Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tribology International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT, Finland
Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439, USA
art ic l e i nf o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 15 March 2014
Received in revised form
28 April 2014
Accepted 1 May 2014
Available online 10 May 2014
In this paper, we report the global fuel energy consumption in heavy-duty road vehicles due to friction in
engines, transmissions, tires, auxiliary equipment, and brakes. Four categories of vehicle, representing an
average of the global eet of heavy vehicles, were studied: single-unit trucks, truck and trailer combinations,
city buses, and coaches. Friction losses in tribocontacts were estimated by drawing upon the literature on
prevailing contact mechanics and lubrication mechanisms. Coefcients of friction in the tribocontacts were
estimated based on available information in the literature for four cases: (1) the average vehicle in use today,
(2) a vehicle with today's best commercial tribological technology, (3) a vehicle with today's most advanced
technology based upon recent research and development, and (4) a vehicle with the best futuristic technology
forecasted in the next 12 years. The following conclusions were reached:
Keywords:
Friction
Energy
Trucks
Buses
In heavy duty vehicles, 33% of the fuel energy is used to overcome friction in the engine, transmission,
tires, auxiliary equipment, and brakes. The parasitic frictional losses, with braking friction excluded,
are 26% of the fuel energy. In total, 34% of the fuel energy is used to move the vehicle.
Worldwide, 180,000 million liters of fuel was used in 2012 to overcome friction in heavy duty
vehicles. This equals 6.5 million TJ/a; hence, reduction in frictional losses can provide signicant
benets in fuel economy. A reduction in friction results in a 2.5 times improvement in fuel economy,
as exhaust and cooling losses are reduced as well.
Globally a single-unit truck uses on average 1500 l of diesel fuel per year to overcome friction losses;
a truck and trailer combination, 12,500 l; a city bus, 12,700 l; and a coach, 7100 l.
By taking advantage of new technology for friction reduction in heavy duty vehicles, friction losses
could be reduced by 14% in the short term (4 to 8 years) and by 37% in the long term (8 to 12 years). In
the short term, this would annually equal worldwide savings of 105,000 million euros, 75,000 million
liters of diesel fuel, and a CO2 emission reduction of 200 million tones. In the long term, the annual
benet would be 280,000 million euros, 200,000 million liters of fuel, and a CO2 emission reduction
of 530 million tonnes.
Hybridization and electrication are expected to penetrate only certain niches of the heavy-duty
vehicle sector. In the case of city buses and delivery trucks, hybridization can cut fuel consumption by
25% to 30%, but there is little to gain in the case of coaches and long-haul trucks. Downsizing the
internal combustion engine and using recuperative braking energy can also reduce friction losses.
Electrication is best suited for city buses and delivery trucks. The energy used to overcome friction
in electric vehicles is estimated to be less than half of that of conventional diesel vehicles.
Potential new remedies to reduce friction in heavy duty vehicles include the use of advanced lowfriction coatings and surface texturing technology on sliding, rolling, and reciprocating engine and
transmission components, new low-viscosity and low-shear lubricants and additives, and new tire
designs that reduce rolling friction.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Corresponding author. Tel.: 358 40 544 2285; fax: 358 20 722 7069.
E-mail address: kenneth.holmberg@vtt. (K. Holmberg).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2014.05.004
0301-679X/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
During the past two decades, global awareness of the need for
more fuel-efcient and environmentally benign transportation
systems has increased tremendously, mainly because of limited
petroleum reserves, skyrocketing fuel prices, and much tougher
95
will still be used for a long period of time, especially in the case of
long-haul heavy duty trucks, since the electrication of trucks is
more challenging than that of light duty vehicles.
Their driving range and load proles differ signicantly from
those of passenger cars.
Commercial heavy duty vehicles are often part of eets: it is
thus easier to inuence decision-making concerning these
vehicles compared to passenger cars.
The fuel economy ratings and carbon footprint of heavy duty
vehicles are rather dismal and need urgent improvement.
For heavy duty vehicles, the power-to-weight ratio, and thus the
average relative load, is quite different compared to passenger cars. In
the case of passenger cars, signicant fuel savings can be achieved by
downsizing and choosing less powerful vehicles. Commercial vehicles
are, in most cases, more tailored for their purpose than passenger cars;
hence, the potential for fuel savings by downsizing is not as obvious as
in the case of passenger cars [9,10].
