Welcome to the Final Conference - TRANSFORMERS … · Welcome to the Final Conference ... Datalogging Gateway 04/07/2017 ... Slide TRANSFORMERS -18 Testing 29/06/2017

Welcome to the

Final Conference

Thursday 29th June,

Volvo Trucks Experience Centre,

Gothenburg, Sweden

This project has received funding from the European Commission through the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement No. 605170.

Final Conference, 29th June 2017 Agenda – Afternoon Sessions

13.20 Vehicle viewing & moveable roof demo Fraunhofer LBF, Van Eck,

13.50 Results & conclusions from TRANSFORMERS • Testing • Holistic simulation • Evaluation & conclusions • Q&A

DAF, IRU, TNO, Uniresearch, Virtual Vehicle, Volvo

15.20 Aeroflex - Introduction MAN (Ben Kraaijenhagen)

15.30 Coffee, vehicle viewing & moveable roof demo Fraunhofer LBF, Van Eck

16.00 Key note speech: Future transport solutions - the Volvo Group journey ahead

Lars Stenqvist Chief Technology Officer, Volvo Group Executive Vice President, Volvo Group Trucks Technology

16.20 Panel Discussion P&G (Sergio Barbarino), SCB (Bernd Meurer), Volvo (Lars Stenqvist), DAF (Jack Martens), IFSTTAR (Bernard Jacob), TNO (Rik Baert), IRU (Marc Billiet)

16.55 Closure of the day Volvo

17.00 Reception -

29th June 2017 TRANSFORMERS - Welcome 2

www.transformers-project.eu

This project has received funding from the European Commission through the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 605170.

Testing Transformers Validation Activities

Guus Arts - DAF Trucks NV

Christophe Maillet – Volvo GTT

Ton Bertens – Van Eck Group

http://www.transformers-project.eu/



Objectives of testing activities;

Verify with simulations & measurements if targets are met

Validate innovations against customer requirements

Provide data to validate simulation models (TNO & ViF)

29/06/2017 TRANSFORMERS - Testing Slide 4

Introduction

EBS

Truck

EMGTDMS

EBS

Trailer

VCU

ISO11992/2

WBISO11992/3

Transformers innovations;

1. Hybrid on Demand

2. Aerodynamic improvements

3. Loading & unloading improvements

EBS

Truck

EMGTDMS

EBS

Trailer

VCU

ISO11992/2

WBISO11992/3

Main target; 25% reduction of CO2 emissions in g/t.km

Direct reduction of CO2 emissions;

Improved (and adaptable) trailer aerodynamics

Hybrid-On-Demand trailer technology

Increased transportation efficiency;

Improved trailer loading/unloading capability

Increased trailer payload capacity


Target

g

t.km

Energy Efficiency Trailer Load Optimisation Trailer Schmitz Cargobull Van Eck Group


Innovations

Hybrid on Demand system

Aerodynamic bulk head

Side skirts

Boat tail

Movable roof

Load volume indicator

Flexible movable floor

system Side skirts

Boat tail

Movable roof

Hybrid on Demand system

Aerodynamic bulk head

Side skirts

Boat tail

Movable roof

Load volume indicator

Flexible movable floor

systemSide skirts

Boat tail

Movable roof


Overview of validation activities

Transformer Innovation

Test objective Trailer Truck Test environment

Improved trailer aerodynamics

Vehicle drag force reduction

Energy Efficiency DAF Track

Fuel consumption reduction

Energy Efficiency Volvo Track

Hybrid-On-Demand trailer


Energy Efficiency DAF Track, dense urban traffic

Energy Efficiency Volvo On-road, extra-urban and motorway

Load optimisation Fill speed Payload capacity Load factor

Load Optimization

Volvo Loading dock (LVI on test rig)

Use of existing (CAN-bus) signals

Dedicated sensors installed for specific accuracy

Synchronised by GPS

Naming convention for log data


Datalogging

Gateway

For synchronisation

04/07/2017

Logging Vector system Logging truck

Logging vbox

GateWay:

Engine torque mode

Drivers Demanded wheel

torque[%]

Actual Engine torque [%]

Engine speed[rpm]

Load at current speed [%]

Vehiclespeed [km/h]

Reference wheel Torque [Nm]

Drivers Retarder demand

For synchronisation

Truck Logging:

• Fuel consumption [g/s]

• Odometer [km]

• Velocity [km/h]

• Brake pressure/ switch

Trailer Logging:

• Battery SOC

• Battery current

• Battery voltage

• All data from/to Gateway

IFSTARSystem

IFSTAR Logging:

• Roll angle/rate of the CoG

• Yaw angle/rate of the CoG

• Pitch angle/rate of the CoG

• Longitudinal/Lateral/vertical dynamics of

the CoG,

• Side slip angle of each vehicle

• Vertical acceleration of axles

• Pressure on the braking pedal.

