NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Medium and Heavy Duty 

Vehicle Field Evaluations

PI: Kevin Walkowicz

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

2014 DOE VTO Annual Merit Review

June 17, 2014

Washington, D.C.

NREL/PR-5400-61895 Project ID VSS001

This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information.
2

Overview

• Multiple Sites: varies by project

• Project Length: typically 12-18 months start 

to finish (including startup and report)

• For FY14: Some "in-process," some "new"

• Percent Complete: ~50%

• Unbiased Data: Commercial users and OEMs 

need unbiased, 3rd-party new technology 

evaluations for better understanding of stateof-the-art technology performance to 

overcome technical barriers

• Variable Commercial Vehicle Use: Variable 

performance by technologies due to multiple 

and wide-ranging duty cycles (makes data and 

analysis of data valuable in overcoming this 

barrier)

• Total Project Funding FY14 w/industry cost 

share: ~$700K

o DOE Share: $600K in FY14

o Participant cost share: in-kind support 

(vehicle loans, technical support, data 

access, data supplied to NREL); varies by 

individual project

• DOE Funding Received in FY13: $850K 

Timeline

Budget

Barriers

Partners • Industry collaboration required for successful 

studies. Past partners include:

New Flyer, Freightliner, Workhorse, 

International, Orion, Allison Transmission, Eaton, 

Enova, Azure, Cummins, International, 

Caterpillar, Coke, NYC Transit, Verizon 

• Current partners in FY14: 

FedEx, UPS, Eaton, Peloton, Parker Hannifin, 

Frito-Lay, Momentum Dynamics, XL Hybrids

• Project Lead: National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL)
3

 Relevance: Providing Unbiased Data and Analysis

This project provides medium-duty (MD) and heavyduty (HD) test results, aggregated data, and detailed 

analysis.

• 3rd party unbiased data: Provides data that would not 

normally be shared by industry in an aggregated and 

detailed manner

• Over 5.6 million miles of advanced technology MD and HD 

truck data have been collected, documented, and analyzed 

on over 240 different vehicles since 2002

• Data, Analysis, and Reports are shared within DOE, national 

laboratory partners, and industry for R&D planning and 

strategy.

• Results help:

o Guide R&D for new technology development

o Help define intelligent usage of newly developed technology

o Help fleets/users understand all aspects of advanced technology

3

NREL 19908

NREL 18337

NREL 19816
4

Milestones and Deliverables

Month / 

Year

Milestone or 

Go/No-Go Decision

Description Status

Q1 Milestone Status Report on all Projects Complete

Q2 Milestone Status Report on all Projects Complete

Q3 Milestone Status Report on all Projects On-Track

Q4 Milestone Final Report & Data on all 

Projects

On-Track

Reports highlighting fleet data collection efforts and analysis of data:

• In addition to the above reports, the following published (publically available) technical 

project reports will be completed:

o UPS Hydraulic Hybrid Technical Report – May 2014

o Frito-Lay EV Implementation Report – September 2014

o Peloton Truck Platooning Final Report – June 2014

o BARTA Inductive Charging Startup Report – September 2014

o XL Hybrid Startup Report – September 2014
5

Approach: FY14 Projects

5

Typically have 3–4 projects in 

process at any given time with 

some starting and some 

finishing.

FY14 projects to be discussed:

1. UPS Hydraulic Hybrid 

Delivery Vans

2. Frito-Lay Electric Vehicle 

(EV) and Infrastructure 

Case Study

3. Peloton Truck Platooning 

Study

New projects starting in FY14 (not discussed today) include:

1. Berks Area Regional Transport Authority (BARTA) evaluation of EV buses with 

inductive charge (WPT = wireless power transfer)

2. XL hybrid evaluation of service vans and Class 4 box trucks

Phto courtesy 

Momentum 

Dynamics
6

Approach – Selection and Data Flow

This project will collaborate with fleet and OEM partners to select, test, and validate advanced 

technologies in commercial vehicle applications. 