Buses, and especially city buses, constitute a relatively homogeneous vehicle category in terms of energy consumption. For a
city bus, operated on low average speed, with a frequent stop-andgo pattern, a major portion of the fuel energy is used for
accelerating the vehicle. Consequently, without hybridization, a
large amount of energy is lost when decelerating the vehicle by
using the brakes. Coaches, by contrast, are operated at much higher
and constant cruising speeds, at which aerodynamic drag becomes
far more important than the weight and rolling resistance.
For trucks used for goods transporting, the gross weight and
conguration of the vehicle vary signicantly. The gross vehicle
weight range is from some 3.5 t up to 60 t or even more. Duty
cycles vary from start-and-stop type driving typical of urban
settings to the constant high-speed cruising of long-haul trucks.
Our earlier paper reviewed the global energy consumption due to
friction in passenger cars [3]. This review presents calculations of the
global energy consumption due to friction and potential savings
through the adaption of advanced friction control technologies in
trucks and buses. We focus on four categories of heavy duty vehicles:
single-unit trucks, truck and trailer combinations, city buses, and
coaches. The vehicles were chosen to represent an average of the
world heavy vehicle eet. We base our calculations on vehicles with
diesel engines. We discuss the effect of future change to electrical
motors separately. Other expected changes, such as improvements in
aerodynamics and a more extensive use of light-weight materials, and
related predictions, are not included in the present analysis.
96
Table 1
Global key parameters for the four categories of heavy duty vehicle.
Total
number
globally
(million)
Average annual
mileage (km)
Single-unit trucks
29.2
20,000
7.3
100,000
2.3
1.3
80,000
100,000
Percent operating in
urban (urb) and
highway (hgw) regions
Average
speed (km/h)
Average
weight with
load (kg)
Idlinga (%)
Engine
power
outputb (%)
50 urb
50 hgw
5 urb
95 hgw
100 urb
10 urb
90 hgw
60
10,000
15
40
80
30,000
50
20
80
14,000
16,000
30
5
20
35
The data in the second column originates from global statistics, the data in the last column is based on Table 7 and the Figs. 47, and the data in the other columns are
estimations based on information from operators [2,12,14,16,1821].
a
b
97
City bus
Coach (or intercity bus)
Based on the available global statistics, the average age of all
studied heavy duty vehicles was estimated to be about 13 years,
which means that they were manufactured in the year 2000. The
technical details of the global average vehicle in each category are
specied in Table 3.
3.3. Operating proles
When a vehicle is moving, the fuel energy delivered to the
engine is consumed for the following reasons:
Single-unit truck
Semi-trailer truck, consisting of a truck unit and a semi-trailer
Fig. 2. Representatives of the four main categories of heavy duty vehicles chosen
for detailed analysis.
Table 2
Global energy consumption and the energy consumption for an average heavy duty vehicle within each category.
Number of vehicles
globally (million)
Single-unit trucks 29.2
Truck and trailer
7.3
combinations
Trucks, in total
36.5
City buses
2.3
Coaches
1.3
Buses, in total
3.6
Trucks and buses, 40.1
in total
Energy use
globally (EJ/a)
5.2
10.5
20,000
100,000
25
40
5000
40,000
180,000
1,440,000
80,000
100,000
38
25
30,000
25,000
1,080,000
920,000
15.7
2.5
1.2
3.7
19.4
98
Table 3
Characteristics of the average heavy vehicles in the four categories, with reference to the year 2000.
Feature
Single-unit
truck
Semi-trailer truck
City bus
Coach
Manufactured (year)
Average total weight (kg)
Number of axles
Engine capacity (dm3)
Maximum engine power (kW)
Type of engine
2000
10,000
2
7
150
Turbo diesel,
6-in-line
10 W40 18cSt @
90 1C
Manual or
robotized
SAE 80 W90
12cSt@80 1C
Hypoid
SAE 80 W90
60cSt@60 1C
0.75
8
Single tires 315/
70R22.5
Dual tires 315/
70R22.5
0.01
2000
30,000
5
12.5
300
Turbo diesel, 6-in-line
2000
14,000
2
9
200
Turbo diesel, 6-inline
10 W40 18cSt @
90 1C
Automatic with
torque converter
ATF 29cSt@801C
2000
16,000
2
12.5
250
Turbo diesel,
6-in-line
10 W40
18cSt@90 1C
Manual or
robotized
SAE 80 W90
12cSt@80 1C
Hypoid
SAE 80 W90
60cSt@60 1C
0.51
7.5
Single tires 315/
80R22.5
Dual tires 315/
80R22.5
0.01
some extent, those of city buses. However, for the delivery trucks
the stops are not as frequent, and the share of idling might, in
some cases, be higher than that of the city buses. For the city buses
and the single-unit delivery trucks, the energy needed for acceleration and the energy needed to overcome rolling resistance
dominate, while the air drag is of lesser importance.
