Fuel Conservation and Management Symposium Equipment Technology for Fuel Savings & Emission Reduction Steve DuleySchneider NationalModerator Rich MoskowitzThe

Fuel Conservation and Management Symposium

Equipment Technology for Fuel Savings & Emission Reduction

Steve Duley Schneider National Moderator Rich Moskowitz The American Trucking Assoc. Presenter Dave Beasley Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Presenter Tim Tindall Daimler Trucks NA Detroit Diesel Presenter Mark Lampert Daimler Trucks NA Freightliner Presenter


Fuel economy has been a constant priority, and a requirement to compete as a low-cost provider of services.

• Key sustainment actions– Driver training and management– Equipment specs – Equipment controls – Supplier decisions

The impact of change is new; the effort and drive to improve has continued for 30 years

http://www.commercialtrucktrader.com/big-trucks/find/listing/2008-peterbilt-388-93732105


Significant progress has occurred; factors have offset some gains.

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20086.10

6.20

6.30

6.40

6.50

6.60

6.70

6.80

6.90

7.00

7.10

Fleet Average MPGSpeed change from 63

to 60 MPH

'07 En-gine

change

EGR Emission change

Change to Freightliner con-ventional, emis-

sion change

Speed change

from 57 to 63 MPH

Engine change to DDC S60

.6

.4

.5

.3

.2

.1

.0

-.1

-.2

-.3

-.4

Low rolling re-sistance

tires

More tire design

changes

• Competition for drivers• Requirement to lower diesel emissions


Fundamentals of mpg.

• Factors for fuel consumption:– Air Resistance

– Rolling Resistance

– Power Train

PowerDemand

Power Creation and Delivery

Fuel Conservation and Management Symposium5

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Vehicle Speed, mph

Ro

ad L

oad

, HP

Air ResistanceHPRolling ResistanceHP

Fundamentals of mpg: Power demand vehicle speed and road load horsepower.

Vehicle Speed MPH

Rolling Resistance HP

Air Resistance HP

Road Load HP

30 31.9 11.1 43.060 82.8 89.0 171.8

Linehaul tractors operate at about 60 mph 50% of operating time


Factors affecting truck fuel economy (fundamentals).

RouteFlat Interstate Highway

vs = 4-18%Mountainous Interstate

DriverBest Driver

vs = up to 35%Worst Driver

IdlingZero Idling Time

vs = 7-10%50% Idling Time

Speed55 mph

vs = 15%65 mph

Tire Inflation100 psi

vs = up to 2%80 psi

Load80,000 lbs

vs = 5%70,000 lbs

WeatherWinter No Headwind

vs = 8-12% vs = 5-10%Summer 5 mph Headwind


Each design factor is influenced by purchase and operation decisions.

Factor Variables Fleet Action

• Aerodynamics− Ideal: Rain drop

• Speed• Shape• Frontal area

• Completed− Governor speed − Cruise speed limit− Cab and chassis design− Roof fairing− Side extenders− Side skirts− Wheel base− 5th wheel position− Trailer king pin− Trailer type

• Known, not cost effective− Trailer skirts− Trailer tail




• Rolling resistance− Ideal: Train

• Speed • Weight• Tire design• Tire tread depth• Air pressure• Geometry/Align• Pavement type

• Tire spec• Maintenance practices

− Alignment/airing − Change out standards− Empty weight




• Power train/operation− Ideal: 100% energy

conversion− Current 34% thermal

conversion

• Engine design− Fuel map

• Horsepower/torque • Transmission type • Parasitic losses• Idle• Driving practices

• Accessory design/type(fans, compressor)

• Lubricants – synthetic• Direct drive transmission

• Gearfast/run slow• Cab heaters/coolers• Turbo compound• Maximize top gear time• Engine ECM parameters

(speed, cruise, idle, progressive shift)


Equipment Technology and Advancements to Conserve Fuel within Scope of

Legislative and Regulatory Mandates


Richard MoskowitzVice President, Regulatory Affairs CounselSeptember 23, 2008


• 2002 Emissions Standards (EGR) • 2006 ULSD• 2007 PM traps• 2010 Additional NOx Controls (SCR)


1994

1998

Electronic fuel control

2002EGR

2007Increased EGR w / DPF

2010EGR w/Urea injection

0.010.01 0.100.10

0.20.2

1.21.2

2.52.5

4.04.0

5.05.0

0.00.00.00.0

NO

x (

g/h

p-h

r)N

Ox (

g/h

p-h

r)

PM (g/hp-hr)PM (g/hp-hr)

Relationship Between EPA’s Diesel Emissions Regulations and Fuel Economy has been Negative


Can Congress Solve the Energy Crisis?

