2015 OBDCERTIFICATION WORKSHOP

A Non Governmental Organization in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations

2015OBD CERTIFICATION

WORKSHOP

April 23, 2015Chicago Marriott O’Hare

Confidential Business InformationNot for Distribution


OBD Certification WorkshopApril 23, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. AGENDA

2. ANTITRUST GUIDELINES

3. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

4. PRESENTATIONS

A. Certification Potpourri Panel John Trajnowski - Moderator

B. Deficiencies and Concerns EMA Staff

C. ARB Preparatory Session All

D. Update from ARB Tom Montes (ARB)

E. Non-Traditional Certification Rob WeissAbishek Muralidharan

F. Experience with PM Sensors Panel Don Keski Hynnila - Moderator

G. Potential Impacts of OBD II Biennial Review Changes on Future Heavy-Duty OBD

Dave Ferris

H. International OBD: Europe, Mexico and Japan Ron Davis

I. Litigation Status and What’s Next Tim FrenchLisa Stegink

5. MARRIOTT FLOOR PLAN

81575_1.docx

2015 OBD Certification Workshop

Thursday, April 23, 2015 Chicago Marriott O’Hare

Terminal 5 8535 West Higgins Road Chicago, Illinois 60631

DRAFT AGENDA

TOPIC SPEAKERS

7:00 a.m. – 7:45 a.m. Registration – Booth B Continental Breakfast – Terminal 1-3

7:45 a.m. – 8:00 a .m. Welcome and Opening Remarks John Trajnowski

8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Certification Potpourri Panel (Ken McAlinden, Chad Grugel, Fredrik Wattwil, Greg Pataky)

John Trajnowski - Moderator

9:00 a.m. – 9:45 a.m. Deficiencies and Concerns EMA Staff

9:45 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Break

10:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. ARB Preparatory Session All

10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. California Air Resources Board Tom Montes (ARB)

12:00 p.m. – 12:45 p.m. Lunch – Terminal 1-3

12:45 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. Non-Traditional Certification

Rob Weiss Abishek Muralidharan

1:15 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. Experience with PM Sensors Panel

(Justin Kosik, Ken McAlinden, Tom Sloane)

Don Keski-Hynnila - Moderator

2:00 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. Potential Impacts of OBD II Biennial Review Changes on Future Heavy-Duty OBD

Dave Ferris

2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. Break

2:45 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. International OBD: Europe, Mexico and Japan Ron Davis

3:30 p.m. – 3:55 p.m. Litigation Status and What’s Next Tim French Lisa Stegink

3:55 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Closing Remarks John Trajnowski


TRUCK AND ENGINE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATIONANTITRUST GUIDELINES

While the positive contributions of trade associations are well recognized and encouraged by government, their activities also are subject to close scrutiny under both federal and state antitrust laws. The single most significant law affecting trade associations is the Sherman Antitrust Act, which makes unlawful every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade. Because a tradeassociation is, by nature, a group of competitors joined together for a common business purpose, trade associations satisfy what would ordinarily be a difficult element in proving an antitrust violation.

Historically, the most significant area of antitrust concern for trade associations has been price fixing. Price fixing is a very broad term which includes any concerted effort or action that has an effect on prices, terms or conditions of trade, or on competitors. Accordingly, members of the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) and individuals attending or participating in EMA’s meetings and workshops should refrain from any discussion which may provide the basis for an inference that they agreed to take any action relating to prices, services, production, allocation of markets or any other matter having a market effect. These discussions should be avoided both at formal meetings and workshops and at informal gatherings. The following are guidelines that EMA members and attendeesshould follow at all EMA meetings, workshops and informal gatherings:

- DON’T discuss your own or competitors’ prices or fees for service, or anything that might affect prices or fees, such as costs, discounts, or profit margins.

- DON’T stay at a meeting where any such price talk occurs.

- DON’T make public announcements or statements about your own prices or fees, or those of competitors, at any EMA meeting.

- DON’T talk about what individual member companies plan to do in particular geographic or product markets or with particular customers.

- DON’T speak or act on behalf of EMA unless specifically authorized to do so.

- DO alert EMA officers or legal counsel to any sensitive issues in proposed statements to be made on behalf of the EMA.

- DO consult with your own legal counsel or EMA before raising any matter or making any statement that you think may involve competitively sensitive information.

- DO be alert to improper activities, and don’t participate if you think something is improper.

Adherence to these guidelines involves not only avoidance of antitrust violations, but avoidance of behavior which might be so construed. Bear in mind that the antitrust laws are stated in general terms, and that these guidelines only provide an overview of prohibited actions. If you have specific questions, seek guidance from your own legal counsel or from EMA’s staff or legal counsel.

63857_1


2015 OBD Certification WorkshopApril 23, 2015

Participation List

Name and Company Phone Number Email

AGCO Power Inc.Sami Sahimaki +35 82 0786 3600 [email protected]

Cummins Inc.Barb Chance (812) 377-8520 [email protected] Davis [email protected] Muralidharan (812) 341-4940 [email protected] Pataky (812) 377-3945 [email protected] Pimple (812) 377-5940 [email protected] Psota (812) 552-6353 [email protected] Ratnalikar (812) 390-9221 [email protected] Weiss (810) 377-0803 [email protected]

Daimler Trucks North America LLCGerald Freitag (503) 745-6938 [email protected] Golub (313) 592-5036 [email protected] Hawkins (313) 592-3750 [email protected] Keski-Hynnila (313) 592-7568 [email protected] Kosik (313) 592-7080 [email protected] LaVoie (313) 310-2397 [email protected] Potter (313) 592-7376 [email protected] Priest (313) 610-1088 [email protected] Slayden (313) 592-1392 [email protected] Super (313) 592-5438 [email protected]

Deere & CompanyDeanna Carroll (319) 504-6153 [email protected] Guruswamy (319) 292-7463 [email protected]

Fiat Powertrain Technologies S.p.A.Brandon Baumgartner (425) 931-3563 [email protected] Mendrick (248) 576-5464 [email protected] Stuber (630) 481-2832 [email protected]

-2-

Ford Motor CompanyKen McAlinden (313) 32-24018 [email protected] Gabbert (313) 323-7122 [email protected] Trajnowski (313) 322-5670 [email protected] Whitbeck (313) 323-1670 [email protected]

General Motors CompanyDave Ferris (248) 310-3265 [email protected]

Hino Motors Manufacturing U.S.A., Inc.James Dixon (248) 660-4151 [email protected] Kudo (248) 442-6882 [email protected]

Isuzu Manufacturing Services of America, Inc.Scott Gordon (734) 678-3646 [email protected] Yarosz (810) 459-0221 [email protected] Yamauchi (734) 455-7595 [email protected]

Navistar, Inc.Chad Grugel (331) 332-1881 [email protected] Malanowski (331) 332-5706 [email protected] Murray (331) 332-5101 [email protected] Mago (331) 332-1880 [email protected]

PACCAR IncAdetokunbo Adekanmbi (360) 588-5916 [email protected] Feijen +31 40 214 5482 [email protected] Kieffer (425) 468-7270 [email protected] Luke (940) 591-4025 [email protected] Manning (940) 591-4284 [email protected] Potter (425) 468-7884 [email protected] Sloane (360) 757-5446 [email protected] Stazel (425) 828-5515 [email protected] Thedinga (3140) 214-4918 [email protected]

Volvo Group North AmericaRaymond Istenes (301) 790-5528 [email protected] Johansson +46 31 322 3142 [email protected] Wattwil +46 31 323 8484 [email protected]

Volkswagen Group of AmericaSuanne Thomas (248) 797-4074 [email protected]


Certification Potpourri Panel

Panel Participants

• John Trajnowski, Ford - Moderator• Chad Grugel, NavistarChad Grugel, Navistar• Ken McAlinden, Ford• Greg Pataky, Cummins• Fredrik Wattwil, Volvo

2

Discussion Topics

• Top 3 Things ARB Needs to Know about Heavy-Duty

• Heavy-Duty Aging Protocol Development• Unique ARB Documentation Requests for the

Non-Representative Calibrations in an OBD Group

• ARB Issues with IRAF Calculation Methodology

3

Top 3 Things ARB Needs to Know about Heavy-Duty

#1, HD Vehicles are normally used as Commercial Vehicles• A professional “tool” while LD vehicles are utilized differentlyA professional tool while LD vehicles are utilized differently• This implies that there is a broader variety in utilization

between different HD applications. • It is therefore of high importance to understand the differences

and how vehicles are operated:– Duty cycles: Stop and Go vs. Long-haul vs. Refuse – Cold Start every morning vs Cold Start once every week

4

– Cold Start every morning vs. Cold Start once every week (or even every second week)

– Cool down time for a HD vehicle vs. LD vehicle


#2, GHG vs. OBD• Decreased cruising speed for fuel consumption benefits in• Decreased cruising speed for fuel consumption benefits in

long-haul applications. – Engine demonstration in the FTP vs. Real Life Operation

(FTP cycle does not reflect “normal” HD vehicle operation conditions) – Monitor demonstration and In-use monitor evaluation

HD i d t ti

5

• HD engine demonstration• LD chassis demonstration


#3, In-Use Performance Monitoring Ratio• Some vehicles used for stand still operations resulting in that

general denominator will increment but multiple monitors will not evaluate (since high idle operation engine speed above 1150 rpm).