Air drag is a dominating factor within the energy use in
highway driving, which is typical of the intercity coaches and
long-haul truck-and-trailer combinations. When operating on
mainly at topography at almost constant speed, some variation
in speed and elevation always occurs in practice. However, the
energy losses due to such minor changes in speed and altitude
typically cause only some 7 5% to 15% variations in the kinetic and
potential energy levels, with a long-term sum effect close to zero
[37] and will, hence, not be considered in this study.
4. Friction and energy losses in trucks and buses
4.1. Global average energy losses in heavy road vehicles
In Section 3.1, the global average energy consumption was
calculated for the four heavy duty vehicle categories (Table 2):
Single-unit trucks
Trucks and trailer combinations
City buses
Coaches
180,000 MJ/a
1,440,000 MJ/a
1,080,000 MJ/a
920,000 MJ/a
10 W40 18cSt @ 90 1C
Manual or robotized
SAE 80 W90 12cSt@80 1C
Hypoid
SAE 80 W90 60cSt@60 1C
0.8
9
Single tires 315/80R22.5
Truck: Dual tires 315/80R22.5 Trailer:
Dual tires 385/65R22.5
0.01
Hypoid
SAE 80 W90
60cSt@60 1C
0.62
7
Single tires 295/
80R22.5
Dual tires 295/
80R22.5
0.01
99
Fig. 3. Breakdown of the average energy consumption in heavy duty vehicles based on average values from the four categories of trucks and buses.
The main tribological contact mechanism is marked in parentheses above. For engine bearings and seals, the dominant
mechanism is hydrodynamic lubrication (HD), while that in the
valve train is mixed lubrication (ML). In mixed lubrication,
combined effects from hydrodynamic (HD), elastohydrodynamic
(EHD), and boundary lubrication (BL) are present. Boundary
Coaches and heavy trucks are normally equipped with manually operated or automated mechanical gearboxes with helical
spur gears in order to minimize the transmission friction losses.
The number of gears may vary from six in a simple gearbox up to
16 in a four-speed gearbox combined with additional splitter and
range-change units [66]. For ergonomic reasons, a city bus is
usually equipped with an automatic gearbox with planetary gears
and a torque converter.
The energy losses from gearbox friction occur in the rolling
bearings, gears, gear synchronizers, and shaft seals; oil churning
also contributes. For manual or automated mechanical gearboxes
with helical spur gears, typical of commercial vehicles, the
efciency of the entire gearbox lies in the range 9097%. For
automatic gearboxes of city buses, the efciency varies between
90% and 95% under optimal conditions of operation, while at nonoptimized driving cycles the efciency of automatic transmissions
can be signicantly lower due to the low efciency of hydrodynamic torque converters at low speed ratios across the converter
[66].
100
The energy losses from friction in the bevel gear of the nal
drive occur in the rolling bearings, the hypoid gear, and the shaft
seals; oil churning in the gear contacts also contributes. In road
bends, some energy is lost due to the action of the differential gear
of the nal drive.
The friction torque in the wheel bearings was included in the
analysis on frictional power losses in the transmission. For
simplicity, the wheel bearings for the vehicles and the semitrailer truck combination were analyzed as a single bearing loaded
by its portion of the total weight of the vehicle or vehicle
combination. A coefcient of rolling friction of m 0.002 was used
for the bearings [67,68].
Since the wheel bearings are grease-lubricated and do not
contain signicant amounts of superuous lubricant, the proportion of additional frictional torque from any squeezing or churning
of the lubricant was regarded as insignicant. The energy losses
from friction in the bevel gear of the nal drive occur in the rolling
bearings, the hypoid gear, and the shaft seals; oil churning also
contributes.
A great variety of different transmission system designs are
used in heavy duty vehicles. In general, the energy consumed to
overcome friction in a manual or robotized transmission system
is consumed for the following reasons [43,66,6972]:
101
Fig. 4. Annual energy ow and distribution in the global average single-unit truck
(model year 2000) corresponding to 20,000 km annual mileage.
102
Fig. 5. Annual energy ow and distribution in the global average semi-trailer truck
(model year 2000) corresponding to 100,000 km annual mileage.
Fig. 6. Annual energy ow and distribution in the global average city bus (model
year 2000) corresponding to 80,000 km annual mileage.
