ARPA-E Welcome

Chanette ArmstrongActing Director

NEXTCAR – Next Generation

Energy Technologies for Connected

and Automated On-Road Vehicles

Chris Atkinson, Sc.D., Fellow ASME, Fellow SAE

Program Director

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy

The ARPA-E NEXTCAR Team

2

Chris Atkinson

Program DirectorMary Yamada

Tech-to-Market Advisor

Reid (Rusty)

Heffner

Technical Support

Whitney

WhiteShawn

Kimmel

Programmatic Support

Gokul

Vishwanathan

Thanks to Nancy Hicks and Danielle Weingarten for assistance with meeting planning

Zara L’Heureux

ARPA-E Fellow

ARPA-E’s Mandate

ARPA-E’s mandate is to:

‣ Reduce energy imports,

‣ Improve the efficiency of energy generation, storage,

transmission, distribution and usage,

‣ Reduce energy-related emissions including CO2, and

‣ Promote US innovation and hence competitiveness in the

energy arena.

– There is a direct match between ARPA-E’s mandate and

current and future vehicle energy efficiency.

3

4

Energy Impact

NEXTCARNEXT-Generation Energy Technologies for Connected and Automated on-Road

vehicles

Goals

• Energy Consumption: 20% reduction over a

2016 or 2017 baseline vehicle.

• Emissions: No degradation relative to

baseline vehicle.

• Utility: Must meet current Federal vehicle

safety, regulatory and customer performance

requirements.

• Customer Acceptability: Technology should

be transparent to the driver.

• Incremental System Cost: $1,000 for LD

vehicle, $2,000 for MD vehicle and $3,000 for

HD vehicle.

Potential Impact

• Energy Consumption Reduction: 4.4

quads/year

• CO2 Emissions: 0.3 GT/year

Mission

The ARPA-E NEXTCAR Program will

fund the development of new and

emerging vehicle dynamic and

powertrain control technologies (VD&PT)

that reduce the energy consumption of

future Light-Duty (LD), Medium-Duty

(MD) and Heavy-Duty (HD) on-road

vehicles through the use of connectivity

and vehicle automation.

Program Director Dr. Chris Atkinson

Total Investment $35 Million over 3 years

Facilitating energy efficient operation through

connectivity and automation

by bringing together experts in powertrains, vehicle dynamics,

controls and optimization, and transportation systems.

NEXTCAR Motivation

Future Powertrain and Vehicle Control with

NEXTCAR

Requirements for Commercial Success

Criterion Explanation

Power Power density (or energy density including the fuel/energy

storage capacity) Customer acceptance

Efficiency Fuel economy (over real-world dynamic driving)

Regulation

Energy efficiency

Emissions Regulated criteria pollutants (and CO2) Regulation

Cost Total cost of ownership (including capex and energy cost)

Reliability Mean time between failures, maintainability

Utility Acceleration, driveability, NVH, cold or off-cycle operation,

ease of use, transparency to the user, refueling, and

acceptable range

Fuel acceptability Use a readily available fuel or energy source.

SAFETY Non-negotiable.

Any new powertrain technology should be comparable to or better than

the baseline in:

