Experimental Fuel Consumption Results from a Heterogeneous Four-Truck Platoon
Platooning has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas missions of heavy-duty vehicles. Prior platooning studies have chiefly focused on the fuel economy characteristics and three-truck platoons, and most have investigated aerodynamically homogeneous platoons with trucks of the same trim. For real world application and accurate return on investment for potential adopters, non-uniform platoons and the impacts of grade and disturbances on a platoon’s fuel economy must also be characterized. This study investigates the fuel economy of a heterogeneous four-truck platoon on a closed test track. Tests were run for one hour at a speed of 45 mph. The trucks used for this study are two 2015 Peterbilt 579’s with a Cummins ISX15 and a Paccar MX-13, and two 2009 Freightliner M915A5’s, one armored and the other unarmored. Many analysis methodologies were leveraged to describe and compare the fuel data, including lap-wise and track-segment analysis. The methodology for dividing the data into laps is described in detail. The influence of other factors beyond the aerodynamics of platooning is discussed. CAN fuel rate analysis showed excellent agreement with previous experimental trends for two and three-truck platoons. In general, the indicated fuel economy benefits in this study were 5-11% for following vehicles and 0-4% for the lead vehicle in platoon relative to their baseline fuel consumption. On a cumulative basis, all platoons saved fuel, ranging from 6% to 8% versus the sum of the standalone trucks’ fuel consumption. The practical implications of the fuel economy results are discussed, as well as avenues for future research. Introduction and Motivation platooning is controlled coordination of two or more vehicles in a convoy, sometimes called CACC (Coordinated or Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control). The distance between vehicles in a platoon can be controlled tightly at no additional fatigue to the driver. Platooning vehicles can also respond quickly to braking events of the leader, much more quickly than the typical human driver’s reaction time of 1-1.5 s. Therefore, vehicles in a platoon can follow each other much more closely than would usually be considered a safe following distance under human operation. It is implied that under very close following conditions, platooning technology must be extremely robust before it is safe for wide-scale implementation. Platooning is under investigation as a fuel-saving technology. Close-following significantly reduces aerodynamic drag for both leading and trailing vehicles. According to the NRC in 2010, aerodynamic drag represents roughly half of a Class-8 truck’s on-highway fuel usage, meaning a 20% reduction in drag roughly equals a 10% reduction in fuel usage, if all other sources of energy loss remain equal (i.e. accessory, rolling resistance, drivetrain, braking). It is by aerodynamics that platooning saves fuel. At risk of oversimplifying the aerodynamics, following (or trailing) vehicles experience reduced wind velocity due to shielding, and the leading vehicles experience an increased aft pressure, especially at distances closer than 75’ (23 m).