Comprehensive Solution Needed:

• Drill – Increase Supply• Conserve – Reduce Demand • Orderly Markets – Government Oversight

Opportunities:– Energy Legislation (55 bills)– Highway Reauthorization (2009)



ATA’s Sustainability Initiatives

Control Speed (Highway Reauthorization)• 1/10 mpg for each 1 mph • Enact 65 mph national speed limit • Govern new trucks at 68 mph maximum speed


65 mph for trucks*:2.8 billion gallons of diesel fuel31.5 million tons of CO2* Over 10 years

65 mph for all vehicles*:

8.7 billion gallons of gasoline 84.7 million tons of CO2

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blogs.cars.com/photos/uncategorized/limit65.jpg&imgrefurl=http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2006/10/about_time_spee.html&h=262&w=120&sz=39&hl=en&start=9&tbnid=LSDAraSJf4E3hM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=51&prev=/images?q=65+mph+speed+limit+sign&gbv=2&hl=en



Reduce Main Engine Idling (Gang of 10)

- 40 state/municipal regulations (GA, NC, PA)

• .8 gallons per hour• Financial Incentives

– Waive FET (12%)– Provide tax incentives– Weight exemption (32 states)


Truck idling consumes 1.1 billion gallons of diesel annually13.3 million tons of CO2 annually



Address Congestion (Highway Bill)• 4.2 billion hours/year sitting in traffic • 2.9 billion gallons of fuel

• Invest in infrastructure– Gas Tax (1% - 2% cost)– No Tolls (20%-30% cost)


Eliminating 437 key congestion bottlenecks could save trucking companies:

4.1 billion gallons of fuel over a 10 years45.2 million tons of CO2 emissions annually

http://doogs.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/tehsuck.jpg



Improve Fuel Efficiency (Energy Legislation)• Voluntary• Market Based Incentives• Constant Improvement (3 year plans)• Funding dropped from $3M to $2M in ‘08


SmartWaysm Benefits:

554 million gallons annually48M tons CO2 by 2012



Enhance Truck Productivity (Highway Reauthorization)

• Lower consumption by reducing the number of trucks needed to move freight

• Size and Weight Reform


Allowing heavier double 33-foot trailers could save:

20.5 billion gallons of diesel over 10 years 227.3 million tons of CO2



Increase Fuel Economy Standards

• Historical Tradeoff• NAS study

• Technologically Feasible• Economically Feasible • Maintain Performance• Adequate Lead Time



Looking to the FutureThe Greenwashing of Public Opinion

• Massachusetts v. EPA • EPA ANPRM (GHG Emissions) – Future Mandates

– Aerodynamic Standards – Heat Recovery– Low Viscosity Lubricants– Alternative Fuels– Hybrid Technologies– Automatic Tire Inflation

• Climate Change – Greenhouse Gas Controls– Carbon Tax– Low Carbon Fuel Standard– Cap & Trade

• Lieberman/Warner Bill ($3 trillion dollars)• Moderated / Derailed by dramatically higher fuel costs• ATA Position – no double counting

• Presidential Politics



Dave BeasleyDirector, Commercial Tire Sales

Improving Truck Fuel Technology


Tire rolling resistance.

• ROLLING RESISTANCE is the energy loss resulting from sidewalldeflection and tread deformation

Improving tire rolling resistance can reduce fuel consumption.

Load

Deflection – tire sidewall flexes outward

Deformation – tread in the contact patch is compressed and deformed


Each wheel position contributes to rolling resistance.

Drive and trailer tires account for over 85% of total rolling resistance.


Various tire components contribute to rolling resistance.

Fuel efficiency improvements come primarily from the tire tread.


Tire tread research focuses on two areas to improve rolling resistance.

Tread Design Optimization

Tread designs that reducetread element deformations

Tread Rubber CompoundsCompounds that reduce tread element compression and deformation

Tread designs and compounds work together to meet performance objectives.


New tires and retreads with Fuel Max™ technology.

Up to 4%* actual on-highway fuel savings with strong mileage andperformance for the life of the tire.

* In comparison with standard Goodyear tires. Results may vary.


Goodyear continues to improve tire fuel efficiency.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

% S

AE

Fu

el

Sa

vin

gs

1980’s 1990’s Today’s FE Future FETechnology Technology Technology Technology

The next generation of Fuel Max products will provide even greater fuel savings.


Removal Mileage

Wear Evenness

Noise

RetreadabilityRR Improvement

Handling

Traction

95

100

105

110

115

Removal Mileage

Wear Evenness

Noise

RetreadabilityRR Improvement

Handling

Traction

Current Technology Target Future Technology Target

Next generation tires will be designed to enhance overall performance.