• Ignition Cycle vs. General Denominator for IUMPR report. Less ignition cycle counter than general denominator counter due to engines running during multiple days

6

Have in mind that denominator and numerator conditions should be frozen during PTO operation

Heavy-Duty Aging Protocol Development

• Requirements• Scope• Status

7

RequirementsBackground: California Air Resources Board (CARB) HDOBD regulations require development and approval of an accelerated aging protocol for all demonstration testing required for certification and running changes.

CCR 1971.1(i)(2.3) outlines the milestones required for certification starting in 2010 model year and beyond:

(2.3.1) – 2010+: Engine 125 hours AND Aftertreatment accelerated to full useful life through end of 2012 model year

(2.3.2)(A): Manufacturers are required to submit vehicle aged (185,000 miles) performance data of engines and aftertreament systems to develop or confirm aging protocol by end of 2011

(2.3.2)(B) – 2013+: Engine AND Aftertreatment accelerated to full useful life using approved aging

8

(2.3.2)(B) 2013 : Engine AND Aftertreatment accelerated to full useful life using approved aging protocol

(2.3.3)(A): Manufacturers are required to submit vehicle aged (435,000 miles) performance data of engines and aftertreament systems to confirm and update aging protocol by end of 2014

(2.3.3)(B) – 2016+: Engine AND Aftertreatment accelerated to full useful life using approved and updated aging protocol

ScopeConcept: Evaluate the performance of field-aged units and develop to control-aged systems using a specified protocol.

Starting point was to age control systems onl b d l ld fila cycle based on real world usage profile

(RWUP) cycles.

Initial concept was to base the protocol offengineering performance metrics (e.g.,EGR cooler efficiency, turbocharger boostefficiency) across components and systems.

• EGR cooler efficiency• Turbocharger efficiency• Aftertreatment catalyst efficiency

And o er 30 others for ario s s stems

9

• And over 30 others for various systems

Scope (continued)Upon review of first data points, CARB seemed to identify with the performance metrics but CARB simply mandated metrics based on emissions.

Emissions Performance Metric

• Engine Out (NMHC, CO, NOx)• Tailpipe Out (MNHC, PM, CO, NOx)

10

StatusGoals:

Engine System

1. Receive approval to age engine systems on standard accelerated cycle [COMPLETE]2. Align engine system aging cycle between DDVs and DFs [COMPLETE]3. Set up performance metrics for each key system and component [COMPLETE]4. Establish a test out scheme for individual components to remove from aging protocol [FAILED]

Aftertreatment System

1. Receive approval to age aftertreatment systems on standard oven-based cycle [COMPLETE]2. Receive approval to not age aftertreatment sensors as part of oven-based aging [COMPLETE]3. Receive approval to age aftertreatment systems separate from engine systems [COMPLETE]

11

However, even after approval, CARB continues to seek additional and specific validation…

Open Items

1. CARB seeking updated emissions values to account for cold FTPs and IRAFs2. CARB seeking an evaluation of performance and emissions impact of aged aftertreatment

sensors (NOx sensors)

Unique ARB Documentation Requests for the Non-Representative Calibrations in an OBD Group

• Introduction• Problem• Discussion

12

Introduction

• ARB has recently been requesting that Ford submit certain detailed calibration information for configurations other than the representative calibration in the OBD Familythe representative calibration in the OBD Family

• Examples requested for every test group/engine family:– Catalyst monitor distribution plots used to set monitor

thresholds– Thermostat regulating temperatures and highest minimum

ECT enable conditions for any monitor

Problem

• Due to the nature of representative calibrations (and especially interim representative calibrations), the calibration work on some test groups/engine families is not g p gcomplete at the time this information is being requested

• For ECT enable/thermostat data Ford provides design direction

• For catalyst monitor distribution plots, – Ford provides the data available at the time, and ARB lists

only test groups for which this data has been provided in the approval letterapproval letter.

– Revised approval letters must be requested as calibrations are completed and data becomes available.

Discussion

• Are ARB reviewers making similar requests to other manufacturers?

• If so how are they handling calibration schedule and• If so, how are they handling calibration schedule and approval letter issues?

ARB Issues with IRAF Calculation Methodology

• Recently ARB OBD staff expressed concerns to Cummins regarding IRAF calculations– OBD staff disagrees with EPA IRAF guidance

• Frequency factor adjustments per CISD-06-22 and recent draft amendments is of particular concern

• OBD staff also fears “gaming” by manufacturers– Regeneration length could be tuned with respect to

16

Regeneration length could be tuned with respect to test cycle time to minimize the UAF

• OBD staff indicated future cert applications could be affected

ARB Issues with IRAF Calculation Methodology

• Some possible outcomes– Nothing may come of it– OBD staff may influence EPA to remove the

frequency factor adjustment – OBD staff may pursue an OBD-specific IRAF

calculation method• At a joint ARB-EMA meeting in February, ARB emissions

staff expressed the desire to maintain a common calculation

17

method

• Other manufacturers’ experiences

Questions

18


OBD Deficiencies and Concerns

Background & Overview

Leading up to Workshop:

• EMA members provided their individual ARB OBD deficiencies & concerns information to staff

• Information aggregated and company identifiers removed

Today:

• Review aggregated list of all deficiencies & concerns

• Review summary of DPF system deficiencies & concerns

• Detailed backup information on DPF deficiencies & concerns included for reference

2

3

Aggregated List of Deficiencies & Concerns

Description A B C D E F G HBoost Pressure X X X X

Brake Monitoring XComponent Monitoring X X

Crankcase Ventilation X X

CSERS X X X XDEF System X X X X X X

DPF Performance X X X X X X XEGR Flow X X X

Engine Cooling System X X X X

Exhaust Gas Temperature XIdle Controls X X

Fuel Injection Pressure X XFuel Injection Quantity X X X X

Fuel Injection Timing X X X X

NMHC Conversion Efficiency X X X XNOx Sensor Diagnostic X X X X X X X

SCR Catalyst X X XStandardization - Readiness X X

Standardization - Fault Handling X

Standardization - Datastream X X X X XStandardization - Freeze Frame X X X

Statistical Protocol X X

Summary of DPF Deficiencies & Concerns

• DPF Diagnostic – Test cycle requirement

– Diagnostics must be completed during FTP

• DPF Performance Monitoring (Failure Mode Exemption)

– Interaction with UAF

– Detection threshold

• Specific emission level requirement (driver for PM sensors)

• Product variability influence on margin required

– False failures

• Differentiate DPF failures from differential pressure sensor failures

4

Summary of DPF Deficiencies & Concerns

• PM Sensor Diagnostic

– Missing filter detection

– Product variability influence on margin required

– Differentiate missing DPF from differential pressure sensor failures

• DPF Temperature Sensor

– Interaction with other OBD diagnostics

• DPF Regeneration Inhibit Switch

– Interaction with regeneration enabled monitors

5

DPF Deficiencies & ConcernsReference Information

Individual member company deficiencies and concerns related to DPF system

6

DPF System Deficiencies and Concerns

DPF Diagnostic:

Section (d)(3) of the HD OBD regulation defines the monitoring conditions and specifically states that diagnostics should be designed to ensure monitoring will occur during the FTP. XXX provided data showing that its diagnostic for the filtering efficiency of the DPF does not complete on the FTP cycle as the HD OBD regulation mandates, but requires a special pre-conditioning cycle and test procedure to complete this monitor. Specifically, XXX's DPF efficiency diagnostic requires a twenty-minute cruise at 70 miles per hour and two Unified cycles with an engine-off soak period between the Unified cycles to set a pending code. This would then be followed by a ten-minute engine-off soak period, two additional Unified cycles with an engine-off soak period between them, then a 12-hour to 36-hour soak period, and finally an FTP to complete the diagnostic. Such a lengthy and elaborate test procedure does not provide for a robust monitor with good in-use monitoring frequency, and does not meet the monitoring condition requirements of section (d)(3) of the regulation. XXX is required to address this concern on its future model year applications to avoid a deficiency determination.

