2018Unpublished venueRequires access

Comparative Study of Hybrid Electric Vehicle and Conventional Vehicle Under New European Driving Cycle and Bangkok Driving Cycle

A. Charadsuksawat, Yossapong Laoonual, Nuwong Chollacoop

Open publisher page 25 citations

Abstract

In this study, two full hybrid electric vehicles and two conventional vehicles were tested to evaluate fuel consumption, carbon dioxide emission, engine operation and tank to wheel efficiency using chassis dynamometer with the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and the Bangkok Driving Cycle (BDC) under the UNECE R101 regulations. The results show that the hybrid electric vehicles can improve the fuel consumption and emissions in low to medium average speed by up to 60 % compared with conventional vehicles, however, in high average speed, the gains are only up to 10%. The engine operation time of hybrid electric vehicles can be reduced by up to 80% in low average speed, while in high average speed, the hybrid electric vehicles are powered by the engine at around 90%. For tank to wheel efficiency, the difference between the hybrid electric and the conventional vehicles is up to 50% in low average speed and 10% in high average speed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In this study, two full hybrid electric vehicles and two conventional vehicles were tested to evaluate fuel consumption, carbon dioxide emission, engine operation and tank to wheel efficiency using chassis dynamometer with the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and the Bangkok Driving Cycle (BDC) under the UNECE R101 regulations. The results show that the hybrid electric vehicles can improve the fuel consumption and emissions in low to medium average speed by up to 60 % compared with conventional vehicles, however, in high average speed, the gains are only up to 10%. The engine operation time of hybrid electric vehicles can be reduced by up to 80% in low average speed, while in high average speed, the hybrid electric vehicles are powered by the engine at around 90%. For tank to wheel efficiency, the difference between the hybrid electric and the conventional vehicles is up to 50% in low average speed and 10% in high average speed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 25 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In this study, two full hybrid electric vehicles and two conventional vehicles were tested to evaluate fuel consumption, carbon dioxide emission, engine operation and tank to wheel efficiency using chassis dynamometer with the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and the Bangkok Driving Cycle (BDC) under the UNECE R101 regulations. The results show that the hybrid electric vehicles can improve the fuel consumption and emissions in low to medium average speed by up to 60 % compared with conventional vehicles, however, in high average speed, the gains are only up to 10%. The engine operation time of hybrid electric vehicles can be reduced by up to 80% in low average speed, while in high average speed, the hybrid electric vehicles are powered by the engine at around 90%. For tank to wheel efficiency, the difference between the hybrid electric and the conventional vehicles is up to 50% in low average speed and 10% in high average speed.

Key concepts: Driving cycle, Automotive engineering, Fuel efficiency, Electric vehicle, Chassis, Hybrid vehicle, Miles per gallon gasoline equivalent, Engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative Study of Hybrid Electric Vehicle and Conventional Vehicle Under New European Driving Cycle and Bangkok Driving Cycle — Research Paper | ScholarLens