ME experts
Modification consists of introducing the cutter efficiency for ethane in the NMHC calculation (consistency with gtr4).
principal agreement
LabProcICE developed gtr draft proposal (see LabProcICE-123)
Correction also needs to be integrated in R83
 Poland or GFV Informal Group
slide 23

24. Overview State of the working progress Issues on DTP level
Input for validation 2
4) Work in progress items / proposals / open issues
5) Next steps
slide 24

25. Small teams (LabProc, ME, RLD) will continue work on draft gtr / OIL / definitions
Additional Tel/web conferences, e. g. evaluation of first results of Validation Phase 2
Evaluation of new test procedure during Validation Phase 2
Next face-to-face workshop: 22nd May 2012, Brussels (COM)

26. Thanks for your attention.
LabProcICE contact:
Béatrice Lopez de Rodas - beatrice.lopez(at)utac.com
Konrad Kolesa - konrad.kolesa(at)audi.de
Stephan Redmann – stephan.redmann(at)bmvbs.bund.de