7


DPF Filtering Performance Monitoring:

Section (d)(6.2) requires manufacturers to adjust emission test results that are used to determine the malfunction criterion for monitors that are required to indicate a malfunction before emissions exceed applicable emission thresholds on engines equipped with emission controls that experience infrequent regeneration events. The manufacturer is required to derive the adjustment factor with the component, for which the malfunction criteria is being established, deteriorated to the malfunction threshold. XXX has not provided data to support its engineering assessment that the upward adjustment factor (UAF) for the PM filtering performance monitor is not affected. Therefore, XXX is considered deficient for PM filter monitoring. To remove this deficiency, XXX is required to submit data supporting its engineering assessment that the UAF is not affected and additional data demonstrating the calculations for the UAF.

8



To comply with section (e)(8.2 .1) of the regulation, XXX chose a path that requires the OBD system on its model year yyy engines to detect a malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the DPF that would cause an engine's PM emissions to exceed yyy grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr). The demonstration data submitted by XXX for its yyy engines indicate that the monitor detects a malfunction at yyy g/bhp-hr when tested over the Federal Test Procedure heavy-duty transient cycle using a DPF with yyy . Because the HD OBD system cannot meet the required threshold, it is deficient for DPF filtering performance monitoring.

9



Section (e)(8.2.1) requires the HD OBD system to detect a malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the PM filter that would cause an engine's PM emissions to exceed the applicable threshold of yyy grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr). XXX has submitted data indicating that their HD OBD system will not detect the malfunction prior to PM emissions exceeding the applicable threshold. The demonstration data showed emissions were yyy g/bhp-hr when the malfunction was detected. Furthermore, XXX observed false faults in the field after the PM filter monitor was re-optimized and re-enabled. As such, XXX has disabled this monitor and now relies on the DPF differential pressure sensor rationality monitor to detect malfunctions of the PM filter. However, one of the primary intents of the HD OBD requirements is to assist repair technicians by pinpointing, to the extent feasible, the likely cause of the malfunction. Given the high expense of replacement PM filters, the ability to discern PM filter failures from DPF differential pressure sensor failures will provide a substantial benefit to the repair technician and improve diagnosis and repair efficiency. Other manufacturers have been able to discern between such faults with additional diagnostic routines in their HD OBD systems. As such, XXX system is considered deficient for PM filter monitoring.

10



Section (e)(8.2.1)(C)(ii) of the regulation requires the HD OBD system to detect a DPF performance malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the DPF that would cause PM emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-hr as measured from an applicable emission test cycle (i.e., FTP or SET) without using the provisions of section (g)(5.1) to exclude specific failure modes. The PM threshold mentioned above shall be met for at least 50 percent of all the diesel engines which are projected to be sold in California for the yyy model year. HD OBD demonstration data shows that PM emissions were above yyy g/bhp-hr for this application. It has not demonstrated that all the PM filter failure modes can be detected with the current delta pressure sensor- based monitoring strategy.

11



Section (e)(8.2.1)(C)(ii) of the regulation requires the HD OBD system to detect a DPF filtering performance malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the DPF that would cause particulate matter (PM) emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-hr as measured from an applicable emission test cycle (i.e., FTP or supplemental emissions test) without using the provisions of section (g)(5.1) to exclude specific failure modes. The PM threshold mentioned above shall be met for at least 50 percent of all the diesel engines which are projected to be sold in California for the yyy model year. XXX demonstration data shows that PM emissions were at yyy g/bhp-hr for engine family XXX. Additionally, XXX has not demonstrated that all the PM filter failure modes can be detected with the current delta pressure sensor based monitoring strategy. Therefore, XXX HD OBD system does not meet the PM emission threshold defined by the regulaton and the PM filter failure modes detection requirement. As such, XXX HD OBD system is deficient for PM filter performance monitoring. For engine families yyy and zzz, XXX has not demonstrated these engines will detect a malfunction prior to exceeding HD OBD threshold for PM emissions (yyy g/bhp-hr). As such the HD OBD system is considered deficient for DPF efficiency monitoring for engine families yyy and zzz.

12



Section (e)(8.2.1)(C)(ii) of the regulation requires the HD OBD system to detect a DPF performance malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the DPF that would cause PM emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-hr as measured from an applicable emission test cycle (i.e., FTP or SET) without using the provisions of section (g)(5.1) to exclude specific failure modes. The PM threshold mentioned above shall be met for at least 50 percent of all the diesel engines which are projected to be sold in California for the yyy model year. HD OBD demonstration data shows that PM emissions were above yyy g/bhp-hr for this application. It has not demonstrated that all the PM filter failure modes can be detected with the current delta pressure sensor- based monitoring strategy.

13



Section (e)(8.2 .1)(C)(ii) of the regulation requires the HD OBD system to detect a PM filter performance malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the PM filter that would cause PM emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-hr as measured from an applicable emission test cycle (i.e., FTP or SET) without using the provisions of section (g)(5 .1) to exclude specific failure modes . The PM threshold mentioned above shall be met for at least 50 percent of all the diesel engines which are projected to be sold in California for the yyy model year. XXX demonstration data shows that PM emissions were yyy for this application. Additionally, XXX has not demonstrated that all the PM filter failure modes can be detected with the current delta pressure sensor based monitoring strategy. Therefore, XXX HD OBD system does not meet the PM emission threshold defined by the regulation along with various PM filter failure modes detection requirement. As such, XXX HD OBD system is deficient for PM filter performance monitoring.

14



Section (e)(8.2.1)(C)(ii) of the regulation requires the HD OBD system on 50% of a manufacturer’s yyy MY engines to detect a malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the PM filter that would cause an engine PM emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-h as measured from an applicable emission test cycle. For these engines, the provisions of section (g)(5.1) to exclude specific failure modes are not applicable. The other 50% of a manufacturer’s yyy MY engines must detect a DPF malfunction prior to exceeding yyy g/bhp-h. For these engines the same provisions are applicable. Data indicates that engines will detect PM filter malfunctions at yyyg/bhp-h. Since these emissions levels exceed the required yyy g/bhp-h threshold required for the first 50% of the engines described above, these engines are considered deficient for the yyy MY. For the second 50% of engines that are required to meet the yyy g/bhp-h threshold, the data indicates that the required emission levels are met but only by rounding test results downward. Staff is not confident that the system will consistently be capable of detecting a malfunction at the required yyy g/bhp-h threshold during repeated tests or on different engines. As such, the second 50% of engines is considered deficient for the yyy MY.

15


Failure Mode Exemption (FME) Requirements:

To comply with section (e)(8.2 .1) of the regulation, the HD OBD system on XXX engines must also be able to detect malfunctions in filtering performance without using the provisions of section (g)(5.1) to exclude specific failure modes. The monitor used by XXX system, which uses a DPF differential pressure threshold, is unable to detect malfunctions caused by all failure modes and therefore is deficient. XXX plans to implement a soot sensor for the yyy model year to remove this deficiency.

16


PM Filter Monitoring:

XXX observed false faults in the field after the PM filter monitor was re-optimized and re-enabled. As such, XXX has disabled this monitor and now relies on the DPF differential pressure sensor rationality monitor to detect malfunctions of the PM filter. However, one of the primary intents of the HD OBD requirements is to assist repair technicians by pinpointing, to the extent feasible, the likely cause of the malfunction. Given the high expense of replacement PM filters, the ability to discern PM filter failures from DPF differential pressure sensor failures will provide a substantial benefit to the repair technician and improve diagnosis and repair efficiency. Other manufacturers have been able to discern between PM filter and differential pressure sensor malfunctions with additional diagnostic routines in their HD OBD systems.

17


PM Sensor Diagnostic:

Under section (e) of the regulation, manufacturers are required to have diagnostics which check for circuit continuity of exhaust gas sensors. XXX HD OBD system currently does not have a diagnostic which checks for circuit continuity of the PM sensor. XXX claims that it is currently not possible to differentiate between a malfunctioning PM sensor with an open circuit fault and a properly functioning PM sensor which does not have any soot loading; as both would produce a virtually unmeasureable amount of electric current. Other manufacturers have successfully implememented an open circuit diagnostic for the PM sensor. A properly functioning PM sensor is critical in detecting a cracked or broken diesel particulate filter (DPF). A malfunctioning PM sensor, which does not have circuit continuity would effectively disable the DPF monitor, and would not be detected with XXX current HD OBD system. As such, XXX PM sensor diagnostic is deficient for the yyy model year. XXX is required to implement an open circuit diagnostic for the PM sensor on its future model year applications in order to remove the deficiency.