29/06/2017

Logging Vector system Logging truck

22/06/2017

Gateway

For synchronisation

Logging Vector systemLogging truck

Test Methodologies & Procedures



Test track measurement

Schmitz reference trailer

500kg payload compensation

“High flat” as reference

Vehicle drag force reduction (Cd x A)

Test according Annex VI for CO2 declaration

Maximum -14.3% drag reduction for “high tapered” with boat tail

Significant contribution from boat tail

Effect from front bulkhead and side-skirts not included

Lower drag force reduction “low tapered” > “high tapered” configuration

Due to tractor-trailer height compatibility



Configuration Roof deflector With boat tail Without boat tail Boat tail effect

High flat standard 91.4% Reference -8.6%

High tapered standard 85.7% 91.9% -6.8%

Low flat * no 87.1% 92.2% -5.5%

Low tapered * no 86.2% 90.8% -5.1%

Tractor SCB-trailer Cd*A relative

Type Roof deflector Type Roof Roof height

front/rear [mm] With boat tail Without boat tail

1 DAF_TF standard Ref - - invalid

2 DAF_TF standard HoD high flat 4000/4000 91.4 % 100 %

3 DAF_TF standard HoD high tapered 4000/3200 85.7 % 91.9 %

4 DAF_TF no HoD low flat 3500/3500 87.1 % 92.9 %

5 DAF_TF no HoD low tapered 3500/3200 86.2 % 90.8 %

Test Methodology & Procedure

Tests realized on Hällered main track

Tested speeds : 60, 70, 80, 90 & 100km/h



Fuel consumption reduction at 80 km/h

Benefit up to -5.7%

Significant benefit from boat tail ~50%

Max benefit -9.2% at 90 km/h

For low tapered with boat tail



with boat tail without boat tail tail effect (%)

High flat -0.9% Reference -0.9%

High tapered -5.5% -1.7% -3.8%

Low flat -5.0% -0.4% -4.5%

Low tapered -5.7% -3.4% -2.3%

Configuration With boat tail Without boat tail Boat tail effect


High tapered -5.7% -2.0% -3.7%

Low flat -5.3% -0.9% -4.4%

Low tapered -5.2% -3.8% -1.5%

Configuration

Average speed

With boat tail Without boat tail Boat tail effect


High tapered -5.5% -1.7% -3.8%

Low flat -5.0% -0.4% -4.5%

Low tapered -5.7% -3.4% -2.3%

DAF test-track test procedure Dense urban traffic

1150 kg payload compensation

Test Track; automated throttle

Hybrid-on-Demand on/off

Engine fuel signal




Payload (kg)

hybrid on/off

Fuel consumption

(l)

∆ SOC start/end test

Equivalent fuel consumption (l)

Fuel saving (%)

1200 on 1.88 2.3 % 2.00 6.6 0 off 2.14

16200 on 3.21 -1.9 % 3.11 5.9 15000 off 3.31

Energy consumption in cycle

Mass in itrailer (kg)

Hybrid SOC (%) Diesel equivalent

(l) Diesel (l)

Diesel equi (l) Diesel saving (%) Energy saving (%)

1200 on 2,3 0,12 1,88 2,00 12 6,6

0 off 2,14

16200 on -1,9 -0,10 3,21 3,11 3 5,9

15000 off 3,31

Volvo on-road test procedure



1150 kg payload compensation when

HoD is ON

Extra-urban and motorway

Highway: 100% cruise control driving

Reference vehicle to eliminate random effects (e.g. weather)

Fuel flow sensor and GPS equipment

Extra-urban and motorway



DistanceApprox

time

129km 1h55

Hällered – Borås – Göteborg – Alingsås – Hällered

Test name Initial SoC Fuel only SoC DiffFuel

(SoC compensation)

Ref. BOGA -

BOGA 1 42% -5.1% -4% -4.7%

BOGA 2 41% -3.2% -1% -3.1%

BOGA 4 50% -4.6% -10% -3.5%

BOGA cycle

&

37.1 L/100km

Motorway only

100% cruise control



Borås – Ödeshög – Borås

DistanceApprox

time

263km 3h20

Test nameInitial

SoCFuel only SoC Diff

Fuel

(SoC compensation)

Speed

difference

[km/h]