6. Potential savings
Fig. 7. Annual energy ow and distribution in the global average coach (model year
2000) corresponding to 100,000 km annual mileage.
presented in Table 1, the energy loss during idling has been taken
into account in the energy balance calculations.
103
Fig. 8. Breakdown of the global average energy consumption for single-unit truck, semi-trailer truck, city bus, and coach. Friction losses also shown.
Table 4
Tribological contact performance for the chosen four types of heavy vehicles [50,52,70,71,74,8394].
Contact types acting as friction sources
Coefcients of friction
Truck & Bus 2000
Lab 2013
0.14
0.10
0.025
0.08
0.06
0.01
0.010
35
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.002
0.006
20
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.01
0.005
0.001
0.003
15
0.005
0.005
0.001
0.005
0.0008
0.0005
0.002
5
Average rolling friction coefcients for trucks and buses on average roads with average tire pressure.
Estimated average of engine and transmission oils adjusted based on their part of energy losses.
commercially justied. Nonetheless, it would be realistic to estimate that perhaps half of this level could be reached in the short
term, within four to eight years, as shown in Fig. 9. As shown in
Table 5, that improvement would result in a 13.8% reduction in
fuel consumption which corresponds to 2.7 million TJ/a energy
savings, equal to 104,500 million euros saved annually worldwide,
and 196 million tonnes reduction in CO2 emission [12,95]. Table 6
shows the energy and cost savings broken down by region.
We estimate that after 8 to 12 years of extensive and focused
research and development work and actions for implementation
of new technology, the level half way between Trucks and Buses
2013 and Lab 2013 could realistically be achieved, as shown in
Fig. 9. This would result in 36.8% reduction in fuel consumption,
which on the global scale corresponds to 7.2 million TJ/a energy
savings, equal to 280,600 million euros saved annually worldwide,
and 527 million tonnes reduction in CO2 emission (Table 5).
Fig. 9. Trends in the coefcient of friction in the four truck and bus categories for
different lubrication mechanisms and for tire rolling friction.
Several reports have been published on methods and techniques on how to improve fuel economy in heavy duty vehicles and
in transportation [1,2,26,36,52]. Below we will focus on the
techniques related to friction reduction in heavy-duty road vehicles. Some of the non-tribological means of improving fuel
economy of trucks are currently being explored under the sponsorship of various government agencies (i.e. the Super truck
programs sponsored by the Department of Energy, United States;
the Heavy Duty Vehicle transport program at the Energy Technologies Institute in Europe, etc.). Collectively, these and the
104
Table 5
Global energy consumption, emissions, costs and potential global annual energy savings per year in short and long terms.
Present situation (2012)
Annual energy
demand (TJ)
Annual costsa
(million euros)
Single-unit trucks
Trucks and trailers
Trucks in total
City buses
Coaches
Buses in total
Trucks and buses in total
To overcome friction, trucks and
buses in total
145,600
294,000
439,600
70,000
33,600
103,600
543,200
180,900
5,200,000
10,500,000
15,700,000
2,500,000
1,200,000
3,700,000
19,400,000
6,460,000
382.9
773.2
1156.1
184.1
88.4
272.5
1428.6
475.7
203,800
411,600
615,400
98,000
47,000
145,000
760,400
253,200
Economic savings
(million euros)
Savings/
reduction (%)
Reduction in fuel
Energy demand
consumption (million liters) reduction (TJ)
12
32.5
17,500
47,300
624,000
1,690,000
45.9
124.4
24,400
66,200
15
40.5
44,100
119,000
1,575,000
4,253,000
116
313.1
61,700
166,700
11.5
30
8100
21,000
288,500
750,000
21.2
55.2
11,300
29,400
15
39
5000
13,100
180,000
470,000
13.3
34.5
7100
18,300
74,700
200,400
2,670,000
7,160,000
196.6
527.2
104,500
280,600
13.8
36.8
Calculated based on average diesel fuel price in Europe, November 2013 (1.4 euros for 1 l).
Table 6
Estimated realistic energy savings by region, representing 50% of the total potential energy savings by using today's best commercial solution, after four to eight years of
concentrated actions to reduce friction in heavy duty vehicles worldwide, see Fig. 9. Also given are the corresponding cost savings, fuel savings, and CO2 reduction.