Current Product

New Product

Rolling resistance will not be the only improvement.


Tire and truck maintenance remains important.

Prevent fuel economy losses with proper tire and truck maintenance.

Tire Inflation Axle Alignment


After fuel cost, fleet managers say their largest uncontrollable issue is on-road tire failures.

Improve uptime and reduce repair costs with DuraSeal Technology®.

• Nearly 2/3 of on-highway tire failures come from the trailer position

• The G316 trailer tire with DuraSeal Technology® has a built-in tire sealant that quickly seals up to ¼” diameter tread punctures in the tread area


Engine Manufacturers Perspective



Detroit Diesel Engines Emission Control Timeline


1990 2000 2010

Cooled Exhaust Gas Recirculation

Particulate Filters

Selective Catalytic

Reductant Systems

Emissions Controlled through fuel injection timing

Improving fuel consumptionIncreased fuel consumption

Improving fuel consumption


Detroit Diesel Engines

• In the beginning of 2000, it was determined a another advancement in engines was needed

• Detroit Diesel, now part of Daimler began development of a brand new line of heavy duty engines

• Once again the focus was fuel economy and emission reduction as the 2007 emission standards were now clearly defined

• Investment of $1.5 Billion has bought this engine family to the market beginning in January 2008



Gro

ss

Co

mb

ine

d V

eh

icle

We

igh

t, l

bs

55000

60000

65000

70000

75000

80000

85000

90000

Vehicle Speed, mph

55 60 65 70 75

3.0

4.0 5.03.5

4.55.5

5.95.55.24.13.4DD15 Fuel Consumption vs. S60 Fuel Consumption

Source:

Advantage DD15

Advantage S60


The new DD15 is the industry leader in fuel

efficiency


SCR System for 2010

2007 Emissions2007 Emissions 2010 Emissions2010 Emissions



2010 Aftertreatment Design Concept



SCR Benefits Will Rapidly Overcome Upfront Cost Increases and “Complexity” Challenges

SCR Fuel SavingsPer Truck

@ 3% = 583 gallons/yr



There Are 3 Factors In SCR Economics

1. Diesel Fuel Savings

1 yr. 2 yr. 3 yr.

DEF Price = $2.50

Diesel Price = $5.00

$0

$2,000

$3,800

$7,500

$11,430

3% fuel savings5% fuelsavings

3. DEF PricingRelative to Diesel

2. Fluid Savings from

SCR


2010 Aftertreatment Design Concept

Fuel Conservation and Management SymposiumFuel Conservation and Management Symposium

Drivers have a significant impact on vehicle fuel consumption

Numerous engine control strategies are employed to control the drivers influence on fuel consumption

• Vehicle Speed Limiting• Cruise Control Incentives• Progressive Shifting Engine Speed Controls• Engine Idle Time Limiters• Cooling Fan Control Strategies• “Soft” Cruise Control • Adaptive Cruise Control – anticipate topography changes (future

technology)

Other Factors Impacting Fuel Consumption


Future Fuel Economy Improvements

• Future Fuel Economy Improvements beyond 2010 will come in small increments

• Attention to aerodynamic detail in both tractor and trailer

• Incremental electronic controls to further optimize drivelines

• Continued small increments in basic engine efficiency


Reduced Fleet (Fuel) Operating Costs

Mark LampertSr. VP SalesDaimler Trucks North America


Fuel Energy Distribution

• A modern Long Haul Class 8vehicle operating on a typicalU.S. round trip with a GVW of80,000 lb utilizes fuel energyas follows:

Drivetrain Friction

3%Engine Based

Auxiliaries1%

Brake Friction*4%

Tire Rolling Resistance

16%

Aerodynamics*19%

Engine*57%

* Influenced by driving technique


DD15 - TURBO COMPOUND

Optimize Fuel Consumption – Engine & Engine Based Auxiliary Loads

• Technologies available today (FE increase)− DD15 (5% vs previous industry benchmark)

• Turbo Compounding• Amplified Common Rail System• Benchmark compression ratio• Thermostat on inlet side

− Eaton AMT with integrated shift map for DD15 (up to 20%, depending on driver) − Soft cruise (up to 1%)− Gearing for cruise speed around sweet spot (up to 10%)− APUs to reduce idling (5% depending on idle time)

• Short Term Future Technologies− BlueTec – EPA 2010 (3 to 5 % compared to non-SCR engines)− Gear based torque management (under evaluation)− Engine oil temperature thermostat (up to 3% in extremely cold climate)

• Long Term Future Technologies− Electrified Exhaust energy recycling− Coolant energy recycling− Variable injection angles− Variable compression ratio


2400

2000

1600

1200

800

400

00 1

020

30

40

50

60

70

80

Vehicle Speed Mile/h

En

gin

e S

pee

d r

/min

Peak Torque Zone

Road Speed Limit

9th gear

10th gear

6.68 mpg

5.46 mpg

IMPORTANCE OF PROGRESSIVE SHIFTING

Optimize Fuel Consumption – Engine & Engine BasedAuxiliary Loads (cont.)