Ref. BOB 40t GCW - 78.0 km/h

BOB 01 - 40t GCW 50% -2.9% 3.0% -3.0% -0.2

BOB 03 - 40t GCW 51% -3.3% 4.0% -3.5% -0.2

Ref. BOB 15t payload - 79.9 km/h

BOB 01 - 15t payload 38% -2.5% 7.0% -2.9% -0.1

BOB 02 - 15t payload 49% -2.0% -10.0% -1.4% 0.0

35.9 L/100km

30.3 L/100km

BOB cycle

Test Methodologies & Procedures


Load optimisation

Palletized goods, as 42% of goods

(tons) are shipped on pallets

3 representative shipments chosen by

Procter & Gamble

2 different P&G warehouses

KPI’s determined by video timestamps

Flexible moving floor

Increased floor space

Fill speed

10 pallets extra = +16 minutes but +30% load efficiency

Roof sets in 30 seconds to new shape

Closing trailer in acceptable 150 s (normally 20-30 s)

Payload capacity

Payload -2t due to moving floor, roof and reinforced bulk head. For low density products no real problem

Load factor

Improved payload utilization due to double floor and increased floor space up to a maximum of 106%

Remarks

Compatibility with different tractors due to battery charging pins

Uptime risk due to increased trailer complexity


Load optimisation

t (min)

t (min)

amo

un

t o

f p

alle

ts

amo

un

t o

f p

alle

ts

Slide 19 29/06/2017 TRANSFORMERS - Testing

Truck Manufacturers Trailer Manufacturers Supplier End User

Researchers Service Supplier

Thank you for your attention

Questions?

This project has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 605170


Slide 20






Holistic Simulation

Bernhard Hillbrand

VIRTUAL VEHICLE

29.06.2017

Göteborg




Simulation Model

Motivation

Component optimisation

Holistic Simulation

Evaluation of the Simulation Model

Method

Results

Simulation Matrix

Scenarios

Variations

29/06/2017 TRANSFORMERS - Holistic Simulation Slide 22

Agenda


Simulation Model

Simulation

Find Best Solution

Prototype / Production

Experiment with different …

- Configurations

- Parameter

- Scenarios

- Components

- Shapes


Motivation for Simulations

Source: www.comicbookmovie.com

Simulations were used to find the optimal drive axle ratio for the HoD trailer.

Find best ratio for recuperation at higher velocities

Taking losses and EMG efficiency map into account


Component Optimisation Recupera

tion E

nerg

y

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

-55

-50

-45

-40

velocity in km/h

Nd = 2.64

Nd = 2.74

Nd = 2.93

Nd = 3.07

Nd = 3.21

Nd = 3.42

Nd = 3.58

Nd = 3.73

Nd = 3.9

Nd = 4.11

0 20 40 60 80 100-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

velocity in km/h

Nd = 2.64

Nd = 2.74

Nd = 2.93

Nd = 3.07

Nd = 3.21

Nd = 3.42

Nd = 3.58

Nd = 3.73

Nd = 3.9

Nd = 4.11

Features:

Supported by ICOS


AVL Model.CONNECT

Co-Simulation

Variant Management

Case Management

Remote Simulation

Features:


AVL Model.CONNECT

Co-Simulation

Variant Management

Case Management

Remote Simulation

Features:


AVL Model.CONNECT

Co-Simulation

Variant Management

Case Management

Remote Simulation

Features:


AVL Model.CONNECT

Co-Simulation

Variant Management

Case Management

Remote Simulation Co-Simulations were done at Virtual Vehicle in Austria with remote access to models at TNO in the Netherlands


Evaluation of the Simulation Model


Measurement data

Comparing the results of the Simulations to measured data of the Volvo test runs in Sweden

Borås – Göteborg – Alingsås (BOGA)

Borås – Ödeshög – Borås (BOB)

Source: Google Maps

Key Performance Indikator 3 (KPI) = 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦

𝑡𝑜𝑛 ∙𝑘𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟


Evaluation Method (1)

Generic Truck Model and Trailer Model

Real Volvo Truck and Hybrid-on-Demand

(HoD) Trailer

Driver/Cruise Control

real altitude

Road Gradiant

Velocity, Speed,..

Velocity, Speed,..