Who’s here: NEXTCAR Portfolio + 1

9

Split Micro-Hybrid

Boosting Enabling Highly

Diluted Combustion

ARPA-E

OPEN-2015

Who’s here: NEXTCAR Industry Ecosystem

10

OEMs

Tier-1 Suppliers

and CAV service

provider

Who’s here: External Stakeholders

11

Government

OEMs

Tier-1 Suppliers

and Equipment

Manufacturers

Testing Services

Energy Providers

Mobility Services

NGO/Consultancy

NEXTCAR Awardee Distribution

ICVs HEVs PHEVs

LD • General Motors • Ohio State

University

• University of

Michigan

• University of Delaware

• Michigan Tech. University

• University of California –

Berkeley

• Southwest Research Institute

MD • University of

Minnesota

• University of California

Riverside

HD • Penn State

University

• Purdue

University

Green - Gasoline

Blue - Diesel

Yellow - Natural Gas

NEXTCAR Timeline and Critical Milestones

13

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year-1 Year-2 Year-3

Approximate Program Timeline

Recent Buzz on NEXTCAR type work

14Not an exhaustive list

Recent Buzz on NEXTCAR type work

15Not an exhaustive list

Current State of the AV Industry

Source: Navigant Research’s 2019 Automated Driving Leaderboard

• AV industry is highly

dynamic and marching

forward with L3-L4

automation

• Various technology

leaders are participating

in this meeting either as

project teams or external

stake-holders (shown by

the blue circles in the

image)

Next after NEXTCAR

‣ Hypothesis: Short of full electrification, L4 and L5 vehicles

will still benefit from NEXTCAR technologies.

‣ If so, then what?

17

Additional Funding Opportunities

‣ ARPA-E Request for Information (RFI) DE-FOA-0002120:

Pre-Pilot and Pilot R&D Projects to scale, mature and

advance ARPA-E funded technologies

‣ ARPA-E DE-FOA-0001953: Solicitation on Topics Informing

New Program Areas

‣ DOE Vehicle Technologies Office

18

Are Humans the Worst Drivers?

‣ Driver aggressiveness has a big

impact on fuel economy

‣ 30% spread in city driving

‣ 20% spread in highway driving

‣ How do we incorporate driver

aggressiveness in estimating

energy consumption

improvements?

19Source: Gonder et al. SAE 2012-01-0494: Analyzing Vehicle Fuel Saving Opportunities through Intelligent Driver

Feedback

How to Define Baseline and Measure 20%

Energy Consumption Improvement?‣ Starting point: SAE 2013-01-1453 (Neubauer and Wood: Accounting for the variation

of Driver Aggression in the Simulation of Conventional and Advanced Vehicles)

‣ ~15 min synthetic/representative drive cycle produced from 2,154 unique vehicle records

– Av. speed: 30.5 mph, av. accel=: +-.96 mph/s and KI = 0.577/mi

– Represents average predicted vehicle efficiency from vehicle records

– Scaling factors for each powertrain type – provides energy consumption distribution for each powertrain type as a function of population percentile

‣ Key conclusions:

– Driver behavior can decrease fuel efficiency by >50% or increase it by >20% from average

– Normalized efficiency deviation from average as a function of population percentile is relative insensitive to the powertrain type

‣ We assume other factors such as weather (cold vs. hot start), AC loads (unless you are performing thermal management optimization) are consistent between the baseline and CAV scenarios

‣ We expect the teams to demonstrate an average of 20% improvement over a large number of routes (≥20) and route types (urban, arterial, highway etc.)

20

Real-World Fuel Consumption vs. Certification Cycles for

Conventional Vehicles, HEVs and PHEVs

21Source: SAE 2013-01-1453

How We Envision Fuel Economy Improvement?

22

• Fuel economy for the same route as

a function of driver behavior:

Average difference ~ 20%.

• The average could be based on a

synthetic drive cycle similar to the

one shown before created using

real-world driving information.

• Fuel economy of an average/median

aggressive driver for different routes

of the same type (urban or arterial or

highway): Average difference ~ 20%.

Baseline

NEXTCAR NEXTCAR

Baseline

Are Consumers Willing to Tradeoff Longer

Travel Time for Fuel Economy?

23

Trip time (minutes)

Energ

y c

onsum

ption

impro

vem

ent

(%)

• NEXTCAR objective is to reduce energy consumption; consumers may prefer lower

travel time specifically for ridesharing and ride-hailing applications.

• HMI recommendation to consumer for accelerating product adoption?

• What about MD and HD?

• We urge teams to work with their industry partners to survey the customer/end-user.