Specific technologies are selected based on:

1. Their potential for reducing fuel consumption (current fuel usage and potential for reduction)

2. Their potential for widespread commercialization and availability to cooperate with deploying fleets

3. The interest of DOE (including 21st Century Truck partners and other DOE program managers) 

General approach:

6
7

Approach – Most Data Made Available to Public

7

y = 2182.6x-2.324

R2 = 0.7533

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

KI (1/mile)

Average Driving Speed (mph)

School Bus Data Average Driving Speed vs. Kinetic Intensity

Lake Washington Adams County Schenectedy Power (Aggregate Data)

Data from field studies from 

this project as well as data 

from other national 

laboratories and industry 

partners...

...into Fleet DNA – a vocational database 

developed by NREL in partnership with 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory to capture 

and analyze MD and HD data: 

• Develops industry standard drive cycles

• Enhances modeling and simulation

• Helps develop codes and standards
8

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

peak demand (kW)

Federal Way Depot Monthly Peak Demand

2011

2012

2013

Technical Accomplishments: Frito-Lay EV Delivery Truck Case Study

Background

• Frito Lay North America (FLNA) is planning to operate 

269 all-electric delivery vehicles by the end of 2013

• Data from Smith EVs in FLNA’s fleet are monitored 

and reported to NREL as a part of Smith’s ARRA grant

Objectives

• Quantify commercial PEV total cost of ownership

• Analyze 10 PEVs at FLNA’s Federal Way, WA 

depot and compare with diesels at that site

• Explore potential value of grid integration for 

commercial PEVs

– Analyze various charge management schemes

– Avoid increased site demand charges

– Explore V2G demand reduction savings

– Federal Way currently shows $9/kw demand 

charge which equates to $70/veh/month

PEVs, introduced 

in Jan 2013, 

nearly double 

peak demand

NREL PIX 28804

Found comparable 

travel patterns between 

diesels and PEVs

Diesel EV

2013 Fuel Cost $0.54 $0.17 $/mi

... But EVs Still Save Nearly 2/3 Fuel Costs

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0

fuel economy (mpge)

average daily driving distance (mi/day)

2013 Fuel Economy Comparison: PEV v 

Diesel Delivery Trucks

Smith EVs

Diesels
9

Technical Accomplishments: Frito-Lay EV Facility Data

• Communications process established for charging station energy system data 

collection

o 15-minute interval power quality on each electric vehicle service equipment 

(EVSE) (voltage, current, etc.)

9

Preliminary results 

show peak EVSE 

demand may align 

with peak facility 

demand
10

Technical Accomplishments: Frito-Lay Charge 

Management Simulation

• Model modified to simulate vehicle 

charging power/energy requirements in 

conjunction with facility loads

• Originally developed for Fort Carson 

SPIDERS microgrid V2G assessment

• Objectives:

o Minimize peak demand (and thus cost) by 

smoothing added vehicle charging

o With V2G, flatten net load as much as 

possible (charging in valleys and 

discharging to offset peaks)

o Avoid power penalties

• Status: March–June = gathering 15-

minute facility load data to combine with 

vehicle charging data

• September deliverable will have:

o Optimized "smart charge" strategy

o Optimized V2G scenario

10

*using interpolated preliminary data

*

*

All necessary charging may be 

accommodated with minimal 

peak demand increase
11

Technical Accomplishments: Peloton Truck Platooning Testing 

Complete

Data collected:

• SAE Type II fuel economy track testing to quantify performance in a controlled setting

o 55, 65, 70 MPH vehicle speeds; ten total constant-speed tests

o One variable speed test

– Using NREL-developed “driver aid” to guide driver for desired speed vs. current speed

– Based on California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT), the-high 

speed section increased 10 MPH and repeated 2.5 times

o 20–75 ft vehicle gaps

– 65 MPH = 95 feet per second

– Truckers told to use 6 or 7 second rule, which equates to 570–670-foot following distance

o 65K and 80K gross vehicle weight (GVW) loading tests

• Gravimetric fuel economy is primary data gathered, weigh tanks used

• J1939 data collection, including some Peloton channels

o Vehicle following distance measured

o Coolant temp and “fan on” time to assess lowered ram air cooling effects

o Aftertreatment temps and NOx values from J1939 

Test Vehicles:

• Two Platooned SmartWay tractors (2011 Peterbilt 

386, Cummins ISX 450 hp, 10 spd, 350k miles)

• One SmartWay control tractor (Peterbilt 579)