Fuel, SOC,…

Fuel, SOC,…

KPI3 Calculation

KPI3 Calculation

Velocity Profile



Simulation NoHoD Trailer

Simulation HoD Trailer

same

input profile

-

KPI3

KPI3

Δ KPI3

Measurement NoHoD Trailer

Measurement HoD Trailer

same

Driver, Track

-

KPI3

KPI3

ΔKPI3

Comparison of ΔKPI3 for each

Track

Multiple NoHoD/HoD test runs result in a set of ΔKPI3

The simulations proofed to be within this area

It shows that the HoD system in the simulations is comparable with the HoD system in the Transformers HoD Trailer




Simulation Matrix

Goal: to do many variations of the original simulation model


Simulation Matrix


Routes

Routes

Motorway driving (flat surface)

Motorway driving (mixed environments)

Frequent Elevation Changes

Steep Hills

Urban Driving

These variations result in a big matrix

Results were used for evaluation by TNO


Simulation Matrix

EMG: An EMG with more power (up to

240 kW) showed always better results

–> additional weight was neglected

Battery: weight of the battery (+housing and thermal system) has a bigger impact, thus a smaller battery size is better for some routes


Optimal Configurations

Ref. EMG Ref. Battery

80 kW (~ 60 kg)

20 kWh (~ 600 kg)

Battery Flat Mixed Env. Freq. Elev. Changes Steep Hills Urban

5 kWh

10 kWh Empty

15 kWh Average Payload

20 kWh Full

Truck Manufacturers Trailer Manufacturers Supplier End Users

Research Organisations Service Supplier


Questions?



Slide 40






Evaluation, Conclusions & Outlook

Marc Billiet (IRU)

Gertjan Koornneef (TNO)

Final Event – June 29th 2017




29/06/2017 TRANSFORMERS - Evaluation, Conclusions and Outlook Slide 42

Part 1: Evaluation


Evaluation Framework

Test results Simulations

Mission profiles

Effects of innovations

Economic evaluation

road type

topology

congestion

payload 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons 1 tons 15 tons 25 tons

Default [HF+NBT / noHOD] 0,45 0,05 0,03 0,49 0,05 0,04 0,53 0,05 0,04 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,02 0,02 0,28 0,03 0,02

A low Loading efficiency low [+1 tons] 0,23 0,04 0,03 0,25 0,05 0,04 0,27 0,05 0,04 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,02 0,14 0,02 0,02 0,14 0,03 0,02

A med Loading efficiency med [+3 tons] 0,12 0,04 0,03 0,14 0,04 0,03 0,14 0,04 0,03 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,02 0,08 0,02 0,02

A high Loading efficiency high [+5 tons] 0,09 0,04 0,03 0,10 0,04 0,03 0,10 0,04 0,03 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,02

B low Aerodynamics low [HF+BT] 0,45 0,05 0,03 0,50 0,05 0,04 0,53 0,05 0,04 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,03 0,02

B med Aerodynamics high [HT+NBT] 0,45 0,05 0,03 0,50 0,05 0,04 0,53 0,05 0,04 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,03 0,02

B high Aerodynamics high [HT+BT] 0,45 0,05 0,03 0,50 0,05 0,04 0,53 0,05 0,04 0,24 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,03 0,02

C low HoD low [80kW/20kWh] 0,42 0,04 0,03 0,46 0,05 0,03 0,49 0,05 0,04 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,03 0,02

C med HoD med [160kW/20kWh] 0,38 0,04 0,03 0,42 0,04 0,03 0,46 0,04 0,03 0,26 0,02 0,01 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,27 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02

C high HoD high [240kW/10kWh] 0,35 0,04 0,03 0,39 0,04 0,03 0,43 0,04 0,03 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,27 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02

A+B Total potential low Combination low 0,23 0,04 0,03 0,26 0,05 0,04 0,28 0,05 0,04 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,02 0,14 0,03 0,02

A+B Total potential med Combination med 0,13 0,04 0,03 0,14 0,04 0,03 0,15 0,05 0,04 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,08 0,02 0,02

A+B Total potential high Combination high 0,09 0,04 0,03 0,10 0,04 0,03 0,10 0,04 0,03 0,04 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,02

A+C Total potential low Combination low 0,22 0,04 0,03 0,24 0,04 0,03 0,25 0,05 0,03 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,14 0,02 0,02 0,14 0,02 0,02

A+C Total potential med Combination med 0,11 0,04 0,03 0,12 0,04 0,03 0,12 0,04 0,03 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,02

A+C Total potential high Combination high 0,07 0,03 0,03 0,08 0,03 0,03 0,08 0,04 0,03 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01

B+C Total potential low Combination low 0,42 0,04 0,03 0,47 0,05 0,03 0,50 0,05 0,04 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02

B+C Total potential med Combination med 0,39 0,04 0,03 0,43 0,04 0,03 0,46 0,04 0,03 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,26 0,02 0,02 0,26 0,02 0,02

B+C Total potential high Combination high 0,35 0,04 0,03 0,40 0,04 0,03 0,43 0,04 0,03 0,24 0,02 0,01 0,24 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,01 0,25 0,02 0,02