• Driver Influence (depending on baseline driver up to 25%)− Progressive shifting − Moderate accelerations− Fan control− Idling


Improving Tractor Aerodynamics


Power Required toOvercome Aero Drag

Note: approximately 50% of aero drag is from the tractor and front of trailer, while the other half is from the trailer undercarriage and rear of trailer.

Optimize Fuel Consumption – Aerodynamics

• Driver influence – high− Speed

• Technologies available today (FE gain)− Slow down – 5mph reduction (5% to 8%)− Optimum 5th wheel height and trailer gap (6%)− Aero bumper and air dam (3%)− Tractor side fairings/skirts (3%)− Aero mirrors (1%)− Eliminate sunvisor (1%)− Eliminate hood mounted aux mirrors (1%)− Trailer side skirts and wheel covers (3.3%)− Trailer undercarriage flow device (1%)− Rear trailer aero treatment (2 to 4%)

• Technologies of the future (FE gain)− Optimize tractor/trailer interface (5%)− Tractor/Trailer cross flow vortex trap device (3.5%)− Trailer vortex strake device (2%)


Optimize Fuel Consumption – Rolling Resistance, Drivetrain

• Driver Influence - minimal• Tire inspection/inflation

• Technologies available today• Fuel efficient tire vs. std tire (5%)• Wide based singles with tire inflation system (2.5%)• Proper tire inflation vs. 10% under-inflation (1%)• Synthetic transmission and axle lube (1%)• Direct drive vs. overdrive (up to 1%)• Proper axle ratio (up to 10%)

• Technologies of the future• Advanced tandems


Energy Use by Application

0%

10%20%

30%40%

50%

60%70%

80%90%

100%

Delivery City Bus Refuse Class 8

Braking

Aero

Rolling

Optimize Fuel Consumption – Braking

• Driver influence – moderate to high• Maintain momentum (braking/accelerating)

• Technologies available today• Driving technique – looking ahead to minimize braking/accelerating• Route optimization (traffic, stops, etc)• Hybrid for medium duty (25% to 40%)

• Technologies of the future• Hybrid for Class 8 (4 to 5%)

• Hybrid

• Recovers brake energy

• Reduction of idle time (ePTO, HVAC/hotel power, etc)

• Lower fuel consumption reduces emissions


• A part of the drive torque of the ICE is transferreddirectly into the drive train

• The other part is used over a planetary gear for thedrive of a electrical generator

• Combustion engine (ICE) propels only generator • No mechanical connection between ICE and axles• ICE can be operated always at optimal point

Serial Hybrid – Application: City-Bus

e.g. Orion VII

ICEengine/

generator

battery

• Electric motor coupled with conventional powertrain

• Electric motor is used either for charging the battery or to support the ICE. Can drive ePTO

Parallel Hybrid – Application: Bus, Van, Truck

e.g. M2e Business ClassDual Hybrid – Application: Passenger Cars

e.g. Toyota Prius

ICE

engine/generator

battery

planetary axle

Long haulCity bus Touring coachRefuse

- Frequent stops- Low mileage, lower share of fuel cost

- Operating in emission sensitive city area

- Variations due to altitude profile and road grade

- High share of fuel cost- Demand for hotel power (HVAC, powernet)

Urban Highway

Delivery

Different HEV Configurations

engine/generator

ICEengine/

generator

battery


Optimize Fuel Consumption Summary

• Class 8 long haul tractor trailer combination:− Aerodynamics (tractor & trailer) improvements: approx. 10 -15 % possible fuel savings with

integrated tractor and trailer.

− Others improvements: approx. 15- 25% possible fuel savings

− Driver remains a critical element

• Medium Duty Delivery vehicle:− Hybrids: approx. 25% - 40% possible fuel savings depending on vehicle

application, most promising in stop and go traffic

− Hybrid with ePTO: approx. 50% to 60% fuel savings with idle reduction

Documents

Fuel Conservation and Management Symposium Equipment Technology for Fuel Savings & Emission Reduction Steve DuleySchneider NationalModerator Rich MoskowitzThe