详情

原文传递 Literature Review and OEM/Test House Interviews on Alternatives for Determining Demerits of Vehicle Performance

题名：	Literature Review and OEM/Test House Interviews on Alternatives for Determining Demerits of Vehicle Performance
作者：	Wellmann, T.
关键词：	Driveability##Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)##Launch feel##Performance feel##Root Mean Square (RMS)##Vibration Dose Value (VDV) of acceleration##Maximum Transient Vibration Value ( MTVV)##Acceleration Discontinuity (AD)##Acceleration Hole (AH)##Upshift Sportivity (UP)##Automated Manual Transmission (AMT)##Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV)##Literature review##
摘要：	The goal of the Coordinating Research Council (CRC) Project No. CM-138-16-1, “Literature Review and OEM/Test House Interviews on Alternatives for Determining Demerits of Vehicle Performance” was to develop an understanding of current technology available to determine vehicle driveability performance demerits using alternatives to human trained evaluators. The results show that the evaluation of driveability includes multiple aspects, with the transmission-related driveability as one of main focus areas amongst the interviewees. Most of the participants in this study (92.6 %) use a mix of objective and subjective evaluations and none of them rely solely on objective methods to meet the requirements for a production program. Objective evaluation tools benefit from the large quantity of data around standard driveability maneuvers that can be analyzed and easily compared. Further, driveability results are generally more repeatable and not biased by subjective opinions. However, CRC Report No. CM-138-16-1 objective tools are expensive and according to the interviewees’ objective evaluations take on average approximately four times longer than subjective evaluations (74 hours versus 18 hours). Further, it was stated that objective tools often only rate specific aspects and driving maneuvers, but currently do not give a full picture of overall vehicle performance. Correlation between subjective impressions and objective tools is very important for acceptance of the tools. In the end, subjective evaluations trump objective measurements, when the two ratings disagree. During the questionnaire it was stated that not all possible driveability issues are currently covered by the existing tools. Therefore, further customization and improvement of the tools regarding items such as data management, detection of outliers, tool robustness, and tool consistency, will be required. In summary, objective driveability tools are well-established in the industry and these tools support driveability evaluations with respect to improved repeatability and documentation of results. Further, they can be used in combination with optimization algorithms for achieving a satisfactory baseline vehicle calibration in reasonable time. Since all experts (interviewed as part of the survey) indicated that they do not rely solely on objective driveability tools, a combination of subjective evaluations and objective tools will continue to be utilized in the vehicle development process.
总页数：	76
报告类型：	科技报告