Fuel consumption of diesel, natural gas, hybrid, full electric and hydrogen fuel cells based buses: A simulated comparison using standard road cycles and gradeability tests

IF 6.7 1区工程技术 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS

Fuel Pub Date : 2025-06-11 DOI:10.1016/j.fuel.2025.135938

Ahmet Fatih Kaya , Marco Puglia , Nicolò Morselli , Giulio Allesina , Simone Pedrazzi

{"title":"Fuel consumption of diesel, natural gas, hybrid, full electric and hydrogen fuel cells based buses: A simulated comparison using standard road cycles and gradeability tests","authors":"Ahmet Fatih Kaya , Marco Puglia , Nicolò Morselli , Giulio Allesina , Simone Pedrazzi","doi":"10.1016/j.fuel.2025.135938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Due to the detrimental environmental impact of diesel and gasoline vehicles, alternative propulsion technologies—such as hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell vehicles—have garnered increased attention. However, no studies were found that analyse both gradeability and fuel consumption across varying road inclines for different bus types—diesel, compressed natural gas (CNG), hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell—while considering the impact of A/C operation. Additionally, limited research has addressed the influence of critical factors, such as bus weight, drag coefficient, and wheel radius, on fuel consumption for these buses. This study addresses this gap by evaluating the fuel consumption and gradeability of five bus types (diesel, CNG, hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell) using the MATLAB/Simulink-based ADVISOR tool.</div><div>Fuel consumption was analysed over the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) drive cycle under both A/C on and off conditions, and the effects of key vehicle parameters—bus weight, drag coefficient, and wheel radius—were investigated. Fuel consumption was also assessed on the modified Central Business District (CBD-14) drive cycle at 0 %, 2 %, and 4 % road grades. Gradeability tests were conducted at 20 and 40 km/h.</div><div>In gasoline equivalent, the battery electric bus exhibited the lowest fuel consumption (29.9 L/100 km with A/C off and 38.4 L/100 km with A/C on), while the CNG bus showed the highest values (87.3 L/100 km with A/C off and 106.9 L/100 km with A/C on). Among the examined parameters, bus weight had the greatest impact on fuel consumption, whereas drag coefficient was the least influential. For a 2 % road grade, the fuel cell bus experienced the largest increase in consumption (78 % with A/C off; 35.5 % for the electric bus with A/C on), while the hybrid electric bus showed the smallest increase. In gradeability tests, the hybrid electric bus achieved the highest climbing capability—22.5 % at 20 km/h and 10.3 % at 40 km/h (A/C off)—compared to the fuel cell bus, which reached only 12.2 % and 7.0 %, respectively; similar trends were observed with A/C on. These findings provide valuable insights into the operational efficiency of different bus technologies under real-world driving conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":325,"journal":{"name":"Fuel","volume":"401 ","pages":"Article 135938"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fuel","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236125016631","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Due to the detrimental environmental impact of diesel and gasoline vehicles, alternative propulsion technologies—such as hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell vehicles—have garnered increased attention. However, no studies were found that analyse both gradeability and fuel consumption across varying road inclines for different bus types—diesel, compressed natural gas (CNG), hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell—while considering the impact of A/C operation. Additionally, limited research has addressed the influence of critical factors, such as bus weight, drag coefficient, and wheel radius, on fuel consumption for these buses. This study addresses this gap by evaluating the fuel consumption and gradeability of five bus types (diesel, CNG, hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell) using the MATLAB/Simulink-based ADVISOR tool.

Fuel consumption was analysed over the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) drive cycle under both A/C on and off conditions, and the effects of key vehicle parameters—bus weight, drag coefficient, and wheel radius—were investigated. Fuel consumption was also assessed on the modified Central Business District (CBD-14) drive cycle at 0 %, 2 %, and 4 % road grades. Gradeability tests were conducted at 20 and 40 km/h.

In gasoline equivalent, the battery electric bus exhibited the lowest fuel consumption (29.9 L/100 km with A/C off and 38.4 L/100 km with A/C on), while the CNG bus showed the highest values (87.3 L/100 km with A/C off and 106.9 L/100 km with A/C on). Among the examined parameters, bus weight had the greatest impact on fuel consumption, whereas drag coefficient was the least influential. For a 2 % road grade, the fuel cell bus experienced the largest increase in consumption (78 % with A/C off; 35.5 % for the electric bus with A/C on), while the hybrid electric bus showed the smallest increase. In gradeability tests, the hybrid electric bus achieved the highest climbing capability—22.5 % at 20 km/h and 10.3 % at 40 km/h (A/C off)—compared to the fuel cell bus, which reached only 12.2 % and 7.0 %, respectively; similar trends were observed with A/C on. These findings provide valuable insights into the operational efficiency of different bus technologies under real-world driving conditions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于柴油、天然气、混合动力、全电动和氢燃料电池的公共汽车的燃料消耗：使用标准道路循环和爬坡性测试的模拟比较

由于柴油和汽油汽车对环境的不利影响，替代推进技术——如混合动力汽车、电池电动汽车和燃料电池汽车——受到越来越多的关注。然而，目前还没有研究在考虑空调运行影响的情况下，分析不同类型公交车（柴油、压缩天然气（CNG）、混合动力、电池电动和燃料电池）在不同道路坡度上的可爬坡性和燃油消耗。此外，有限的研究已经解决了关键因素的影响，如公共汽车的重量，阻力系数，和车轮半径，对这些公共汽车的燃料消耗。本研究使用基于MATLAB/ simulink的ADVISOR工具，通过评估五种类型的公交车（柴油、压缩天然气、混合动力、电池电动和燃料电池）的燃油消耗和可爬升性，解决了这一差距。在橙县交通管理局（Orange County Transit Authority， OCTA）的驾驶循环中，在开空调和关空调的情况下，对燃油消耗进行了分析，并研究了关键车辆参数（公交车重量、阻力系数和车轮半径）的影响。燃油消耗也被评估在改进的中央商务区（CBD-14）驾驶循环在0%，2%和4%的道路等级。在20和40公里/小时的速度下进行爬坡性试验。在汽油当量方面，纯电动客车的油耗最低（关闭空调时为29.9 L/100公里，打开空调时为38.4 L/100公里），而CNG客车的油耗最高（关闭空调时为87.3 L/100公里，打开空调时为106.9 L/100公里）。在试验参数中，客车重量对油耗的影响最大，而阻力系数的影响最小。对于2%的道路等级，燃料电池巴士的消耗量增加最多(关闭空调时增加78%；开了空调的电动巴士的增幅为35.5%)，而混合动力电动巴士的增幅最小。在爬坡性测试中，混合动力巴士的爬坡能力最高，在20公里/小时时达到22.5%，在40公里/小时（关闭空调）时达到10.3%，而燃料电池巴士的爬坡能力分别只有12.2%和7.0%；开着空调也观察到了类似的趋势。这些发现为了解不同总线技术在实际驾驶条件下的运行效率提供了有价值的见解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Fuel 工程技术-工程：化工

CiteScore

12.80

自引率

20.30%

发文量

3506

审稿时长

64 days

期刊介绍： The exploration of energy sources remains a critical matter of study. For the past nine decades, fuel has consistently held the forefront in primary research efforts within the field of energy science. This area of investigation encompasses a wide range of subjects, with a particular emphasis on emerging concerns like environmental factors and pollution.