18



Section (f)(9.2.1) requires the OBD system to detect a malfunction prior to a decrease in the filtering capability of the PM filter (e.g., cracking) that would cause an engine's PM emissions to exceed yyy g/bhp-hr. XXX has submitted data indicating that their system will detect these malfunctions at zzz g/bhp-hr. Staff is concerned that XXX has not calibrated their PM filter monitor for robust detection below the emissions thresholds. As seen with the submitted emission demonstration data, the malfunction was detected exactly at the required threshold. Considering engine to engine and monitoring variability, staff is concerned that some in-use failures will result in emissions exceeding the required threshold before a fault is detected and the MIL is illuminated.

19


DPF Differential Pressure Sensor Rationality Monitoring:

XXX HD OBD system utilizes a DPF differential pressure sensor to detect a malfunction in the filtering performance of the DPF and/or a regeneration malfunction when the DPF does not properly regenerate. Section (g)(3.2.1)(A) requires input components to be monitored for rationality faults. Accordingly, XXX has implemented two rationality diagnostics (yyy and zzz) to detect a stuck, biased, or skewed sensor fault. yyy checks the pressure reading of the DPF differential pressure sensor during key-off and will detect a fault when the DPF differential pressure sensor is stuck above a pressure value of yyy kilopascals (kPa). zzz monitors during engine operation and is capable of detecting either a missing DPF or a stuck DPF differential pressure sensor. Although, zzz can detect when the DPF differential pressure sensor is stuck below a pressure value of yyy kPa, the monitor only pinpoints to a missing DPF. As such, staff is concerned that the lack of ability to distinguish between a missing DPF and a sensor that is stuck below a pressure value of yyy kPa may lead to inefficient troubleshooting, decreased technician confidence in the reliability of the HD OBD system, and increased repair costs for consumers. Thus, to avoid a deficiency on its future model year applications, XXX is required to further distinguish between a stuck DPF differential pressure sensor and a missing DPF.

20



As mentioned previously, XXX has not yet submitted demonstration data to ARB. However, XXX has informed ARB that their preliminary tests indicate the PM filtering performance diagnostic is only capable of detecting a missing filter when PM emissions are at yyy times the standard (i.e., yyy g/mile). This PM emission level exceeds the required emission threshold of yyy times the standard as proposed by XXX under section (f)(17.1.5) of the regulation and approved by ARB. As such, the diagnostic is deficient for the yyy model year. XXX is required to improve this diagnostic on its future model year products to remove the deficiency.

21


DPF Inlet Temperature Sensor Monitoring:

Section (g)(3) of the regulation requires manufacturers to monitor any electronic component that is used as part of a diagnostic strategy for circuit, out-of-range, and rationality malfunctions. XXX HD OBD system monitors the DPF inlet temperature sensor for out-of-range malfunctions (i.e., greater than yyy degrees Celsius) with diagnostic zzz. The MIL-on logic is based upon a two-in-a-row fault logic as allowed in the regulation. However, DPF inlet temperature sensor malfunctions greater than yyy degrees Celsius and less than yyy degrees Celsius will set zzz in one trip and trigger a red stop lamp instead of a MIL while directly disabling other major HD OBD diagnostics. XXX does not satisfy the regulation requirements and is deficient for DPF inlet temperature sensor monitoring.

22


Regeneration Inhibit Switch Monitoring:

Section (g)(3) of the regulation requires manufacturers to monitor any electronic component that provides input to the on-board computer for rationality malfunctions and pinpoint with separate fault codes to the extent feasible indicating the component or malfunction. XXX HD OBD system utilizes a physical switch located on the vehicle dashboard to cancel DPF regeneration at an operator's discretion. The DPF inhibit switch is intended as a safety measure to prevent high exhaust temperatures from a DPF regeneration during unsafe or hazardous conditions (e.g., combustible vapors surrounded by dry leaves/tall grass or low roof). However, during certification review, XXX representatives have confirmed that existing diagnostics that detect a malfunctioning "stuck on" inhibit switch have been calibrated to not turn on the MIL. Staff is concerned that inhibit switch malfunctions could unnecessarily delay DPF regenerations and lead to low in-use monitor performance ratios for monitors that rely on DPF regenerations to enable. As such, XXX is given a deficiency for not satisfying the requirements of the regulation.

23



Section (g)(3) of the HD OBD regulation requires manufacturers to monitor any electronic component that provides input to the on-board computer for rationality malfunctions and pinpoint with separate fault codes to the extent feasible indicating the component or malfunction. XXX HD OBD system utilizes a physical switch to cancel DPF regeneration at an operator's discretion. The DPF regeneration inhibit switch is intended as a safety measure to prevent high exhaust temperatures from a DPF regeneration during unsafe or hazardous conditions (e.g., combustible vapors surrounded by dry leaves/tall grass or low roof). However, existing diagnostics that detect a malfunctioning "stuck on" inhibit switch have been calibrated to not turn on the MIL. Staff is concerned that inhibit switch malfunctions could unnecessarily delay DPF regenerations and lead to low in-use monitor performance ratios for monitors that rely on DPF regenerations to enable. As such, XXX is given a deficiency for lack of MIL illumination for an OBD input.

24



Section (g)(3) of the regulation requires manufacturers to monitor any electronic component that provides input to the on-board computer for rationality malfunctions and pinpoint with separate fault codes to the extent feasible indicating the component or malfunction. XXX HD OBD system utilizes a physical switch located on the vehicle dashboard to cancel DPF regeneration at an operator's discretion. The DPF inhibit switch is intended as a safety measure to prevent high exhaust temperatures from a DPF regeneration during unsafe or hazardous conditions (e.g., combustible vapors surrounded by dry leaves/tall grass or low roof). However, during certification review, XXX representatives have confirmed that existing diagnostics that detect a malfunctioning "stuck on" inhibit switch have been calibrated to not turn on the MIL. Staff is concerned that inhibit switch malfunctions could unnecessarily delay DPF regenerations and lead to low in-use monitor performance ratios for monitors that rely on DPF regenerations to enable. As such, XXX is given a deficiency for not satisfying the requirements of the regulation.

25


Chicago Marriott O'HareChicago Marriott O Hare

ARB Preparatory Session

Lisa Stegink

Questions Concerning ARB Staff

• Recent changes in reviewers and/or additional staff changes anticipated?

• ARB Testing (field and test cell)– What can manufacturers do to provide support?

• New staff “education” regarding heavy-duty versus light-duty– In-use Performance Monitor Ratio (IUPMR)

2

– Commercial versus non-commercial

Questions Concerning ARB Process

• DMS – modifications to the reporting template• DMS – modification to the system coming?• DMS – Staff use rather than asking

manufacturers to submit information separately• Time for Staff review

– Data requests need to recognize time required– Last minute questions

3

– New criteria not previously discussed

• Time for manufacturers to develop and submit– Forecasting new requirements very important– Need a process to report benchmarking

Questions Concerning ARB Regulatory Development

• Timeline for update to heavy-duty rule– Can ARB provide any insight regarding changes being

considered

• IRAF – Is ARB aware of EPA regulatory proposal?

– Is ARB aligned with EPA?

• Demonstration cycles

4

– Is ARB anticipating additional demonstration cycles similar to light-duty regulatory changes?

