首页> 外文期刊>Transportation research >Corrigendum to 'Fuel economy testing of autonomous vehicles' [Transp. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 65 (2016) 31-48]
【24h】

Corrigendum to 'Fuel economy testing of autonomous vehicles' [Transp. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 65 (2016) 31-48]

机译:“自动驾驶汽车燃油经济性测试”勘误表[Trans。 Res。 C部分:新兴技术。 65(2016)31-48]

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This paper presents a reanalysis of two of the models and one of the vehicles used in a previously published paper "Fuel Economy Testing of Autonomous Vehicles" (Mersky and Samaras, 2016). In that paper, a method for testing the fuel economy of automated vehicle features was proposed and tested, via simulation. In that paper, for the rule-sets and vehicles tested, it was estimated that fuel economy could change from -3 to + 10%; this has been amended to -3 to + 5%. In the prior paper, it was concluded that the VelocityACC control method occasionally improved fuel economy, that HeadwayACC generally performed worse than VelocityACC and that PlannedACC performed best. HeadwayACC and VelocityACC were also found to be insensitive to target headway. In this paper implementation errors were corrected in VelocityACC and HeadwayACC. Additionally, of the four vehicles tested, the 2011 Toyota Camry was rerun with four cylinders, rather than six. Under the assumptions used, VelocityACC has been found to never increase fuel economy, when following base EPA cycles. HeadwayACC has been found to always increase fuel economy and perform better than PlannedACC, when following base EPA cycles. Both HeadwayACC and VelocityACC were found to be sensitive to desired headway, improving fuel economy as desired headway increased. These amended results serve to further reinforce the importance of testing automated vehicle feature fuel economy as was concluded in the previous paper.
机译:本文对之前发表的论文《自动驾驶汽车的燃油经济性测试》(Mersky和Samaras,2016年)中使用的两种模型和一种汽车进行了重新分析。在该论文中,提出了一种通过仿真来测试自动车辆功能的燃油经济性的方法。在该论文中,对于测试的规则集和车辆,估计燃油经济性可以从-3变为+ 10%;此值已修改为-3至+ 5%。在先前的论文中得出的结论是,VelocityACC控制方法偶尔会改善燃油经济性,HeadwayACC通常比VelocityACC表现差,而PlannedACC表现最好。还发现HeadwayACC和VelocityACC对目标行进不敏感。在本文中,在VelocityACC和HeadwayACC中纠正了实现错误。此外,在接受测试的四辆车中,2011年丰田凯美瑞使用四个气缸而不是六个气缸重新运行。根据使用的假设,发现在遵循基本EPA循环时,VelocityACC永远不会增加燃油经济性。人们发现,在遵循基本EPA循环时,HeadwayACC始终可以提高燃油经济性,并且性能优于PlannedACC。发现HeadwayACC和VelocityACC都对所需的行驶距离敏感,随着所需的行驶距离增加,燃油经济性提高。这些修正的结果进一步增强了测试自动车辆功能燃油经济性的重要性,如前文所述。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Transportation research》 |2018年第2期|212-217|共6页
  • 作者单位

    Carnegie Mellon Univ, Porter Hall 119,5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA;

    Carnegie Mellon Univ, Porter Hall 119,5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号