World
Industrialized countries (60%)
Industrially developing countries (35%)
Agricultural countries (5%)
EU (17.3%)
U.S. (21.7%)
China (10.4%)
Japan (5%)
Finland (0.25%)
Cost savings
(million euro/a)
Fuel savings
(million l/a)
2,670,000
1,600,000
935,000
130,000
104,500
62,700
36,600
5200
74,700
44,800
26,100
3700
196.6
118.0
68.8
9.8
470,000
580,000
280,000
130,000
6700
18,100
22,700
10,900
5200
260
12,900
16,200
7800
3700
190
34.0
42.7
20.4
9.8
0.490
7.1. Low friction coatings for engine components, gears, and bearings
During the past two decades, research on low-friction materials
and coatings has intensied, mainly because the traditional solid
and liquid lubrication approaches would not alone meet the
increasingly more stringent operational conditions of modern
mechanical systems, including engines [96,97]. In recent years,
concerted effort to develop more advanced techniques for physical
and chemical vapor deposition (PVD and CVD) plasma, and
thermal spraying methods, etc., has made it possible to coat all
kinds of engine components with low-friction coatings reliably
and cost effectively. Some of the more advanced PVD technologies
are based on pulse DC, arc-PVD, high power impulse magnetron
sputtering (HIPIMS), and pulsed laser deposition (PLD). These
techniques seem to afford much superior chemical and structural
qualities to coatings and, hence, lower friction and wear even
under marginally lubricated sliding conditions [98]. Because of
their highly energetic nature, PVD techniques also afford much
stronger bonding between tribological coatings and underlying
substrates and thus provide very long wear life, which is critically
important for most engine applications.
With the use of sophisticated computer codes and nite
element modeling [99102], the tribological performance and
durability of such coatings were further improved. Specically,
these techniques can help more closely match the coating properties with those of the substrate materials through predictive
interface engineering and better internal stress control, which
together ensure outmost lm-to-substrate bonding and hence
high performance and longevity under severe operating conditions. Modern tribological coatings may range in thickness from
half a micrometer to several millimeters. Mainly because of their
self-lubricating nature, they can act as a backup lubricant in oillubricated contacts to provide much lower friction, even under
severe boundary and oil-out conditions.
Recent tribological experiments have conrmed that low-friction
coatings such as diamond-like carbon, MoS2, etc., can drastically
reduce the friction coefcients of dry and lubricated sliding contacts
by more than 90% [81]. Such impressive reductions are for
boundary-lubricated regimes, where direct metal-to-metal contacts
occur since in HD and EHD contacts, there are very few asperity
contacts, and shearing takes place within the uid lm itself. Besides
friction, coatings can extend the lifetime of tribological components.
For example, with the use of hard low-friction coatings, as much as
ten-fold increase in fatigue lifetime was reported under rolling
contacts. Furthermore, such coatings have reduced bearing wear
by seven-fold and increased gear lifetime by three-fold [81,103].
In engines, drive trains and transmissions, there are many coatings that can improve the efciency, performance, and durability.
The most important tribocontacts producing friction losses are
typically the piston ring and cylinder liners, gears, bearings, valves,
and cam and follower contacts. Fuel injection, commutators, ball
pivots, connecting rods, gear selection shafts, synchronizer rings,
clutch mechanisms, shifter forks, joints, shock absorber parts, steering system parts, and brake components [104,105] can also give rise
to friction but at much reduced levels. Even if the friction losses in
some of these parts may not be large, they may cause increased
wear and reduced lifetime in the long run and sometimes even
result in catastrophic failures due to gradual damage accumulation.
Among the many hard and low-friction coatings, the development of diamond-like carbon (DLC) coatings has attracted the
greatest attention in recent years, since they provide the best
overall frictional performance under dry and lubricated conditions
[106]. Some of the components cited above are nowadays coated
with DLC and used in actual engines [107]. Systematic lubricated
studies by Kano et al. on DLC [108] have demonstrated that as
much as 90% reduction in boundary friction is feasible with certain
types of DLCs, provided that the additive package contains polar
additives like glycerol. In another similar study with different
types of DLCs (such as metal doped), more than 30% reduction in
friction compared with uncoated steel/steel contacts was reported
by Podgornik and Vizintin [109,110] compared to uncoated steel/
steel contacts. Likewise, Ghlin et al. [111] achieved a 70-fold
increase in lifetime by applying WC/C coatings on gears tested in
an FZG test machine. Other hard and low-friction materials and
coatings developed for improved friction and wear performance in
engine components include CrN, TiN, NiSiC, AlMgB14, MoS2, WC/
Co, AlTiN, WC:H, AlMgB14TiB2, composite coatings with, for
example, TiN, TiC, or TiB2 particles embedded in Si3N4 or SiC
ceramic matrices, as well as various nanostructured and nanolayered coatings [43,59,98,104,112115].
