See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258256299

Methodologies for driving cycle development, using on-Road data from

Athens

Conference Paper · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

5 1,455

3 authors, including:

Fanourios E. Zannikos Evangelos. G. Tzirakis

National Technical University of Athens Hellenic Mediteranean University
173 PUBLICATIONS 3,165 CITATIONS 22 PUBLICATIONS 328 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Evangelos. G. Tzirakis on 18 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

Methodologies for driving cycle development, using on-Road data from

Athens

Evangelos Tzirakis Alexios Kyriakidis Fanourios Zannikos

Dr
National Technical
University of Athens
Athens, Greece
vtziraks@central.ntua.gr
PhD Researcher
National Technical
University of Athens
Athens, Greece
alexkyr@central.ntua.gr
Associate Professor
National Technical
University of Athens
Athens, Greece
fzanntua@central.ntua.gr

Abstract
Two different methodologies for the development of driving cycles were designed and used
through computer programming. On-road data from various test vehicles and driving patterns
were adopted in order to be used for the calculations. Data were processed to form a driving
cycle of an exact number of driving periods. This number was evaluated from the on- road data
analysis.
During the designing of the two methods it was obtained that they can be adopted according to
the case. The first method was applied for short duration and limited number of driving
periods. The second method was applied for long duration and multi-driving period cycles. This
constitutes one of the main differences between the methods. Furthermore, they were designed in
order to secure that a great number of characteristics of the resulted driving cycles meet the
corresponding characteristics of the road data used. In this work, 10 main characteristics of the
driving cycles were used for the process.
For direct comparison, the same data set was processed using both methods to develop two
driving cycles. Those two results, in combination with the rest of the driving cycles developed
showed the differences between the methods as well as their advantages and disadvantages of the
methods.
The main advantage of the first method is that it gives accurate results with limited amount of
data. Its main disadvantage is that it is time consuming. The main advantage of the second
method is that it consumes very little time. Its disadvantage is that it needs large amount of data
in order to give high accuracy results.

1. Introduction
In order to estimate emissions from vehicles, researchers in universities and organizations have
developed driving cycles used for dynamometer emission testing. Driving cycles are speed time
profiles representing the driving conditions in a city and/or wider area.
There are two major categories of driving cycles, legislative and non-legislative. According to
legislative driving cycles, exhaust Emission Specifications are imposed by governments for the
car emission certification. Such cycles are the FTP-75 used in the USA the NEDC used in
Europe and the 10-15 used in Japan. Non-legislative cycles find broad application in research for
energy conservation and pollution evaluation such as the Hong Kong driving cycle (HY Tong
 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

and others, 1999), and the Athens driving cycle (ADC) (E Tzirakis and others 2006). Driving
cycles find broad application in research for energy conservation and pollution evaluation
through the vehicle testing on exhaust emissions and fuel consumption (TJ Lyons and others,
1986) (DJ Simanaitis 1977) as well as in the field of vehicle design tooling and marketing (HC
Watson and others, 1982).
Recent researches have shown that the comparison of NEDC with driving cycles from on-road
data from European and non-European cities on emission and fuel consumption levels, showed
significant differences (E Tzirakis, 2006, M Ergeneman and others, 1997). Each city has
different driving profile and the data collected result in a different driving cycle. Those
characteristics could be the road network, the driving behavior and the vehicle fleet potentiality
and number (M Andre, 2006).
It is also essential for the driving cycles to be updated frequently. The characteristics mentioned
in the previous paragraph, change through the years within a city or area, as the road network is
improved or updated the vehicles are changing in characteristics and number and drivers
behavior changes due to stress in a modern city. There is no point of discussing the CO2
emissions from a newly designed vehicle, when the exhaust emission and fuel consumption are
estimated on a driving cycle which is not up to date and does not represent the driving conditions
of modern cities (eg. NEDC). Since emissions differ from cycle to cycle, new technology
“green” car solutions should be tested on cycles that follow the flow of the era.

2. Driving cycle development

There are two ways of developing a driving cycle. One is composed from various driving modes
of constant acceleration, deceleration and speed (like the NEDC and ECE), and is referred as
modal or polygonal (M Kuhler and D Karstens, 1978). The other type is derived from actual
driving data and is referred as “real world” cycle. Such cycles are the FTP-75 and the ADC. The
real world cycles are more dynamic, reflecting the more rapid acceleration and deceleration
patterns experienced during on road conditions. This more dynamic driving in real world
conditions results on higher emissions compared to those under the standard emission (modal)
test cycles (OECD, 2004).
Researchers describe in their work the methodology of constructing a driving cycle using on-
road data. The methodologies include techniques such as the chase car method with instrumented
vehicles, route selection or complete road network coverage of specific areas and cycle
construction where a large number of road data specification, meets the corresponding
specification of the cycle.
Since the beginning of driving cycle development scientists were using the available technology
to log and process on-road data from moving vehicles in order to conclude to a representative
result (driving cycle). A number of its characteristics should meet in the largest percentage
possible, the corresponding characteristics of the on road data. Several methods were developed
by scientists, in order to conclude to a driving cycle from a set of road data. Sometimes the
process was in extend of the whole trip a vehicle was performing and some others in extend of
its micro trips. W.T. Hung and others (2007) describe the Hong Kong cycle construction
methodology (WT Hung, 2007). For the monitoring of European traffic characteristics and the
formation of representative driving cycles, a number of institutions are involved such. An
example is INRETS in France (M Andre, 2004).