• All tractors had 53-ft van body trailers with side 

skirts

• Testing took place March 17 – April 3 at Uvalde 

track, San Antonio, TX
12

Technical Accomplishments: Peloton Truck Platooning Results

• “Team” fuel savings ranged from 

3.5% to 6.4%

o Best combined result was 

for 55 mph, 30-ft gap, 65K 

GVW

• Percent savings at 70 mph were 

lower than at 55 and 65 mph

• Higher GVW and variable speed 

both negatively impacted fuel 

saved percent

• Closer following distances 

caused the engine fan on the 

trail truck to engage, negatively 

impacting fuel savings

Photo courtesy of Peloton 

Technology Inc.
13

Technical Accomplishments: Peloton Truck Platooning Results

• Lead truck consistently saw the most 

benefit with closer following distance at 

all speeds

o 1.7% to 5.3% savings @ 65K GVW

o 0.6% savings @ 80K GVW

o Anomaly at 65 mph, 65K GVW, 50 ft 

correlates with coolant temp anomaly 

and is being investigated with regard to 

ambient conditions

• Trail truck saw savings from 2.8% to 9.7%

o Tests with no fan on time had savings of 

8.4% to 9.7%

o To maximize savings, coolant temp should 

be monitored to adjust following distance

– Function of load, ambient temp, 

following distance

• Engine coolant temps on the trail truck 

generally increased as following distances 

decreased 
14

Technical Accomplishments: Completed UPS Hydraulic Hybrid (HHV) 

Study

Background and Value

• UPS operating 40 Parker HHVs in Baltimore and 

Atlanta

• 20 HHVs in Baltimore area are currently being 

studied

Approach

1. Collect J1939 and GPS parameters for duty cycle 

study and in-use fuel economy (NREL datalogger)

2. Collect additional GPS and J1939 fuel rate data 

from Parker Hannifin telematics system

3. UPS records for reliability analysis

4. ReFUEL chassis testing fuel economy on three 

different vehicles (HHV, diesel, and gasoline)

Final report available in FY2014

Photo courtesy of UPS
15

Technical Accomplishments: UPS HHV Drive Cycle Analysis

6 weeks of GPS duty cycle data characterized:

 18 delivery vans tested

 290 days of combined operation

• In Baltimore, the HHVs are driving only 55% of their miles at speeds where the hydraulic 

system can transmit more than 10% of the power – where hybrid advantage can be 

realized
16

• Three vehicles (HHV, diesel, gasoline) tested on four 

cycles to replicate observed in-use duty cycle

• The HHV demonstrated 19%–52% better fuel 

economy than conventional diesel on cycles other 

than the highway-oriented HHDDT (no statistically 

significant difference)

• The HHV demonstrated 30%–56% better fuel 

economy than conventional gasoline on cycles other 

than the highway-oriented HHDDT, on which it was 

3% better.

• The HHV achieved 16%–34% lower fuel cost per mile 

than conventional diesel on cycles other than the 

highway-oriented HHDDT (no statistically significant 

difference)

• The HHV achieved 8%–39% lower fuel cost per mile 

than conventional gasoline.

o 1-year average ultralow sulfur diesel cost of $3.94/gal

o 1-year average regular conventional gasoline cost of 

$3.46/gal

Technical Accomplishments: UPS HHV Chassis Dynamometer 

Testing Results
17

• NREL’s custom Baltimore 

cycle, statistically created 

from pieces of collected 

field data using DRIVE, 

most accurately matched 

observed in-field fuel 

economy

• City Suburban Heavy 

Vehicle Cycle (CSHVC) 

over-predicted the fuel 

economy for the HHV

• Higher kinetic intensity = 

bigger advantage for HHV

Technical Accomplishments: UPS HHV In-Field vs. Lab Fuel Economy 

Comparison
18

Responses to Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Comment #1: The reviewer noted that the project provided a pertinent variety of competing technologies 

and unbiased comparison of FE attributes in actual real world drive cycles. However, with respect to overall 

petroleum displacement, the reviewer stated that a measurement of total fuel displaced for the vehicle 

class, and the impact that the specific vehicle technology would project when broader adoption occurred, 

needed further examination. 

Response: In FY14, funding was made available to purchase and analyze MD and HD market data from a 3rd

party source. This data along with in-depth knowledge of the duty cycle data obtained from this work will 

enable the program to extrapolate nationwide, vehicle class total fuel displacement estimates. This will most 

likely be documented in upcoming technical reports as well as in the Fleet DNA.