7.2. Surface texturing of components in engines, gear boxes, and bearings
The surface texture or topography of sliding contacts has a
strong inuence on friction, wear, scufng, and fatigue
105
106
Correct tire pressure combined with equipment that continuously maintains the pressure.
We estimated in Section 5 that the average global heavy duty
vehicle has a tire rolling resistance corresponding to a coefcient
of friction of 0.01; in new vehicles it would be 0.006. Signicant
improvements in tire design have been achieved during the past
few decades to achieve rolling resistance to as low as a coefcient
of friction of 0.004 [52,142]. Misalignment between the tires on
the respective axles of a truck or bus may increase the level to
approximately 0.0045. These values are slightly higher than the
lowest coefcients of rolling friction for truck tires that have been
suggested by modeling calculations [77].
For the last two decades, and at increasing rate over the years,
the rolling resistance of truck and bus tires has been suppressed by
adding silica (silicon dioxide, SiO2) particles into the rubber
material of the thread surface. The addition of silica instead of
the traditional carbon black particles into the rubber has reduced
the rolling resistance by about 20% [50]. The reduction in the
rolling resistance is the consequence of an increase in the stiffness
of the rubber material from the increase in the proportion of the
silica ller, from increased rubberller interaction, and from an
increase in the crosslink density in the rubber elastomer [143].
New computational nite element analyses and moleculardynamics-based nano-architecture design of tire compounds has
been reported to reduce the rolling resistance by 20% [150].
To prolong the operational life-time of tires for heavy vehicles,
they can be re-threaded after being worn to a certain thread
depth. The re-threading is a gain in terms of tire renewal cost
savings, while a drawback is that the rolling resistance is increased
by the deepening of the threads [52]. Consequently, for the
minimization of the rolling resistance, sufcient thread depth
must be maintained.
Wide-base single truck tires, which are wider and have a lower
prole than traditional tires, are a signicant step on the route
toward low rolling resistance [10,14,52]. For the wide-base tires, a
typical range for the coefcient of rolling friction is 0.004 to 0.005,
while for traditional installations with dual tires on the nonsteering axles of trucks and buses, it is 0.005 to 0.008, or
signicantly higher on an average [35,52,74]. Hence, without any
other modications of a heavy vehicle, replacing the traditional
dual-tire installations with wide-base single tires leads to energy
loss reductions on the order of several percent. A partial benet of
the change into single tires is that the conicts between doublemounted tires with slightly different dynamic diameters disappear. A drawback of the single tires, and the higher tire pressure
associated with them, is that there may be a higher probability for
road damage [52].
The tire pressure has a considerable effect on the rolling
resistance. For truck tires a 20% reduction in the pressure results in
an increase of 58% in the rolling resistance and a 23% increase in
the energy consumption. In practice, maintenance of sufcient tire
pressure provides signicant means for energy savings on the global
level [50,52]. As a practical tool, the monitoring of the ination
pressure in the tires of heavy vehicles provides important means of
suppression of the rolling resistance. Several monitoring systems are
already available, and their adoption has been encouraged [141,144].
Furthermore, the use of nitrogen gas instead of air in tires gives less
reduction in the tire pressure due to leakage over time [52].
107
The friction losses in the nal drive and the differential gear of
the driving axle or axles comprise losses in gears, bearings, and seals
similar to those in the gearboxes. The benecial effect of coated
rollers on the friction loss of rolling bearings for nal drives has been
discussed by Bandi [146]. The nal drive is, in most cases, a hypoid
gear characterized by a combination of rolling friction and sliding
friction in the gear contacts. According to work by Winter and Wech
[69], the efciency of a hypoid gear is higher for smaller pinion shaft
off-sets, the absolute effect being dependent on the gear design and
the operating conditions. The amount of sliding friction can be
reduced by a hypoid design with a smaller off-set between the
centerlines of the pinion shaft and the crown gear shaft, and by the
use of a lubricant with additives that reduce the coefcient of sliding
friction. A drawback of reducing the off-set is that the torque
transmission capacity of the nal gear will be reduced.
The friction losses in the wheel bearings and their seals, for a
given speed and total weight of the vehicle or semi-trailer truck
combination, can be reduced by the use of low-friction bearings
with improved geometry and surface nish.
108
8. Discussion
Table 7
Key gures related to the annual friction losses and energy use for global average road vehicles in the year 2011.
