—With respect to a change in any other characteristic extensions may be granted after agreement with the technical service responsible for conducting the tests. Also needs to be discussed with the EV group. 3.5.5 Extension of type-approval of vehicles of category N within a family 3.5.5.1 For vehicles of category N that are approved as members of a vehicle family using the procedure in Section 3.6.2, the type-approval shall be extended to vehicles from within the same family only if the technical service estimates that the fuel consumption of the new vehicle does not exceed the fuel consumption of the vehicle on which the family’s fuel consumption is based. Type-approvals may also be extended to vehicles which are up to 110 kg heavier than the family member tested, provided that they are within 220 kg of the lightest member of the family, —have a lower overall transmission ratio than the family member tested due solely to a change in tyre sizes, and, —conform with the family in all other respects Review needed “family’s fuel consumption” in WLTP ? “extension up to 110 kg heavier than the family member tested, provided that they are within 220 kg of the lightest member of the family.” Do not fit into the combined approach of WLTP!! See above Multi-stage vehicles introduce a lot of complexity for dealing with extensions of type approval for category N vehicles. Need to review how this fits into the combined approach. For the combined approach the actual mass of the vehicle needs to be used. The methods to deal with optional equipment could be extended to deal with different bodywork. André Rijnders to draft a first proposal. 3.5.5.2 For vehicles of category N that are as members of a vehicle family using the procedure in point 3.6.3, the type-approval can be extended to vehicles from within the same family without additional testing only if the technical service estimates that the fuel consumption of the new vehicle falls within the limits made up of those two vehicles in the family that have the lowest and the highest fuel consumption, respectively. Review needed See above 3.6 type-approval of vehicles of category n within a family for fuel consumption and CO2 emissions UTAC comment Not needed, include in § 3.1 It was agreed with the UTAC recommendation to include type-approval of vehicles of category n within a family for fuel consumption and CO2 emissions into paragraph 3.1. type- stage
relevant extension. Also RLD checks needed “feedback approach” see WLTP-DTP-LabProcICE-040. 4.3.2. If the approval authority is not satisfied with the auditing procedure of the manufacturer, points 3.3 and 3,4 of Annex X to Directive 2007/46/EC shall apply. Is a review needed? There are no criteria for how many audits the TA should conduct and there are no criteria for “not satisfied”. Annex X will in practice not often (never) be used by the TA. See above 4.3.3 For the purpose of this section and Appendices 1 and 2, the term ‘pollutant’ shall include the regulated pollutants (given in Tables 1 and 2 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 715/2007) and the emission of CO2. See above 4.3.4 The conformity of the vehicle for CO2 emissions shall be determined in accordance with the procedure described in point 4.2.2. with the following exceptions Statistic approach up to 32 vehicles see above See above 4.3.4.1 Three vehicles shall be randomly taken in the series and tested as described in Annex XII. See above 4.3.4.2 However, at the request of the manufacturer, the tests may be carried out on vehicles which have completed a maximum of 15 000 km. In this case, the running-in procedure shall be conducted by the manufacturer, who shall undertake not to make any adjustments to these vehicles See above 4.3.4.3 If the manufacturer wishes to run in the vehicles, (‘x’ km, where x 15 000 km), the procedure shall be the following:…… See above 4.3.4.5 When checking the conformity of vehicle for CO2 emissions, as an alternative to the procedure mentioned in Section 4.3.4.3, the vehicle manufacturer may use a fixed evolution coefficient EC of 0,92 and multiply all values of Review needed!! UTAC comment Yes, because the manufacturer use the same coast down as for type approval (run in vehicle) Is this alternative procedure with an evolution factor See above
Appendix 3 Model INFORMATION DOCUMENT 0 GENERAL 2 MASSES AND DIMENSIONS (c) (in kg and mm) 2.6 Mass of the vehicle with bodywork and, in the case of the towing vehicle of a category other than M1 with coupling device, if fitted by the manufacturer, in running order, or mass of the chassis or chassis with cab, without bodywork and/or coupling device if the manufacturer does not fit the bodywork and/or coupling device (including liquids, tools, spare wheel, if fitted, and driver and, for buses and coaches, a crew member if there is a crew seat in the vehicle (a) (maximum and minimum for each variant): Review needed UTAC comment Yes Additional information needed: -Mass of option equipment etc. Agreed that review is needed. Changes will need to be reflected in a simultaneous update to the Framework Directive. TBD 2.8 Technically permissible maximum laden mass stated by the manufacturer (b) (*) See above 3.2.12.2.1.10. Heat shield: yes/no (1) Heat recovery information should be added See above 3.2.12.2.1.11. Regeneration systems/method of exhaust after-treatment systems, description: See above 3.2.12.2.1.11.1. The number of Type 1 operating cycles, or equivalent engine test bench cycles, between two cycles where regenerative phases occur under the conditions equivalent to Type 1 test (Distance ‘D’ in figure 1 in Annex 13 to UN/ECE Regulation 83): From type 1 (NEDC) to WLTC See above 3.2.12.2.1.11.4. Description of method used to load system in the test procedure described in In annex 13 of R.83 the type 1 test cycles are used. Change into WLTC cycles? See above