Update from ARB

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5/8/2015

1

Heavy Duty OBD Update

Thomas MontesManager, Diesel On‐Board Diagnostics SectionEmissions Compliance, Automotive Regulations & ScienceCalifornia Air Resources Board

EMA WorkshopApril 23, 2015

HD OBD - Agenda

2

5/8/2015

2

HD OBD - Agenda

3

HD OBD - Standardization Requirements

4

5/8/2015

3


5


6

5/8/2015

4

HD OBD - Agenda

7

HD OBD - Demonstration Engine Aging

8

5/8/2015

5

HD OBD - Agenda

9

HD OBD - Manufacturer Self-Testing

10

5/8/2015

6

HD OBD - Manufacturer Self-Testing

11

HD OBD - Agenda

12

5/8/2015

7

HD OBD - PM Filter Monitoring Requirements

13


14

5/8/2015

8


15

HD OBD - Agenda

16

5/8/2015

9

HD OBD - J1939-84 Compliance Testing

17

HD OBD - J1939-84 Compliance Testing

18

5/8/2015

10

HD OBD - Agenda

19

HD OBD - Case Study on Monitor Robustness vs Frequency

20

5/8/2015

11


21


22

5/8/2015

12


23


24

5/8/2015

13


25


26

5/8/2015

14


27

HD OBD - Agenda

28

5/8/2015

15

HD OBD - High In-Use NOx Emissions from HD Vehicles

29


30

5/8/2015

16


31


32

5/8/2015

17


33

HD OBD - Agenda

34

5/8/2015

18

HD OBD – Innovative Technology Regulation

35


36

5/8/2015

19


37


38

5/8/2015

20

HD OBD – The End

39

Non-Traditional OBD Certification

Rob Weiss

Abishek Muralidharan

Cummins Inc.


2

Agenda

• Hybrid Certification Process

• Stop/Start

• Alternative Fuels

3

Hybrid Certification - History

• ARB wants well integrated hybrid powertrains that maximize performance

• HD OBD hybrid requirements started in MY2013– Alternative engine-only OBD approval path in MY2013 only

• For MY2014+, hybrid powertrains required full OBD approval, creating unique certification hurdles:– Single Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) for both engine and

hybrid system• SAE J1939- SPN 6810 message was created to set MIL for a

hybrid emissions fault– ARB needed means to hold both engine and hybrid drive

manufacturers liable for failures to respective systems• ARB developed a new Dual Executive Order (EO) for hybrid

powertrains– Required separate engine EO and Hybrid OBD approval

4

Hybrid Certification

Hybrid Application

Emissions Review Submission

OBD ReviewLeela Rao

ARB Hybrid System Approval

CumminsEngine Application

Emissions Review Submission

OBD ReviewTom Montes

ARB Hybrid Engine Approval

Dual Hybrid EO

• New Dual EO Process Flowchart:

5

Additional Hybrid Application Requirements

• Hybrid manufacturer submits hybrid system application to both ARB emissions and OBD

• Cummins submits supplemental information for engine EO:

–Engine rating / hybrid system application matrix (Emissions & OBD)

– System integration and SPN 6810 testing completion (OBD)

6

Stop/Start

• Background: 1971.1 (d)(4.3.2)(I) OBD denominator text refers to Stop/Start (S/S) systems (italics added for emphasis):– (I) For vehicles that employ alternate engine start hardware or

strategies (e.g., a vehicle with a start-stop system that does not meet the definition of a hybrid vehicle as defined in section (c))…the manufacturer may request Executive Officer approval to use alternate criteria to that set forth in section (d)(4.3.2)(B) above for incrementing the denominator. In general, the Executive Officer shall not approve alternate criteria for vehicles that only employ engine shut off at or near idle/vehicle stop conditions…

• For LD/MD OBD II chassis-certified vehicles, manufacturers run an A-B-A test with ARB-approved worst-case fail mode on chassis FTP to test out of S/S

7

Stop/Start Certification Requirements

• For MD OBD II / HD OBD engine dyno-certified engines, more difficult task– Prove emissions transparency without the complete

system present / exercised on certification cycles

– If claiming GHG credit, greater chance of being OBD

• ARB OBD guidance– Need to approve worst case S/S mode for each monitor

– Idle-based monitors must still have acceptable IUMPR performance

– Datastream/OBD system must not treat S/S operation as a new driving cycle

– Ensure system does not meet hybrid definition • No torque assist

• No regen braking energy capture/energy storage

8

Alternative Fuel

• Alternative fuel OBD starting in MY2018 ARB / MY2019 EPA

• No phase-in schedule, no enforcement relief

• More detail may be added to 1971.1 in next rulemaking cycle

• Current guidance is to submit a monitoring plan– Monitoring plan may have aspects of

compression- and spark-ignition monitoring sections

– Alternative fuel monitoring plan only applies during ARB-defined alternative fuel operation

Alternative Fuel

• Evaporative system monitoring – submit plan equivalent to gasoline plan for EO approval

• Optional low NOx engines can use 0.4 g/hp-hr emission threshold for NOx

– HD OBD emission threshold is 2.0x (.04 g/hp-hr)

9

Non-Traditional Certification

QUESTIONS?


Experience with PM Sensors Panel

Panel Participants

• Don Keski Hynnila – Moderator• Justin Kosik, DaimlerJustin Kosik, Daimler• Ken McAlinden, Ford• Tom Sloane, PACCAR

2

Experience with PM Sensors - DDC

• Supplier Selection (~2010-2011) – Sensor technology evaluation– Sensor supplier selection criteriapp

• History / stability• Capability – hardware, software, OBD development• Production readiness• Experience with HD applications• Relationships with other business units

– Suppliers Considered• Bosch• Continental

3

• Delphi• Electricfil• Ibiden (pressure based)• NGK• Pegasor (electric charge)• Stoneridge

Experience with PM Sensors - DDC• Challenges

– Sensor design stability– Packaging challenge – multiple variants and orientations for g g g p

consistent response characteristics– Software development

• sensitivity vs. detection time• Sensor development to improve signal:noise

– Mileage accumulation on final design and associated risks at SOP

4

Experience with PM Sensors - DDC

• Current Status and Remaining Concerns– Mileage accumulation continues on multiple g p

vehicle/engine family/ATS configuration variants.– High mileage samples have been inspected

internally and by supplier.– Concepts and monitoring strategies reviewed

with OBD Staff, detailed review of diagnostics review with OBD Staff is pending

5

review with OBD Staff is pending.– SOP 2016 planned.

Experience with PM Sensors – Ford

6

Issue with Bosch PM2.0 Sensor Circuit Continuity Monitor

• The plot at left shows electrode diagnostic results vs. vehicle miles for a durability fleet Fordmiles for a durability fleet Ford Super-Duty Truck

• Measured current is compared to a 0.094 μA threshold

• Around 35k miles, it becomes impossible to distinguish a good sensor from a faulted one

• Cold start work (extended idles at 0 degC) temporarily restored currentcurrent

• New sensor with different alumina doping material is being introduced to address this issue

OBD Deficiency for PM Sensor Circuit Continuity MonitorUnder section (e) of the regulation, manufacturers are required to have diagnostics

which check for circuit continuity of exhaust gas sensors. Ford's HD OBD system currently does not have aOBD system currently does not have a diagnostic which checks for circuit continuity of the PM sensor. Ford claims that it is currently not possible to differentiate between a malfunctioning PM sensor with an open circuit fault and a properly functioning PM sensor which does not have any soot loading; as both would produce a virtually unmeasureable amount of electric current. Other manufacturers have successfully implemented an open circuit diagnostic for the PM sensor. A properly functioning PM sensor is critical in detecting a cracked or broken diesel particulate filter (DPF). A malfunctioning PM sensor, which does not have circuit

ti it ld ff ti l di bl th DPF it d ld t b d t t d ithcontinuity would effectively disable the DPF monitor, and would not be detected with Ford's current HD OBD system. As such, Ford's PM sensor diagnostic is deficient for the 2015 model year. Ford is required to implement an open circuit diagnostic for the PM sensor on its future model year applications in order to remove the deficiency.

Additional Issue

• Ford requested an additional software feature from supplier• When this was first implemented, a coding error

inadvertently prevented communication of temperatureinadvertently prevented communication of temperature sensor OOR faults over CAN network.

• This error was missed in the subsequent DV process• After extensive discussion, ARB combined this with existing

Ford PM sensor circuit monitoring deficiency• Ford fixed the software as a running change • Four months after this discussion, ARB replied to an EMA

letter and agreed “…to exclude PM sensor-related fines and deficiencies for certification of 2016 model year medium-and heavy-duty engines.”