3. Methodology
 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

In the present work, the area of Athens was selected for the collection of on-road data with the
aid of instrumented vehicles. The method comprises three major components, the logging
technique, the route or area selection and the cycle construction methodology. This paper refers
to the third component describing the concept of the methodology. Vehicles were moving
according to various modes and techniques. For the construction of the Athens Urban Driving
Cycle, the chase car technique was used as well as specific every day routes for a large number
of vehicles. Specific areas of Athens were selected in order to record on road data from vehicles
that are looking for a parking spot (E Tzirakis and others, 2006).

3.1 Methods used

Two methods were determined using Matlab code. Driving cycles were obtained using the two
methods and the same set of data, in order to compare the characteristics of the methods, such as
process time and accuracy of the results obtained.

3.1.1 Method ‘A’

The first method used (method ‘A’) is presented in Figure 1a. On road data were collected
second by second and processed in the form of stop-drive-stop phases. Taking 5 basic
characteristics under consideration, a marginal 5% of the total number of phases was removed.
Then they were separated in groups according to the duration of the phases. A capable number of
phases were selected from each group according to their duration starting from the mean value of
the duration of each group. The number of phases selected depends upon the accuracy and the
number of the input criteria and the capability of the computer used to do the combinations. The
selected phases are then used for a very large number of combinations, which depends on the
number of the groups and phases selected from each group, are performed in order to have the
desired result of which the basic characteristics (input criteria) will be as close to the
characteristics of the road data as possible. The basic criteria where based upon a number of
average values of the on-road data which must agree with those of the final cycle. Those criteria
are: % stop time, % positive acceleration, % negative acceleration, average speed without the
stops, average positive acceleration and average negative acceleration. For the driving cycles
developed for the city of Athens, the method gives very accurate results for the characteristics
mentioned (over 99% match) and acceptable percentages for a great number of other
characteristics (over 95% match). Those percentages seem to depend upon the population of the
data and the number of the input criteria.

3.1.2 Method ‘B’

The second method (method ‘B’) is different from method ‘A’ only after the 3th step (Figure
1b). As can be seen from the diagram, the specific method is much simpler than ‘A’. Practically,
method ‘B’ is a very quick statistical evaluation of the driving phases according to the input
criteria, which can be performed only by using programming. This method gives only one result
which is a combination of phases of different duration. The basic characteristics (input criteria)
of the result match, in the greatest percentage possible, the corresponding characteristics of the
on-road data. The accuracy increases as the population of the data increases. The basic criteria
used were the same as the method ‘A’.

3.1.3 Comparison
Both methods are determined in a way that will give driving cycles as combination of phases of
different duration from real driving data. The group separation in both methods was essential in
order to avoid having phases of the same duration in the resulting cycle. The methods differ from
 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

each other only in the final stage of driving cycle formation, through the phase combination. The
phase groups used are the same for both methods.
For comparison purposes the same set of data was processed using both methods described in the
previous paragraphs. The resulted cycles have similarities and dissimilarities. It can be observed
(Figure 2) that the second phase from the left for both cycles is chosen by the computer programs
to be the same.

Road data in the form of driving phases Road data in the form of driving phases

Removal of 5% of Removal of 5% of
the marginal phases • Duration the marginal phases • Duration
according to the • Distance according to the • Distance
criteria: • Average criteria: • Average
speed speed
• Maximum • Maximum
speed speed
Separation in equal Separation in equal
• Average in number groups • Average
in number groups
acceleration according to the acceleration
according to the
duration of the duration of the
phases phases

Selection of capable Criteria input Estimation according to

number of phases for the driving the minimum summation
according to duration, cycle selection of the deviation
around the mean depending on percentages from the
value of each group the needs mean value of the groups
for each criterion

Combinations with the

phases on from each
Change of
group at a time for the
the input
formation of the cycle
criteria
and checking according
depending on
to the criteria Selection of the specific
the result
phases which constitute
Phases Phases the Average Driving
combination combination Cycle of all data used in
=0 or =1 the process
Phases
combination
>1

Final Driving Cycle Final Driving Cycle

Figure 1. Methods developed for driving cycle construction (Method ‘A’: left, Method ‘B’: right).
 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

Figure 2. Driving cycles developed with two different methods using the same set of data.