A+B+C Total potential low Combination low 0,22 0,04 0,03 0,24 0,04 0,03 0,26 0,05 0,03 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,01 0,13 0,02 0,02 0,13 0,02 0,02

A+B+C Total potential med Combination med 0,11 0,04 0,03 0,12 0,04 0,03 0,13 0,04 0,03 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,01 0,07 0,02 0,02

A+B+C Total potential high Combination high 0,07 0,03 0,03 0,08 0,03 0,03 0,08 0,04 0,03 0,04 0,02 0,01 0,04 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,05 0,02 0,01

medium

urban motorway

flat flat hilly mountain

lowlow medium high low high


Testing vs. Simulation

DAF, Volvo, P&G test results

ViF simulation

results

TNO Transformers

Potential- evaluation

results

Fidelity of results

CO

VER

AG

E O

F TR

AN

SPO

RT

DO

MA

IN


Reminder: Targets of the project

Load Optimisation In the range of 3-40%

Whole Vehicle Aerodynamics Approx. 8%

Hybrid-on-demand 3 – 5%

Primary focus of the evaluation and potential

estimation:

Impact on diesel fuel consumption

= Impact on CO2 emission

= Impact on energy

consumption

To avoid confusion, only fuel consumption (FC) is

mentioned here

Per ton.km! Overall goal: 25% better energy efficiency


Demonstrator test results

Hybrid-on-Demand: Target: 3 to 5%

Loading efficiency: Target: 3-40%

Aerodynamic features: Target: approx. 8%

Motorway: 2.2 to 3.8% fuel consumption (FC) reduction Urban heavy traffic: 6 to 7%

Up to 14% drag reduction, 5.7% FC reduction at 80 km/h

1 additional pallet on floor (3%); Double floor: additional floor space;

+10 pallets = +30%= +16 minutes

Road type variation:

Urban flat

Motorway flat

Motorway hilly

Motorway steep hills

Payload variation:

Empty 40 ton GCW

Traffic variation:

Low, medium and high congestion level

Road condition: good

Weather: 20 °C, no rain/wind


Testing vs. Real-life conditions

Multi-dimensional evaluation required to

estimate potential

29/06/2017 TRANSFORMERS - Evaluation, Conclusions and Outlook→→→

Potential of the HoD system

VIF simulation results used as input for evaluation tool

Impact traffic dynamics (low versus high congestion level) is only 1% →in the graph: average congestion

(Short term) regeneration potential determines FC saving potential

High potential for configuration optimization: up to 18%

-20%

-18%

-16%

-14%

-12%

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

FC savings in %/ton.km for 15 ton payload

Motorway: flat and hilly

Urban: flat and motorway: steep hills

Tested variants

Tested configuration: 80 kW EMG /

20 kWh battery

160 kW EMG / 20 kWh battery

240 kW EMG / 10 kWh battery

Slide 48


Potential of aero measures

Evaluation based on drag reduction data from measurements, for SCB semi-trailer

Realistic routes, no constant speeds

Highest impact on routes with highest average speed, no impact at low speeds (urban)

Impact boat tail on FC: up to 3%

Impact movable roof on FC: up to 3%

Combined FC savings up to 6.5% in realistic routes

Note: reference included optimized bulkhead and sidewings impact of all combined

measures higher than shown here

Additional floor space w/o double floor: +1 pallet

+3% fuel consumption saving per ton.km

Impact double floor shows high potential, and is dependent of type of cargo: volume vs. mass

Cargo density study shows that up to approx. 7 ton additional cargo is realistic

In the evaluation, +1, +3 and +5 ton additional cargo scenario’s are used

Example of averaged impact on fuel consumpton using various road types and congestion levels, in %/ton.km:


Potential of efficient loading

FC impact Payload 8 tons Payload 15 tons

+ 1 ton - 9 %/ton.km - 4

+ 3 ton - 22 - 12

+ 5 ton - 31 - 17

FC in %/tonkm Congestion Payload Hybrid-on-Demand + Aerodynamic

+ 1 ton extra +3 ton extra + 5 ton extra

Urban Average 15 ton -20% -26% -30%

Motorway: flat Average 15 ton -12% -19% -25%

Motorway: hilly Average 15 ton -13% -20% -26%

Motorway: steep hills Average 15 ton -22% -28% -33%


Potential of combined innovations

25% overall savings can be reached!