+ve

-ve

Baseline trip time

Example LCA of CAVs

‣ Wireless data transmission: Significant contributor to life cycle GHG when using live maps

– Limiting transmission to existing standard maps results in 35% lower GHG emissions compared to HD maps over a 4G LTE network

‣ CAV energy consumption: 14% reduction in fuel consumption purely due to CAV technologies produces significant environmental benefits in the baseline scenario

– Benefits erode if only a 5% reduction is achieved particularly for BEVs

‣ Added weight and power demand: At an additional weight of 10 kg and 200 W, the computer contributes nearly half of the total CAV subsystem burden

– If the power demand were instead 2,000 W (current developmental prototypes) the environmental benefits enabled by CAVs would be eliminated

‣ Drag: Large exterior-mounted CAV components can increase fuel consumption and can potentially offset the environmental benefits enabled by CAV technologies

– Sensing and computing components will need to be miniaturized and packaged more compactly

24Source: Gawron, James H., et al. "Life cycle assessment of connected and automated vehicles: Sensing and

computing subsystem and vehicle level effects." Environmental science & technology 52.5 (2018): 3249-3256

Reinforcing 20% energy consumption reduction is

critical for CAVs

Annual Review Meeting Objectives

What are we are here for –

‣ To formally report on the end of Year 2 of NEXTCAR,

‣ To hear about the technical & commercialization progress of each of the projects,

‣ Including lessons learned, solutions to common problems, and to discuss common challenges,

‣ To hear from industry, government and policy leaders about the state of the art and future directions in this area, and

‣ To continue the creation of an R&D and commercialization ecosystem around the improvements in energy efficiency of CAVs.

‣ Re-introduce ourselves to each other, get to know what others are doing, get to know the state of the art, to report on achievements, and to get a sense of the challenges and the possibilities ahead of us,

‣ Your competition is not in the room but is the State of the Art – we urge you to share your knowledge to make this ecosystem a success!

Instructions for this Annual Review

‣ Tell us about

– Your project successes,

– Your lessons learned,

– Remaining challenges,

– Best practices,

– Useful SW, hardware, methods and techniques,

– Quantification of energy consumption in real-world testing

‣ Network and exchange ideas

‣ Conferences, workshops, opportunities?

NEXTCAR R&D Ecosystem Development

Activities

‣ Field Day at American Center for Mobility - TBD

‣ Session at ASME DSCC18 championed by NEXTCAR PIs

‣ Focused session in SAE WCX on energy efficiency

improvements in CAVs (2020?)

‣ ARPA-E Summit July 8-10, 2019 in Denver, CO.

NEXTCAR Field Day

‣ Field day = Demonstration

day

‣ At a test facility

‣ ACM

28

Less of this…

29

And more of this…

30

Actually we anticipate it will be like this…

31

Testing, Validation and Verification

‣ Safety first!

‣ No on-road testing (unless the road is closed to other traffic)

https://arpa-e.energy.gov

33

Thank you!

Chris Atkinson, Sc.D., Fellow ASME

Program Director, ARPA-E

chris.atkinson@hq.doe.gov

Connectivity and Automation at CES19

34

Connected Signals: Integration of traffic light

information and traffic light prediction

Sources: https://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/18240/CES-2019-Roundup-Autonomous-Vehicle-

Tech.aspx, https://medium.com/syncedreview/ces-2019-cools-on-self-driving-digital-cockpits-v2x-in-vehicle-shopping-drive-mobility-

market-1a0d711e0048

AutoX: Self-driving car to deliver

groceries to consumers. Pilot in San JoseLevel 2+ NVIDIA Drive Autopilot, which

is expected to be integrated into

production-level cars by next year

Qualcomm C-V2X: To be employed in

all Ford cars and trucks by 2022

• Continental unveiled

a hybrid platform

which supports 4G,

5G networks along-

with DSRC and C-

V2X capability for

communication

• Various other

technologies and

concept vehicles

unveiled