Calculated annually
Single-unit
trucks
Trucks and
trailers
City
buses
Coaches Passenger
carsa
Other light
vehiclesb
Road transport
total
29.2
5.2
1.4
1.6
54
48
12
0.62
24.4
7.3
10.5
2.8
3.3
446
48
15
1.6
61.7
2.3
2.5
0.7
1.0
454
48
11.5
0.29
11.3
1.3
1.2
0.3
0.3
253
48
15
0.18
7.1
700
34
9.1
11.2
12
510
18.5
6.3
260
300
14
3.7
4.6
20
510
18.5
2.6
110
1040
67.5
18
22
59
17.5
11.6
475
17.5
44.1
8.1
178
73
326
45.9
116.0
21.2
13.3
468
192
856
a
b
Data from Holmberg et al. [3] representing the year 2009 but corrected and updated to the situation in the year 2011.
Vans, pick-ups, and sport utility vehicles.
efciency of more than 90% [148]. Fig. 10 shows that the motor
efciency for two electric four-pole motors (IE1 and IE3) is above
85% at a motor nominal output of more than 10 kW and three load
levels (25, 50, and 100%), with only one exception (IE3 at 25%
load). Efciency values in the range of 80 to 95% for electric motors
can be compared with a typical maximum efciency of 43% for a
diesel engine in a heavy duty vehicle.
Frictional losses only constitute a minor part of the losses in an
electric motor (see Table 8). Friction and internal air drag losses
together account for less than 10% of the total losses, so improvements in bearing technology cannot deliver signicant efciency
improvements.
One feature of the electric motor is full torque starting from
zero rotational speed. This means that the driveline for an electric
vehicle can, in most cases, be realized without a traditional
gearbox, a factor that reduces frictional losses. Depending on the
design, an electric vehicle may still need a reduction gearbox, an
angle transmission, or a nal drive. In the case of hub-mounted
motors, the driveline can be realized completely without gears.
In an electric vehicle, in addition to the relatively small losses in
the motor itself, losses occur in the charging and discharging of
the batteries, as well as in the power electronics and battery
management system. Fig. 11 presents a breakdown of the energy
use of an electric bus for public transportation. Energy consumption of the vehicle in the Braunschweig bus cycle is 4.3 MJ/km
(electrical energy supplied from the grid), compared with 15.1 MJ/
km (chemical energy as fuel) for a conventional diesel bus [33,37].
The losses in the electric power line, the including nal drive,
are 50% of total energy input. Some 30% is lost in the batteryrelated systems, and some 20% in the power electronics, the
electric motor, and the mechanical parts of the power line. An
electrical vehicle without a gearbox can be equipped with a
longitudinally mounted electric motor and a conventional rear
axle with a nal drive ratio of about ve. In this case, the auxiliary
systems consume 10% of total energy input. Only 3% of the energy
is lost in the mechanical brakes, as the greater part of braking
recovers energy in an electric regenerative mode.
Fig. 10. Efciency for two electric motors as function of the nominal power output
and three load levels [148].
109
9. Conclusions
We reached the following conclusions from our analyses:
Table 8
Typical losses in electric motors [148].
Losses
(%)
Stator losses
Rotor losses
Core losses
Additional load losses
3050
2025
2025
515
510
110
Acknowledgments
Appendix A
Table A1A3.
Table A1
Annual fuel energy consumption breakdown for four types of average global heavy vehicle.