Combined effects of optimal aerodynamic and HoD configurations for constant conditions

Efficient loading varied from +1 to +5 tons extra

The results shown before imply constant conditions (i.e. payload, road type, …)

In real-life, transport missions consist of varying conditions

3 partner based missions are used as example for applications in Europe

Transport type = palletized goods : 40% share of goods in EU & focus of project


The meaning for EU transport

National urban / flat - Amsterdam (NL) city

delivery - 90% urban, 10% m.way flat - Payload decreasing 15t 3t

EU short distance (P&G) - Euskirchen (D) – Amiens (F)

and return - 12% urban, 88% m.way hilly - Payload 20t and 7t (return)

EU long distance (P&G) - Euskirchen (D) – Rome (I) - Urban 12% / M.way flat 62% /

M.way hilly 18% / M.way steep hills 9%

- Payload 22t

Urban/flat P&G short distance P&G long distance

Kkm/year 50 kkm 100 kkm 200 kkm 100 kkm 200 kkm

FC impact [/ton.km] -26 % -22 % -22 % -17 % -17 %

Total annual savings [€/yr] 4 k€ 4 k€ 8 k€ 6 k€ 11 k€

NPV [€] - 8 yr 4% int. 27 k€ 26 k€ 52 k€ 39 k€ 77 k€


Typical EU transport missions

Combined effects of optimal HoD and aerodynamic (High Tapered + Boat tail)

Efficient loading: 3 ton extra, assuming High Tapered shape allows for additional cargo

Weight reduction for HoD system and aerodynamic measures: 0.5 to 1 % additional benefit

Improved control strategy HoD: first simulations indicate up to 5% additional benefit

Plug-in functionality: additional benefit currently being investigated


Future potential


Impact on CO2 Certification

Tool to calculate CO2 emission from new conventional HD vehicle

configurations

Transformers characteristics In VECTO? VECTO tool adaptation possible

Adaptable loading efficiency* No Yes / Limited effort

Adaptable aerodynamics* No Yes / Limited effort

Hybrid on Demand* No No / Extension needed that considers strong impact of control/energy management

strategies

* With corresponding weight penalty

Three succesfull Transformers innovations demonstrated

All have a high savings potential, depending on mission profile

Loading efficiency improvement measures have highest TRL and impact (savings / NPV)

Aerodynamic measures demand comparable technological effort but with lower impact and only for long haul applications

HoD technology has highest challenge in terms of NPV.

Paths identified for further HoD improvement (weight reduction, plug-in capability, improved HoD control strategy)

Depending on the expected portfolio of vehicle missions, future trailer fleets could consist of trailers that implement 1,2 or all Transformers innovations


Summary


Part 2: Conclusions and Outlook

HoD (3-5%)

Aerodynamics (8%)

Load optimisation

(3-40%)

Mission adaptable

Widely marketable, standard

Within current legal framework


Overall Conclusions

TRANSFORMERS = potentially robust solutions

On the road to the market, but not there yet

Challenging to innovate within current rules – not impossible

Vehicle combination approach + cooperation = essential


Conclusions - Key messages

Aerodynamics – movable roof

•greening – reduced fuel consumption – reduced CO2 emissions

•operational efficiency – platooning – better traffic fluidity

•operational efficiency – fuel consumption reduction

Load optimisation – movable floor

•road safety – load securing device

•higher load capacity – more freight with fewer vehicles – better traffic fluidity

• operational efficiency – higher loading capacity

HoD

•greening – reduced fuel consumption – reduced CO2 emissions

•operational efficiency – additional vehicle power on-demand


Outlook – Transformers usefulness?

Further Cooperation

Further develop the vehicle concepts

Enabling rules and incentives


Outlook - What needs to happen?

- 60%

CO2

2050

+55%

Freight volume

2010-2050

+17%

Energy

Consumption

Approx. -80%

CO2

2050


Transformers and EU policy

Putting Transformers solutions in perspective – combine with other measures and initiatives

TRANSFORMERS

AEROFLEX

MARKET


Future - Vision

Truck Manufacturers Trailer Manufacturers Supplier End Users

Research Organisations Service Supplier


Questions?



Slide 64






Question & Answer

Cor van der Zweep Uniresearch




AEROFLEX

Aerodynamic and Flexible Trucks for Next

Generation of Long Distance Road Transport

Ben Kraaijenhagen | Gothenburg | 29.06.2017

MAN Truck & Bus | | Ben Kraaijenhagen | 03.05.2017 | Technical Coordinator AEROFLEX

Agenda 1 Summary

2 Objectives

3 Concept & Approach

5 Impact

< >

Strategic vehicle concepts and architecture (EC2015/719 L)

Summary

Project status

Submission on 1.02.2017, approval 17.05.2017.