Comment #2: The reviewer indicated that now with the FE or freight efficiency bar being raised at most 

every vehicle OEM to meet regulations, the baseline bar is also improving, but not necessarily with the 

adoption of revolutionary technology. The evolutionary technology needs to be assessed, such as advanced 

transmissions and improved brake thermal efficiency (BTE) powertrains by this project, which will be a more 

cost-effective market entry before the revolutionary technology is adopted. The reviewer stated that the 

approach was generally good but suggested improving the evaluation of baseline vehicle with a better 

understanding of underlying variables that affect differences found between dynamometer and in field 

testing. The industry needs better vehicle FE analytical prediction tools to displace costly field testing. 

Response: An analytical approach to help with this is under development In FY14 using various tools at DOE’s 

national labs. The approach includes: 1) using a methodology to obtain and analyze baseline vehicle use 

using the DRIVE tool, 2) running measured and estimated technology improvements over drive cycle 

population using FASTSim, and 3) using Argonne National Laboratory’s AFLEET tool to estimate cost benefits 

for potential users. This approach was rolled out at an industry conference technical session in March.
19

Collaboration and Coordination with Other Institutions

This project absolutely requires industry collaboration required for successful studies. 

Past industry partners included:

New Flyer, Freightliner, Workhorse, International, Orion, Allison Transmission, Eaton, Enova, Azure, Cummins, 

International, Caterpillar, Coke, NYC Transit, and Verizon

FY14 Collaborations & Coordination with Others

Partner Relationship Type VT Program 

or Outside?

Details

FedEx Corporation Fleet Eval Partner Industry VT Program Provided vehicles and data

UPS Fleet Eval Partner Industry VT Program Provided vehicles and data

Eaton Corporation OEM Support Industry VT Program Provided data access and hardware to enable testing

Peloton OEM Support Industry VT Program Provided vehicles and hardware to test

Parker Hannifin OEM Support Industry VT Program Provided vehicles, data, and support for testing

Frito-Lay Fleet Support Industry VT Program Provided vehicles, data, and installed infrastructure (Servidyne/Chateau)

Momentum Dynamics OEM Support Industry VT Program Providing data and hardware to enable testing

XL Hybrids OEM Support Industry VT Program Providing data and hardware to enable testing

Smith Electric Vehicles OEM Support Industry VT Program Providing access to battery data & vehicle data

South Coast Air Quality 

Management District / 

CARB

Funding Partner Gov’t

Collaboration

Outside Providing funding for projects to supplement DOE advanced vehicle 

technology testing (CARB = HVIP assessment)

Clean Cities Program Coordination Gov’t 

Collaboration

VT Program Providing funding to assess fleet-specific technology options for National 

Clean Fleets Partnerships (Verizon, City of Indianapolis, PG&E)

NTEA/GTA Advisory Industry VT Program Providing access and advisement on tools and protocols

Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory

Coordination Gov’t 

Collaboration

VT Program Coordination of data analysis tools, captured data ,and development of 

test protocol and procedures
20

Top 3 Remaining Challenges and Barriers

1. Availability of New Technology in Fleets

o Fleets remain tentative in procurement based on ROI 

projections – limited rollout of EVs, hybrid electric vehicles, 

plug-in hybrid electric vehicles

2. Telematics in Fleets

o Many fleets moving toward installation of their own 

monitoring. How to we compile from various sources rather 

than collect our own? There is still a need.

3. Changing greenhouse gas regs and impact on 

hardware for fleets

o EPA HD rules will change how fuel economy is viewed (system 

vs. engine)

o Data needed to make best decisions with new testing 

protocols
21

Proposed Future Work

FY15 Proposed Work will Include:

1. More “cross-cutting” vocational analysis rather than a single fleet

2. Better “deep dive” analysis approach to address issues discovered in 

assessments (i.e., root cause analysis of findings)

3. Coordination with SuperTruck and 21st Century Truck to align data and 

analysis

4. Continued fleet analysis approach (3–4 new projects) of various 

technologies based on highest potential for fuel reduction and fleet 

interest (using National Clean Fleets Partnership as forum) 