Experience with PM Sensors - PACCAR

• Background– Failures, Weibull, and HD FUL– PM sensor hardware and software modifications

• Update / Current– SOP 2016 planned– Alternate supplier in evaluation– Detailed discussion with OBD Staff is TBD

10

• MIL fault codes• Internal diagnostics

Questions

11

1

LIGHT‐DUTY ON‐BOARD DIAGNOSTICS (OBD)

FORECAST FOR CHINA

David H. Ferris Date: 23APR2015

General Motors Powertrain, Compliance and Certification

Prepared for EMA OBD Workshop, April 23, 2015

Date: 23APR2015

1

OBD – WORLDWIDE REQUIREMENTS

CHINA (PRC) – Light‐duty

• Requires Euro 4 EOBD

• High mileage durability vehicles are required for OBD testing

• For light‐duty gasoline vehicles:

• Beijing: Dec 30 2005 all registrationsBeijing: Dec. 30, 2005 all registrations

• Country: July 1, 2008 new types, July 1, 2009 all registrations

• GVW>2500kg: July 1, 2010 new types, July 1, 2011 all registrations

• For light‐duty diesel vehicles:

• Beijing: Light‐duty diesel vehicles are banned

• Country: July 1, 2010 new types, July 1, 2011 all registrations

• Must submit documentation and perform OBD testing for approval• Must submit documentation and perform OBD testing for approval

• US CARB or EOBD systems are not automatically accepted

2

2


CHINA (PRC) – China 5 Regulatory Proposal (2011 01 GRT)

• Two steps to introduce China 5 (Euro 5 equivalent) in Beijing:

• Step 1: February 1, 2013 new types, March 1, 2013 all registrations

• Type I emissions: Euro 5b without PN

• Type I OBD: Euro 5+ without IUPR and NOx threshold for catalystType I OBD: Euro 5 without IUPR and NOx threshold for catalyst monitoring

• Type III, IV and VI remain same as GB 18352.3‐2005 (Euro 4)

• Step 2: Starting September 1, 2014

• Type I emissions: Euro 5b

• Type I OBD: Euro 5+ with NOx threshold for catalyst monitoring and IUPR (IUPR demo test)

• Nationwide: All models January 1 2018• Nationwide: All models January 1, 2018

• Type I emissions: Euro 5b

• Type I OBD: Euro 5+ with NOx threshold for catalyst monitoring and IUPR (IUPR demo test)

3


CHINA (PRC) – ”Best Guess” Forecast (final rule end of 2015):

• Beijing, Environmental Protection Bureau (EPB):

• Intent to have “most stringent emission requirements in world”

• As early as July 2017 – (2018 MY)

• Considering CARB LEV3 plus Euro 6c PNg p

• Beijing is proposing US FTP but MEP may require China specific WLTP

• Beijing is proposing CARB OBD II but MEP may require Korean style OBD

• Korea has 0.040” evap and does not have AFIM, asymmetric O2, or CVN

• Nationwide, China Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP):

• As early as January 2020 for all new registrations (2020 MY)

• Some regions can opt in as early as 2019 MY

• Considering CARB LEV3, Euro 6c PN, and China specific rqmts (WLTP)

• Strong preference for common nationwide requirements

• Korean style OBD is most likely (plus CARB PVE testing)

4

3

CONTACT INFORMATION

David H. Ferris


Email: [email protected]

Phone: 248‐310‐3265

5

1


CMI Experiences – WORLDWIDE OBD

Ron Davis – Cummins Inc.

Input from: Jeff Potts – Cummins Inc.Nilesh Choudhari – Cummins Inc.es C oud a Cu s cChristopher Baird – Cummins Inc.Omar F Agular – Cummins Inc.

Agenda

• US and Euro Emissions Progression• HD Regulation Differences between Euro V, Euro VI, and US

OBD• OBD Workload Timeline • Euro VI OBD phase in updates• Update/status on Korean Regulations• Update on Japan OBD regulations and inducement requirements• Update/status China Regulations• 2nd Adopter Status• Management of products between US, Euro IV/V, and Euro VI• Application Dependent Challenges

2

2

The Road to Clean Diesel – US HD On-Highway

EU HD Emission Standards and Effective DatesEmission limits decrease which each new phase

4

3

Common Architectures

• US HD OBD/Euro VI• HPCR• VG Turbo• EGR• DOC/DPF/SCR

• Euro IV/V• HPCRHPCR• SCR

5

HD Regulation Differences between Euro V, Euro VI, and US OBD

• Two distinct OBD design markets:

– US EPA/ARB

– EU and EU-adopting countries

– Differences in regulations are a challenge in meeting business need to create a product that is cost effective

• Business need: Sell engines in multiple markets to leverage scale and minimize costs

– Heavy-Duty volumes low in comparison to light duty so this makes regulation differences more of a challenge

– With low volumes, OBD development cost recovery can add significantly to engine sales pricesales price

4

International OBD Workload Horizon

• International OBD is not homogeneous• Certifications from one region do not typically transfer to Certifications from one region do not typically transfer to

other regions• Most countries base their regulations on European

precedent, but modify, apply and/or interpret the requirements and processes differently• Examples: Brazil, Korea, Japan

• EuroVI not backward compatible with Euro IV/VEuroVI not backward compatible with Euro IV/V– Different emissions test cycle, discriminatory MIL, etc.

7 Cummins Confidential

EOBD Certification Reciprocity

Euro IV Euro V Euro VI

Euro IV

Euro IV Euro V

Euro V Euro VI

Euro VI

8 Cummins Confidential

Euro IV

Certification Not Allowed as Substitute

Allowed as Substitute

5

Requirements Comparison

• EURO IV/V could be largely satisfied with a subset of capability developed for US OBDp y p

• EURO VI adds more US-like capability, but also adds new and significantly different requirements

Requirement Comparison: Emission Thresholds

• OBD Emission Constituents– EURO V: NOx, PM– EURO VI: NOx, PM– US OBD: NOx, PM, HC, CO

• OBD Demonstration Cycle– EURO V: ETC (13 Mode)– EURO VI: WHTC (More similar to FTP)– US OBD: FTP, RMCSET

• Detection Threshold LevelsDiff l l US ll i ik l i diff– Different levels, US generally more stringent – Likely requires different failed part and different calibrations but in some cases the diagnostic algorithm can be reused – Results in significant Rework

6

Euro V and Euro VI Threshold Limits

Emissions Li it

MI Th h ld

OBDTh h ld

Urea Quality Th h ld

Urea Consumption

ParticleM

Particle b

AmmoniaNH3Limit Threshold Threshold Threshold

ConsumptionThreshold Mass number NH3

EuroV

2.0 g/kWhr

3.5g/kWhr

7 g/kWhr N/A N/A .1 g/kWhr N/A N/A

EuroVI

Initial

.46 g/kWhr

N/A1.5

g/kWhr.9 g/kWhr 50%

Perf. Monitor

8.0E+11 g/kWhr

10 ppm

Euro VI

Final

.46 g/kWhr

N/A1.2

g/kWhr.46 g/kWhr

50% (proposed)

.025 g/kWhr

8.0E+11 g/kWhr

10 ppm

Diagnostic Comparison

Emission Threshold

RationalityCircuit

ContinuityUrea Urea

Others TOTALThreshold Monitors

yMonitors

ContinuityMonitors

Consumption QualityOthers TOTAL

Euro V 5 0 ~100 0 0 ~100 ~210

Euro VI 6 ~134 ~140 1 1 ~140 ~415

USEPA/ARB

~35 ~153 ~190 N/A 1 ~140 ~507

7

HD OBD Euro VI HD

DOC and DPF Feedgas Performance

Urea QualityHD OBD ‐ .2 g/bhp‐hrEU VI ‐ .46 g/kWhr PM Sensor

(DPF Filtration Eff'y)HD OBD .03 g/bhp‐hrEU VI ‐ .025 g/kWhr

DOC NMHC Conv Eff'yHD OBD ‐ 0.4 g/bhp‐hrEU VI ‐ Performance

Too Frequent RegenHDOBD – 0.4 g/bhp‐hr, 2 X

DPF NMHC Conv Eff'yHD OBD ‐ 0.4 g/bhp‐hr

Exhaust Gas Sensor PerformanceHD OBD ‐ 0.4 g/bhp‐hr

Circuit ContinuitySystem FunctionalityLack of Reductant(Urea Tank Empty)

SCR Conv. Eff'y(OTL or OBDEL)

/

Reductant Delivery Performance MonitoringHD OBD ‐ 0.4 g/bhp‐hrEU VI ‐ 50% of demanded

Rationality HD OBD, EU VI

IUPR HD OBD 0.1EU VI 0.1

NMHC EU VI – Total Functional Failure

4/15/2015 13Euro IV, V HD

HD OBD ‐ 0.4 g/bhp‐hrEU VI ‐ 1.2 g/kWhEU IV, V ‐ 7.0 g/kWh

OBD DiagnosticMonitor Commonality

Euro VI Timing

Level LetterImplementation dates

NOx control levelsNOx OTL

(mg/kWhr)PM OTL

(mg/kWhr)IUPR

New vehicles All vehicles

Initial A 31 December 2012 31 December 2013Quality: 900mg/kWhrConsumption: 50% 1500 Performance

monitoring No mandatory limitConsumption: 50% monitoring y

IUPR Survey n/a 2 surveys complete by 1st July 2015 Quality: 900mg/kWhrConsumption: 50% 1500 Performance

monitoringDemonstration only, no

mandatory limit

Interim B 1 September 2014 1 September 2015Quality: 900mg/kWhrConsumption: 50% 1500 25 No mandatory limit