Start of project 10.17. Kick of meeting at MAN Munich, 26/27.10.2017

Coordinator Ben Kraaijenhagen (MAN Truck & Bus AG)

Program Horizon 2020, GV-09-2017 Aerodynamic and flexible trucks

Acronym/title AEROFLEX – AEROdynamic and FLEXible Trucks for Next Generation

of Long Distance Road Transport

Consortium

23 partner from 7 EU-countries and TR: MAN (coordinator), DAF, Iveco,

Scania, Volvo, CRF, UNR, SCB, VEG, TIRSAN, CREO, Michelin, Wabco,

Chalmers, DLR, IDIADA, Fraunhofer, HAN, NLR, TML, TNO, MHH, UIRR .

(Daimler in project Sounding Board).

Duration 3,5 yr, 10/17 – 03/21

Cost ca. 11,5 M€

FTE-need 1013 person months

Funding ca. 9,5M€

Submissio

n

Approval Start End

THE VISION OF THE AEROFLEX IS TO SUPPORT VEHICLE

MANUFACTURERS TO ACHIEVE THE COMING CHALLENGES

FOR ROAD TRANSPORT.

MAN Truck & Bus AG | | Ben Kraaijenhagen | 29.06.2016 | TRANSFORMERS | Final Event 68

< >

Goals and achievements

69

Summary

Technology Readiness Level (TRL)

03/2020

02/2021

MAN Truck & Bus AG | | Ben Kraaijenhagen | 29.06.2016 | TRANSFORMERS | Final Event

< >

Participants & Sounding Board

70

Summary


< >

Organisational structure,

decision-making mechanism and management procedures

71

Summary

The management structure of the AEROFLEX project is depicted in Figure 3-3:


< >

THE VISION OF THE AEROFLEX IS TO SUPPORT VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS

TO ACHIEVE THE COMING CHALLENGES FOR ROAD TRANSPORT

72

Objectives

The overall objective of the AEROFLEX project is to develop and demonstrate new technologies, concepts and

architectures for complete vehicles that are energy efficient, safe, comfortable, configurable and cost-effective, while

ensuring that the varying needs of customers are satisfied by being flexible and adaptable with respect to the continuously

changing operational conditions.

These new configurable truck concepts should meet the future logistics and co-modality needs to be met for the

different segments and markets.

OBJECTIVE 1: Characterise the European freight transport market (map, quantify and predict), the drivers, the

constraints, the trends, and the mode and vehicle choice criteria

OBJECTIVE 2: Develop new concepts and technologies for trucks with reduced drag, which are safer, comfortable,

configurable and cost effective and ensure satisfaction of customer needs under varying transport tasks and conditions.

OBJECTIVE 3: Demonstrate potential truck aerodynamics and energy management improvements with associated

impact assessments of the new vehicle concepts, technologies and features developed in the AEROFLEX project.

OBJECTIVE 4: Drafting of coherent recommendations for revising standards and legislative frameworks in order to

allow the new aerodynamic and flexible vehicle concepts on the road.


< >

Context, challenges and targeted advances for the regulatory framework

73

Objectives

Present limitations

Loading units are not fully interchangeable (see Figure 1-2).

Loading units are not used as efficiently as possible due to the

highly limited use of available information.

Existing transport system cannot meet the dynamic demands of

future long- distance, inter-urban and urban transport.

Concepts must be developed to enable the full transport matrix

(Figure 1-2) in order to use the infrastructure optimally.

Beyond the state of the art

AEROFLEX develops technologies and standards for multimodal

transport in Europe and assesses the impact, to deliver cleaner,

safer and more efficient road transport.

The starting point is the loading unit.

Technologies are developed for EC96/5312 – EC2015/719

vehicles, up to 44t GCW (Figure 1-3).

An analysis will be performed for EMS1 and EMS2 vehicles up to

74t GCW for regional areas.

Vehicle concepts and future freight demands will be mapped, to

prepare logistics service providers and carriers for multimodal

transport.

Scenario assessment on new vehicle concepts, including market

potential and future outlook

The definition of recommendations for a future regulatory

framework.


< >

Concept & Approach

Concept and Approach

7 work packages to achieve the 4 objectives

OBJECTIVE 1: Characterise the European freight

transport market (orange part)

OBJECTIVE 2: Develop new concepts and

technologies for trucks (blue part)

OBJECTIVE 3: Demonstrate potential truck

aerodynamics and energy management

improvements (green part)

OBJECTIVE 4: Drafting of coherent

recommendations for revising standards and

legislative frameworks in order to allow the new

aerodynamic and flexible vehicle concepts on the

road. (purple part)


< >

Concept & Approach

Concpet and Approaoch

The orange-coloured “Boundaries and

Constraints” block represents the activities of

mapping, quantifying and predicting of the

European freight transport market, the drivers, the

constraints, the trends and the mode and vehicle

choice criteria in the period 2018 – 2035.

