minimizing operating costs by specifying trucks based on operational...

MINIMIZING OPERATING COSTS BY SPECIFYING TRUCKS BASED ON OPERATIONAL STATISTICS Johan Wängdahl, Scania, Sweden Mikael Curbo, Scania, Sweden Erik Dahlberg, Scania, Sweden

Background

•  Enhanced fuel economy through specifica6on op6miza6on possible

•  Specifica6on based on es6mated opera6on and guidelines

•  Opera6onal sta6s6cs from control units

•  Case study

Specification optimisation

Axle gears

Suspension Engine Frame

Cab Driven

axle

Cab length

Steered axle Roof

height

Axle gears


Cab Driven

axle

Cab length

Steered axle Roof

height


Specification optimisation Operational factors

Specification recommendations

Performance steps

Gross train weight

Topography

Stop frequency

Road rolling resistance

LOAD AXLE GEAR

2

1

3

4

5

Max GTW European haulage

(tonnes)

GTW (80-percentile per truck)

Europe, 4x2 tractors, 400-440 hp, Euro IV/V

5.131 read outs, 2008 (+10.000 km)

(tonnes)

Engine power European haulage 2008, Europe, 4x2 tractors

Max GTW and Engine power

Engine Power

GTW (80 perc)

440 hp 34 tonnes

440 hp 40 tonnes 34 tonnes

(tonnes)

GTW and speed European haulage Europe, 4x2 tractors, 400-440 hp, Euro IV/V

5.131 read outs, 2008 (+10.000 km)

Un-balanced specifications

•  Under-‐balanced truck specifica6ons on emerging markets

•  Over-‐balanced truck specifica6ons on mature markets


I have a truck on the yard that suits your needs perfectly…

Standardiza)on

I will have to give him the larger and

heavier cab without extra cost


These air deflectors are of no interest unless the

pay-back time due to better fuel economy is

below 12 months

No acceptance for long payback period for op)ons


I cannot afford coming late to the ferry, therefore I must not

lose speed in the hills

Misconcep)on of the )me loss in economical driving, thereby specifying for power


Topography varies between flat and very hilly, cruising

speed between 60 and 100 km/h, summertime is hot

while winter is cold

Difficul)es in defining the opera)onal factors


I need to be number one on top of the hill

Wish for higher performance than necessary


Where I operate, we have the steepest hill on earth

Whish for flexible opera)on: specify for worst case


I offer what I know and feel confident with

Not enough knowledge on components and specifica)on possibili)es among sales force


I want the powertrain optimized for the legal

maximum speed 80 km/h

Overconfidence in own law-‐abidingness I cannot hinder

my drivers using the speed limiter

at 89 km/h


We better specify with the larger engine otherwise

it will be difficult to sell it the second time

Over-‐es)ma)on of second-‐hand value compared to increased life cycle costs


I never use the bed in this sleeper cab, but the second-hand value is better with it

Over-‐es)ma)on of second-‐hand value compared to increased life cycle costs


I make better and more economical gear changes

than a machine

Unwillingness to let the machine manage the driving


Different truck specifica6on techniques

•  Market (applica)on/segment) standard •  A copy of the old vehicle •  Customer demanded

•  Compe6tor specifica6on •  Specifica2on based on opera2onal factors •  Specifica2on based on opera2onal sta2s2cs

Case study

Case study – Transport mission GTW 40 tonnes

Topography Flat

Stop frequency Highway

Roll resistance Low

Cruising speed 80 km/h

(tonnes)

Case study – Method

A.  Specifica6on based on the market standard vehicle

B.  Specifica6on based on an analysis of the transport mission completed with factory guidelines

C.  Specifica6on based on an analysis of opera2onal sta2s2cs and an op6miza6on program

(tonnes)

Case study – Engine power 2008, Europe, 4x2 tractors

(tonnes)

Case study – Specifications Market standard (A)

Suggested by experience (B)

Engine 13 litre EGR 440 hp

12 litre SCR 420 hp

Gearbox 12 speeds 2 crawlers Retarder

12 speeds Retarder

Central gear Capacity 3 Capacity 3

Central gear ra)o 2,71 2,71

Tyre dimension Rolling radius

295/60R22.5 0,447 m

295/60R22.5 0,447 m

Weight difference 0 -‐20kg

(tonnes)

Case study – GTW and speed

Case study – Specifications Market standard (A)


Based on opera2onal sta2s2cs (C)

Engine 13 litre EGR 440 hp

12 litre SCR 420 hp

13 litre EGR 400 hp

Gearbox 12 speeds 2 crawlers Retarder

12 speeds Retarder

12 speeds 2 crawlers Overdrive

Central gear Capacity 3 Capacity 3 Capacity 2

Central gear ra)o 2,71 2,71 2,92

Tyre dimension Rolling radius

295/60R22.5 0,447 m

295/60R22.5 0,447 m

295/60R22.5 0,447 m

Weight difference 0 -‐20kg -‐145kg

(tonnes)

Case study - Results

Market standard (A)


Based on opera2onal sta2s2cs (C)

Average speed 82,8 km/h 82,6 km/h 81,5 km/h

Gradeability at 85 km/h

2,3 % 2,2 % 2,0 %

Diesel consump)on

35,0 l/100 km 33,8 l/100 km 33,8 l/100 km

Urea consump)on N/A 1,4 l/100 km N/A

(tonnes)

Case study - Results

•  Specifica6on B indicates fuel savings corresponding to 1 700 – 2 800 € savings per year and truck compared to specifica6on A -‐ 1,2 litres diesel per 100 m3 and 100 km + 1,4 litres urea per 100 m3 and 100 km

•  Specifica6on C indicates fuel savings corresponding to 3 100 – 3 800 € savings per year and truck compared to specifica6on A -‐ 1,2 litres per 100 m3 and 100 km

Conclusions

•  Specifica6ons can be further op6mised, when specializa6on is possible

•  A large amount of fuel, thereby CO2, can be saved by op6mizing trucks using opera6onal sta6s6cs from the vehicle’s control units Example (Europe annually) 130 000 m3 fuel 340 000 tonnes CO2

Thank you!

minimizing operating costs by specifying trucks based on operational...

Documents