Time is an important issue when processing data. Method ‘A’ is time consuming but gives very
accurate results. Many of the characteristics of the cycle match over 99% the corresponding
characteristics of the on-road data (Table 1). Using the ‘B’ method, the resulting cycle is
acceptable since the smallest match percentage is 95.57%. Despite the acceptable percentage the
time needed for the computer to process the data was extremely small (9 seconds).

Table 1. Comparison of matching percentages in 9 characteristics of driving cycles with the corresponding of
the on-road data, developed through two different methods using the same set of data.
Method ‘A’ Method ‘B’
Time consumed (computer) 5 hours 9 seconds
Cycle duration 100 97,44
Duration while moving 100 97,10
Average speed 99,76 97,09
Average speed (without stops) 99,79 96,95
% stop time 99,56 99,26
Time while in positive acceleration 100 96,13
Time while in negative acceleration 100 95,57
Average positive acceleration 99,93 97,30
Average negative acceleration 100 97,85

Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages of the methods used.

Advantage Disadvantage
Acceptable results with small Time consuming depending on
Method ‘A’
amount of data the number of groups
Large amount of data needed for
Method ‘B’ Quick processing
acceptable results

4. CONCLUSION
Driving cycles are essential tools for the estimation of exhaust emissions from vehicles and
should be updated frequently. The methods presented in this paper give the opportunity to the
researcher to easily update its driving cycles by entering the latest on road data.
 Transport Research Arena Europe 2008, Ljubljana

Method ‘A’ is suitable for driving cycle development with small number of phases and the
amount of data is limited. Although the phase combination gives accurate results it is time
consuming. Method ‘B’ is suitable for driving cycle formation which must consist of many
phases. Method ‘A’ is not suitable for this occasion as it needs much more time. On the other
hand, there is a need for a large amount of data (Table 2).
More criteria could be added in the programs in order for the resulting driving cycles to be more
representative in relation to the characteristics of the road data. Adding criteria could lead to
their low accuracy. The accuracy is improved when the set of data grows.
It is necessary for the driving profile to be updated through new road data recordings, set by the
changes in traffic conditions which are the result of the development of road networks, the
growing and change of the car fleet, the traffic adjustments or the changes in driving behavior, in
order to be reliable and to meet up to date traffic conditions.

5. References
1. Tong H.Y., Hung W.T., Cheung C.S. (1999). ‘Development of a driving cycle for
Hong Kong’. Atmospheric Environment, 33, pp. 2323-2335.
2. Tzirakis E., Pitsas K., Zannikos F., Stournas S. (2006). ‘Vehicle Emissions and
Driving Cycles: Comparison of the Athens Driving Cycle (ADC) with ECE-15 and
European Driving cycle (EDC)’. Global NEST Journal, Ref. No:
GNEST09/012/05/376. Vol 8, No 3, pp. 282-290
3. Lyons, T.J., Kenworthy, J.R., Austin, P.I., Newman, P.W.G. (1986). ‘The
development of a driving cycle for fuel consumption and emissions evaluation’.
Transportation Research Vol. A No. 20, pp. 447–462
4. Simanaitis, D.J. (1977). ‘Emission test cycles around the world’. Automotive
Engineering, 85, pp. 34–43.
5. Watson, H.C., Milkins, E.E., Braunsteins, J. (1982). ‘The development of Melbourne
peak cycle’, SAE-A and ARRB Traffic Energy and Emissions Conference Paper
82148, Melbourne.
6. Ergeneman, M., Sorusbay, C., Go¨ktan, A. (1997). ‘Development of a driving cycle
for the prediction of pollutant emissions and fuel consumption’. International
Journal of Vehicle Design, 18, pp. 391–399.
7. Andre, M., Joumard, R., Vidon, R., Tassel, P., Perret, P. (2006). ‘Real-world
European driving cycles, for measuring pollutant emissions from high- and low-
powered cars’. Atmospheric Environment, 40, pp. 5944–5953.
8. Kuhler, M., Karstens, D. (1978). ‘Improved driving cycle for testing automotive
exhaust emissions’, SAE Technical Paper Series 780650.
9. OECD, (2004) “Can Cars Come Clean? Strategies for low-emission vehicles”,
©OECD 2004, ISBN 926410495X, pp. 34.
10. Hung W.T., Tong H.Y., Lee C.P., Ha K., Pao L.Y. (2007). ‘Development of a
practical driving cycle construction methodology: A case study in Hong Kong’.
Transportation Research Part D, 12, pp. 115–128.
11. Andre, M. (2004). ‘The ARTEMIS European driving cycles for measuring car
pollutant emissions’. Science of the Total Environment 334 –335, pp. 73–84.
12. E. Tzirakis, F. Zannikos, S. Stournas. ‘Development of Driving Cycles under Special
Traffic Conditions: Parking Driving Cycle in Athens’. Conference Proceedings of
2nd conference 'Environment & Transport', including 15th conference 'Transport
and Air Pollution', Reims, France 12-14 June 2006.

View publication stats