DLR


< >

Concept & Approach


MAN

The blue-coloured “New Concepts and

Technologies” block indicates the selected truck

technologies and concepts to be advanced from

TRL5 to TRL6/7:

The key innovations are:

- An Advanced Energy Management Powertrain

(AEMPT) architecture and control for distributed

electric hybrid powertrains with an optimised

energy management system and standardized

interfaces for multi-brand compatibility and optimal

interchangeability;

- A smart steerable dolly with energy storage for

EMS vehicles and for ‘autonomous’ manoeuvring at

hubs and docking stations;

- Smart Loading Units for overall efficiency gains

by separate platforms for volume and weight freight

and by more effective loading space utilisation;

VOLV

O


< >

Concept & Approach


SCANI

A

IVECO

- A wide range of Aerodynamic Features and Devices

for the Complete Vehicle to reduce drag that are

adaptable to their logistics task and circumstances, will

be considered; selected features will be developed and

integrated into the demonstrator vehicles such as:

o Active geometry: active air deflectors, active side

skirts, inflatable gap sealing, extending air deflectors,

adjustable 5th wheel, retractable trailer, adaptive rims,

adjustable underbody fairings, changing the ride height,

adaptable trailer shape, movable boat-tail and rotating

cylinders;

o Passive geometry: covered underbody, covered rear

wheels, boat-tail and trailer chassis covering;

o Active flow control: tangential blowing, suction,

plasma actuators, synthetic jets and base bleeding;

o Passive flow control: vortex generators, air curtains

and porous surfaces;

- An Innovative Front End Design for improved

aerodynamics and to help ensure survivability of

vulnerable road users in crashes up to 50 km/h. MAN Truck & Bus AG | | Ben Kraaijenhagen | 29.06.2016 | TRANSFORMERS | Final Event 77

< >

Concept & Approach


IDIAD

A

TNO

The green-coloured “Demonstration and Impact

Assessment” block regards the evaluation of the

vehicle demonstrators which will be conducted

together with the technical impact assessment of

the new vehicle concepts, technologies and

features developed in the AEROFLEX project.

This includes a coherent test matrix of the

operational performance, safety aspects, fuel

consumption and pollutant emissions of the

demonstrator vehicles for specific use cases on

test track and in on-road tests, and in wind tunnel

tests on scale models.

A cost benefit analysis on vehicle concept level and

underlying technologies and systems will also be

performed.

The targeted end TRL level is 7 to 8.


< >

Concept & Approach


IDIAD

A The purple-coloured “Recommendations” block

regards the process of drafting recommendations

for a set of smart and coherent performance based

standards for future trucks, load carriers and road

infrastructure, including a proposal for the

implementation of the performance based

standards by 2025 for policy makers and regulatory

bodies.

This so-called Handbook of Recommendations will

be finalised based on extensive consultations with

the stakeholders and Sounding Board comprising

key representatives of freight logistics, road, water

and rail transportation, the legislative sector, NGOs

such as ETSC.


< >

Measures to maximise impact

80

Impact

The focus of the AEROFLEX Project

is the research for new vehicle

concepts, technologies and standards

for the logistics of freight along

corridors and regional roads in a

multimodal environment, having a

clear route to the market.

Figure 2-2 shows how the results will

be implemented and what on the long

term AEROFLEX will mean for

Europe: the heavy vehicle industry,

regulations, market, and society.


< >

The AEROFLEX innovations will be very cost-effective for the operator

81

Impact

They reduce the TCO by 12%,

increase the utilization by 20%,

and save 4.6 M€ over 48 months

(see Figure 2.3).

The smart loading units and EMS

vehicles allow the operator to

transport the same cargo as today,

but with fewer loading units (-9%),

fewer drivers (-15%) and less fuel (-

24%).

On top of that, the CO2 emission for

his fleet drops by 32%.

The operator will have returns on his

investment after 28 months, which is

an acceptable amortisation.

In conclusion, there is a clear

business case for the technology

developed in the AEROFLEX project.


Q&A

[email protected]

Welcome to the

Final Conference

Thursday 29th June,

Volvo Trucks Experience Centre,

Gothenburg, Sweden

This project has received funding from the European Commission through the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement No. 605170.

Documents

Welcome to the Final Conference - TRANSFORMERS … · Welcome to the Final Conference ... Datalogging Gateway 04/07/2017 ... Slide TRANSFORMERS -18 Testing 29/06/2017