5. Better data coordination and data sharing to enable technology 

development across VTO offices (i.e., battery data to promote better VTO 

battery research efforts in MD/HD)
22

Summary

• MD and HD testing, data collection, and analysis will help drive design, 

purchase, and research investments:

o Making data publically available

o Feeding vocational database for future analysis

o Data available for more accurate modeling and simulation efforts

o Analysis of data underway (and more available upon request)

• Unbiased approach to determine in-use duty cycle and make a valid A-B 

comparison (conventional vs. new technology):

o Highlights the "multi-functional" characteristics of MD and HD vehicles

o Provides accurate laboratory and field data to explore range of 

opportunities for each technology
23

Acknowledgements and Contacts

Thanks to:

Vehicle & Systems Simulation & Testing Activity – Lee Slezak and David Anderson

Vehicle Technologies Office – U.S. Department of Energy

For more information:

Kevin Walkowicz

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

kevin.walkowicz@nrel.gov

phone: 303.275.4492

23
Technical Back-Up Slides

(Note: please include this “separator” slide if 

you are including back-up technical slides 

(maximum of five). These back-up technical 

slides will be available for your presentation 

and will be included in the DVD and Web PDF 

files released to the public.)
25

Technical Accomplishments: Frito-Lay EV Case Study Plan

1. Acquire data describing Total Cost of Ownership from following sources:

1. Smith and NREL on-board data loggers to compare usage

2. Frito-Lay site-energy monitoring systems 

– Efficiency

– Charge times

– Duty cycles

3. Maintenance and fueling logs (in process)

4. Infrastructure cost estimates (in process)

5. Battery degradation tests – see supplement

2. Develop baseline fuel usage and drive cycle profiles from diesel trucks to 

compare with EV performance (potential fuel savings)

3. Assess potential for grid integration

o Simulate charge management schemes that improve business case

o Target demand charge reduction and use of renewables

25
26

Technical Accomplishments: Frito-Lay EV Battery Degradation Testing

• Validate DOE-developed degradation / life 

models of today’s lithium-ion technologies 

in MD/HD vehicle duty cycles

• Quantify impact of operating conditions on 

lifetime for commercial fleets

o Drive cycle (depth of discharge, voltage, 

cycles, etc.)

o Climate (temp)

• Developed load bank data acquisition 

experimental setup

o Discharges battery over pre-determined 

profile (C/6 rate)

o Monitors capacity, cell voltage variation, 

temperatures

• Initial two rounds of testing have been 

completed at four locations 

o Periodic tests planned every 6 months –

next testing in April 2014

o More locations being planned

26

Battery Degradation 

Load Test Setup

NREL PIX 29612
27

Three vehicle tests at NREL (ReFUEL)

1. Parker Hannifin-owned HHV identical to UPS vehicles 

(complete)

o 2012 diesel powered

2. 2012 UPS gasoline V8 powered P100 (complete)

o UPS did not buy diesel + selective catalyst reduction -

equipped delivery vans in Baltimore, opting for gasoline

3. 2012 Diesel conventional comparison (complete)

o Similar vehicle from another fleet

Three standard duty cycles and one representative 

UPS cycle generated with DRIVE tool

o NY Comp, CSHVC, and HHDDT to bracket field 

data

– NY Comp and HHDDT offer direct comparison to 

Minneapolis study ReFUEL testing

o One custom representative cycle of “typical” 

observed operation created with DRIVE

Technical Accomplishments: Background on UPS HHV Chassis 

Dynamometer Testing 
28

Technical Accomplishments: Additional UPS HHV Drive Cycle 

Analysis Information

6 weeks of GPS duty cycle data analyzed:

 18 delivery vans tested

 290 days of combined operation

• Parker HHVs are being used on routes that 

are not ideal for maximizing hybrid 

advantage 

• The HHVs are driving only 55% of their miles 

at speeds where the hydraulic system can 

transmit more than 10% of the power –

where hybrid advantage can be realized

• The HHVs are being used on routes that 

more closely resemble the "conventional" 

routes in previous Minneapolis study

** Minneapolis UPS HEVs demonstrated 

only a 13% fuel economy advantage on the 

“conventional" routes compared to 20% 

advantage on "hybrid" routes 
29

Technical Accomplishments: HHV Freight Efficiency Comparison

• Freight efficiency based on 4,000-lb 

cargo weight used for all vehicles

• Ton-mi/gal value based on total 

vehicle + cargo weight (4,000 lb)