Final C 31 December 2015 31 December 2016Quality: 460mg/kWhrConsumption: 20% 1200 25 Minimum ratio 0.1

Phase B only applicable for Natural Gas

8

OBD Workload Horizon

• Extrapolated Rating Liability

• Engine Aging Phase II

• DPF Feedgas• Partial Range

• Euro IUPR• Euro – Qualtiy

@ FEL• PM Sensor

Phase-In • PM LEV III

MY15 MY16 MY18MY17 MY19 MY20

• DOC Feedgas• DPF NMHC• Injector Tolerance• SCR Threshold

Reduction

gMisfire

• PM Sensor Launch

• SCR Threshold Phase-In

Standards Phase in Starts

• SCR Threshold Phase-In Complete

• Alt Fuel OBD

• OBD Cert Demo• PVE• IUPR• Def’y Reduction• Running Changes

Diagnostics Horizon

MY14

Fault Isolation

Diagnostics Horizon

Diagnosability with Telematics

OBD Workload Horizon

• Challenging Diagnostics/Workload• DOC Feedgas – SCR catalysts formulations becoming less

iti t F d V littl i t d i t lsensitive to Feedgas. Very little signature and signature may only be present at colder temperatures when NOx Sensors are not on

• Can try to use DOC NMHC Conversion Efficiency• PM Sensor

• Challenges remain with the reliability of the sensor• Exclude PM Sensor deficiencies and fines for 2016 in

US• Misfire – Significant application variation causes increasedMisfire Significant application variation causes increased

complexity• Engine Aging to 435,000 miles• Extrapolated Rating Liability

16 Paper # (if applicable)

9

Euro VI OBD phase in updates

• Key points in proposed draft amendment– Continuation to detect 50% reagent consumption deviation within 48hrs/15L

• With the use of the level sensor or flow monitoring this requirement ld till lwould still apply.

– Option to use NOx sensors for 50% reagent consumption detection but thresholds decrease down to 5hrs/2L usage.

– Note: For those trying to use NOx monitoring to meet this requirement may put restrictions on how long you have to run that monitor and also it will become an inducement related fault.

UNECE REG49-06• This document was accepted in GRPE meeting in January, its now going forward for voting at WP29 on July 2015 • Final document/amendment will release in end of 2015 if this proposal accepted in July 2015 at WP29 meeting.

EU 595/2009• The proposal for the change has yet to be agreed on by the TCMV who will need to accept the technical justification. They areg y g y j y

meeting on the 15th May during which a decision will be made.• If it is accepted by the TCMV then it will be included in a new amendment. As it is yet to be voted on in the TCMV there is no

preliminary date for the new amendment.• Concern/Risk :

• Will the second adopter countries adopt these changes exactly as the EU in their regulation or not?

17 Insert Data Classification

NJC9

South Korea Regulation Updates

• South Korea (2nd Adopting Euro VI)• South Korean OBD and Emissions - Same as European Union Euro

VI (Emissions and OBD Limits) – Korea following Reg49.06( ) g g• Potential Differences from European Union Euro VI• No OBD fineable deficiencies, however fines are possible –

• Article 56 (Penalty) (1) Omitted… “2. vehicles manufactured not conforming to the details of certification pursuant to Article 48 Clause 1 and sold.” quoted from Atmospheric Environment Preservation Act Law No. 11690 (2013.3.23)

• Consumption Monitor implementation – Will consider 50% requirement when finalized in Europe

• Phase in period for In use Ratios (2 years from the beginning of 2015)• Repair Maintenance Information (RMI – Regulation 64) will not be adopted by S.

Korea in current plans.• OBD Phase A - Goes into effect January 2015

t• OBD phase-C shall be introduced for all registration from January 1st 2017. (Same as EU)

• Korean Spot Test – Although accepted EU certification still requiring an official demonstration test of Driver Warning System

Slide 17

NJC9 Europe:The proposal for 50% Urea consumption needs to be incorporated into both UN ECE R49.06 and the EURegulation 509/2009, the current situation and timeline for this is as follows

595/2009The proposal for the change has yet to be agreed on by the TCMV who will need to accept the technicaljustification. They are meeting on the 15th May during which a decision will be made.If it is accepted by the TCMV then it will be included in a new amendment. As it is yet to be voted on in the TCMV there is no preliminary date for the new amendment.IMPORTANT NOTE: The type approval agency can only issue approvals to the latest legislation, meaningthat if certification occurs before the new amendments are published then agreement needs to be reached with the agency. All European Type Approval agencies meet once a quarter to harmonise their approach in certification activities and this issue will be one of the topics for discussion.Nilesh J Choudhari, 2/24/2015

10

Anti Tampering Monitor

Hardware store plumbing parts

Machined Aluminum tampering device

Japan Regulation Updates

• Japan currently uses JP09 OBD and JP09 Emissions• In 2016 Japan will move to JP16 emissions levels, but will remain on JP09 OBD

– Circuit Continuity diagnostics are required on all sensors on the engine and ft t t t taftertreatment systems.

• Circuit Continuity diagnostics are required to light the MIL.– Rationality diagnostics are not required as part of the regulation – No mention of OBD emission threshold monitors in the regulation– Nox Emission Limit - .40 g/kWhr vs. .46 g/kWhr in EU– EGR TFF

• Regulation has specific requirements around EGR total functional failure.• This has to light the MIL.

– Witness test must be performed in order to receive certification– Japan has their own unique SCR inducement requirements.Japan has their own unique SCR inducement requirements.

• In 2018 Japan will move to JP16 emission levels and to Post JP-09 OBD.– Japan will pick up the full Global Technical Regulation No.5

• Currently Reg 49.06 (Euro VI) is a subset of GTR No. 5– Post JP-09 regulation will release in March 2015.

11

Japan regulation updates

• Advanced OBD requirements more Severe than current J-OBD-I will be implemented as per below

• Implementation dates • New Vehicle

• Continuously produced Vehicle and Imported Vehicle

(Advanced OBD Oct. 1st, 2020)

Application Implementation Date

GVW>3.5 ton Oct. 1st, 2017

Towing tractor (Advanced OBD Oct. 1st, 2019)

7.5>GVW>3.5 ton Oct. 1st, 2018

GVW>7.5 ton

(Excluding Towing tractor)

Oct. 1st, 2016

(Advanced OBD Oct. 1st, 2018)

Continuously produced Vehicle and Imported Vehicle

21 Insert Data Classification

Towing tractor (Advanced OBD Sep. 1st, 2020)

7.5>GVW>3.5 ton Sep. 1st, 2019

(Advanced OBD Sep. 1st, 2021)

Sep. 1st, 2017GVW>7.5 ton

(Excluding Towing tractor) (Advanced OBD Sep. 1st, 2019)

GVW>3.5 ton Sep. 1st, 2018

Application Implementation Date

China Regulation Updates

• Regional Market Challenges• Jing V - New China Emission Standards – Beijing ONLY – Planned for January, 2015

*** NOTE: Euro V country accepting Euro VI Emissions and OBD certified products) ***

• NOx emission and mass PM emission meet Jing V regulation• NOx <= 2.8g/kwh over WHTC cycle• PM <= 0.03g/kwh over WHTC cycle

• OBD meets Euro V regulation• OBD meets vehicle demonstration – This is a new cycle for specific to Jing 5

• Empty urea tank• Fill urea tank with water• Drive vehicle over C-WTVC test cycle• Measure total NOx emission (g) and total work (kwh) during C-WTVC (g) ( ) g

cycle • Calculate NOx emission level (g/kwh)• If NOx level is less than 5g/kwh, no MIL action is required; • If 5g/kwh < NOx level <7g/kwh, MIL shall be on; • If NOx level > 7g/kwh, MIL shall be on and OBD torque limiter shall

be activated

12

China Regulation Updates

• Special Jing V – ContinuedDPF h ll b d• DPF shall be used.

• PM number is less than 6x1012 over WHTC cycle

• Challenges• Certifying a Euro VI engine to meet Jing V

• OBD requirements higher for Euro VI than Jing V• Euro VI Emissions more stringent than Jing Vg g• Detuning Euro VI emissions and keeping Euro VI

OBD – What is MIL Threshold?

Emission Road Map in Mexico

24Cummins Confidential

* Available in the border with USA and in larger cities (Mexico city, Monterrey, Guadalajara). PEMEX (fuel producer in Mexico) will work to create availability of ULSD in the entire country by 2017.** Potential scenario in Mexico, depending on 15ppm diesel availability. In 2014 Government defined a regulation to measure GHG gases emissions (a point of start to GHG/FE requirements regulation). *** Requirements for this equipment come from customers working on a bid definition process.

13

2nd Adopter Status• EU 2nd Adopters• For Turkey, Euro VI will not be delayed, they are harmonised for

phase C with Europe.• Australia – Euro VI proposed 2019 / 2020

*Note: 1) Expect these countries to start at Phase A2) You can not certify to Euro VI Level C and then detune to Euro VI Level A

Australia Euro VI proposed 2019 / 2020• Taiwan – Euro VI proposed end 2017 but this is not confirmed

yet.• Mexico – Euro VI has been speculated to come in around 2018.• Israel – Euro VI same as Europe• Hong Kong – Euro VI proposed 2016

Management of products between US, Euro IV/V, and Euro VI

• How much rework is required to move an engine designed for one market to another?

• Before OBD emissions focus• Before OBD – emissions focus• Flexible base engines• Adapt air-handling, combustion, controls and other systems

for optimum fuel economy while meeting emissions• Engine designed to meet most requirement of most restrictive

market. If there was margin could be retuned for other markets

• After OBD• Same emissions process• Depending on source and target market, must:

• Add/subtract diagnostic algorithms• Add/subtract “standardization” capabilities• Retune/revalidate OBD capability

C d t OBD lid ti26 Paper # (if applicable)

14

Management of products between US, Euro IV/V, and Euro VI

• Different Software builds required between Euro V, Euro VI and US HD OBD• Discriminatory MIL in EURO VI• Different Scan Tool Requirements

• Calibration• Significant calibration effort to retune from US HD OBD

to EURO VIto EURO VI• Inducement Differences

•

27 Paper # (if applicable)

Regulatory AgenciesHomologation

(official approval)

EMA ISO

SAE

EU

Japan, Australia, Russia, Turkey, others

China

Brazil

Second Adopters

India

CARB

EPA

US

ECE

OBD/Diagnostics – It’s Complicated

Industry Standards

SW/Calibration

OBD Certification and Demonstration Testing

Service Engineering

Cummins

Translated Requirements

Customer

Cert Doc Tool

EMA ISO

Cert Docs

Software Components

Engine Architecture

Master Diag. List

Fault Codes

Raw Build

3-Step CALs

VPI Project Team

System Errors

15

OBD Regulation Translation

Regulation Requirements

Top-Level RequirementsCustomer

RequirementsCummins

RequirementsIndustry

RequirementsRegulatory

Clarifications

Malfunction Criteria

Requirement

Diagnostic System Requirements

Process Requirements

Documentation Requirements

Translated Requirements (Program Independent)

Compliance Requirements

Reference Information

Interface Requirements

Analysis

Infrastructure Requirements

29

Master Diagnostic List - Overview

OBD Regulations

Document and Section References

Translated OBD Requirements

Master Diagnostic List (MDL)

Malfunction Criteria IDs (MCIDs)

Engine Architectures

Program Schedules

Cummins Confidential30

System Errors

Software OBD Certification Document

16

8/3 Step Development Process

Algorithm Development

Application Tuning & Validation

Responsibility: Project TeamsResponsibility: Functional Teams

Step 1 Step A

VOCRequirements

Preparation StepUnderstand Requirements / Initial Planning

Preparation StepUnderstand Requirements / Initial Planning

pUnderstand Impact on tail pipe emissions

Step 2Develop System FMEA

Step 3Identify Impact of Failures

Step 4Develop Diagnostic Concepts

Step 5

pTest Sample Development

Step BDevelop Application Specific Calibration

Step CValidation

Cummins Confidential31

Step 5Model/Prototype Selected Concept

Step 6Validate Concept

Step 7Assess Robustness Across Applications

Step 8Hand off Algorithm to Project Teams

Required Review Point

8-Step / 3-Step Relationship• Algorithm Development (8-Step)

– Ideally completed a single time for each monitor and engine architecture combination

– Responsibility: Functional Team (Air Handling, Fuel Systems, Aftertreatment, etc.)

• Application Tuning and Validation (3-Step)– Completed for each re-application of a developed monitor to a different

engine/application– Responsibility: Project Team

Algorithm Development Application Tuning and

Validation (3-Step)

32

g p(8-Step)

( p)

Application Tuning and Validation (3-Step)

Application Tuning and Validation (3-Step)

Algorithm Software and Documentation

17

OBD Certification Document Tool

CDT - Monitor .obdm.obdm.obdmobdm

Diagnostic Developers

HardwareDevelopers

CDT - Calibration .obdc.obdc.obdc

.obdm

C2ST

CDT - Manager Compiled Cert Doc(.docx)

Cert Doc Config

Data Sources

BuildIntegrators

CalibrationEngineers

.xcalCert Doc Author

33

Application Dependent Challenges• Although there are many challenges in OBD, accommodating application and

customer usage variation is a major challenge more prevalent in the HD market

• Large number of small volume OEMs with significant variation in product• Large number of small volume OEMs with significant variation in product and application/duty cycle

• Different applications for same engine family (Pick Up and Delivery, Long Haul Truck, Vocational, Bus)

• Issue identified early in the HDOBD reg development• Some changes made, but many challenges remain

• Some examples• Grid Heater Monitoring

34

• Grid Heater Monitoring• Charge Air Flow Monitors• Cooling System Monitors• Misfire Monitor (New diagnostic required for 2016)

18

Diagnostic Compatibility for Re-Use

Similar engine system designs allow re‐use with minimum rework:• Sensor / Actuator Rationality• Circuit Continuity

Differences in applications may change behavior and require rework:• System Monitors• Threshold Monitors

Circuit Continuity

ComponentRationality

SystemMonitors

EmissionThreshold

• Circuit ContinuityThreshold Monitors• Sensor/Actuator Rationality

ContinuityRationalityMonitorsMonitors

Summary

• OBD is complex and resource intensive• Managing products across Euro IV/V, Euro VI and UD HD OBD

is a difficult challengeis a difficult challenge. • Differences in regulations by 2nd adopters will make this more

difficult.• Differences in timelines of adopting Euro VI will drive additional

calibration work and product management work• Product complexity requires key systems to manage

requirements, build certification documents, etc.• Application variation and the impact on diagnostics must be

considered in the HD marketconsidered in the HD market• For complex system level monitors it’s important to think about

fault isolation to ensure that proper troubleshooting can be performed.

36


Litigation Status and What’s Next

Tim French Lisa Stegink

Legal Activity

• In-Use Testing/Recall Litigation– California Supreme Court declined petition for review– Cost-effectiveness of in-use testing remains open issue – Case will go back to Superior Court

• HDOBD Amendments Litigation– EMA filed appeal of final 1971.1 HD OBD amendments

on ARB’s expanded definition of “emission standard” for OBD testing

2

OBD testing– Hearing scheduled for May 21, 2015– Potential impacts from in-use decision

Next Steps

• Develop Superior Court litigation strategy• Manage potential implementation of in-use testing

3

8535 W

. Higgins Road, Chicago, IL 60631 Main Floor Meeting Space

Third Floor Executive Meeting Level

River

Cumberland

Higgins

GB 1

GB 2

GB 3

GRAND BALLROOM

Chicago B Chicago A

Chicago C

Chicago D

Chicago E

Chicago F

Chicago G

GB 5

GB 6

GB 7

Salon 10

Salon 9

Salon 8

Term

inal 1

T2

T3

Terminal

5

Business Center

Kennedy

GB 4

Salon 4

CHICAGO BALLROOM

Term

inal 2

Term

inal 3

Term

inal 5

O’HARE BALLROOM

Adams

Dearborn

LaSalle

Franklin

Madison

Michigan

Monroe

State W

abash

Randolph

Wacker

Wells

Clark Jackson

avujovic

Callout

Meals

avujovic

Rectangle

avujovic

Text Box

Hotel Lobby

avujovic

Text Box

General Session

avujovic

Rectangle

avujovic

Line

Documents

2015 OBDCERTIFICATION WORKSHOP