Energy losses
Vehicle,
Average speed
Coach 2000
80 km/h
Total
Friction mechanism
Engine friction
piston assembly
GJ
8
14.4
GJ
6
GJ
108.0
GJ
6
55.2
GJ
86.4
10
HD
18
2.59
18
15.55
18
19.44
18
9.94
18
7.3
264
47.52
EHDS
17
2.45
17
14.69
17
18.36
17
9.38
17
44.88
ML
0.72
4.32
5.40
2.76
13.20
BL
0.72
4.32
5.40
2.76
13.20
HD
30
4.32
30
25.92
30
32.40
30
16.56
30
79.20
bearings
valve train
ML
15
2.16
15
12.96
15
16.20
15
8.28
15
39.60
VL
10
1.44
10
8.64
10
10.80
10
5.52
10
26.40
Subtotal
Transmission friction
100
14.4
100
86.4
50.4
100
1.44
20
10.08
55
50.49
40
14.72
41
76.73
EHDSR
55
3.96
55
27.72
25
22.95
35
12.88
36
67.51
EHDR
20
1.44
20
10.08
15
13.77
20
7.36
18
32.65
0.36
2.52
4.59
1.84
9.31
100
0.5
Tire rolling
TR
Braking contact
BC
7.2
0.9
14.4
100
0.5
18
50.4
7.2
259.2
0.5
8
91.8
5.4
86.4
100
0.5
13
36.8
100
186
186
4.6
0.5
18
119.6
13.2
480
9.5
17.1
15
162.0
36.8
7.2
259
Friction total
30.0
54.0
31.0
446.4
42.0
453.6
27.5
253.0
33.3
1207.0
Air drag
12.0
21.6
18.0
259.2
2.0
21.6
20.0
184.0
13.4
486.4
Auxiliary, losses
43.2
100
5.1
264
7.2
EHDR
36.8
100
4.0
55.2
20
Subtotal
91.8
100
VL
ML
8.5
108.0
3.0
5.4
2.0
28.8
5.0
54.0
2.5
23.0
3.1
111.2
Exhaust
32.0
57.6
29.0
417.6
31.0
334.8
30.0
276.0
30.0
1086.0
Cooling
23.0
41.4
20.0
288.0
20.0
216.0
20.0
184.0
20.1
729.4
70.0
126.0
69.0
993.6
58.0
626.4
72.5
667.0
66.7
2413.0
100.0
180.0
100.0
1440.0
100.0
1080.0
100.0
920.0
100.0
3620.0
Table A2
Annual friction energy breakdown for tribological contact mechanisms in four heavy vehicle categories.
Lubrication and contact mechanism
Code
Tire rolling
Hydrodynamic lubrication
Mixed lubrication
EHD lubrication, sliding
EHD, sliding and rolling
EHD, rolling
Boundary lubrication
Viscous losses
Braking contact
Total
TR
HD
ML
EHDS
EHDSR
EHDR
BL
VL
BC
Coach 2000
80 km/h
Total
GJ
GJ
GJ
GJ
GJ
26.7
12.8
6.0
4.5
7.3
4.3
1.3
5.3
31.7
100.0
14.4
6.9
3.2
2.5
4.0
2.3
0.7
2.9
17.1
54.0
58.1
9.3
4.4
3.3
6.2
3.9
1.0
4.2
9.7
100.0
259.2
41.5
19.8
14.7
27.7
17.3
4.3
18.7
43.2
446.4
19.0
11.4
5.8
4.0
5.1
4.2
1.2
13.5
35.7
100.0
86.4
51.8
26.2
18.4
23.0
19.2
5.4
61.3
162.0
453.6
47.3
10.5
5.1
3.7
5.1
4.7
1.1
8.0
14.5
100.0
119.6
26.5
12.9
9.4
12.9
12.0
2.8
20.2
36.8
253.0
39.7
10.5
5.1
3.7
5.6
4.2
1.1
8.5
21.4
100.0
479.6
126.7
62.1
44.9
67.5
50.8
13.2
103.1
259.1
1207.0
TR
HD
ML
EHDS
EHDSR
EHDR
BL
VL
BC
Total
Single-unit truck
Semi-trailer truck
City bus
Coach
MJ/a
MJ/a
MJ/a
MJ/a
MJ/a
T2000
T2013
L2013
T2015
TT2000
TT2013
L2013
TT2015
CB2000
CB2013
L2013
CB2025
C2000
C2013
L2013
C2015
HV2000
HV2013
L2013
14,400
6910
3240
2450
3960
2340
720
2880
17,100
54,000
8640
2760
1620
1230
1980
470
520
1650
17,100
35,970
4320
550
320
310
330
230
50
1230
17,100
24,440
2880
280
160
150
50
120
30
410
17,100
21,180
259,200
41 470
19,800
14,690
27,720
17,280
4320
18,720
43,200
446,400
155,520
16,590
9900
7350
13,860
3460
3090
10,700
43,200
263,670
77760
3320
1980
1840
2310
1730
310
8020
43,200
140470
51,840
1660
990
920
370
870
150
2670
43,200
102,670
86,400
51,840
26,190
18,360
22,950
19,170
5400
61,290
162,000
453,600
51,840
20,740
13 100
9180
11,480
3830
3860
35,020
162,000
311,050
25,920
4150
2620
2300
1910
1920
390
26,270
162,000
227,480
17,280
2070
1310
1150
310
960
190
8760
162,000
194,030
119,600
26,500
12,880
9380
12,880
11,960
2760
20,240
36,800
253,000
71,760
10,600
6440
4690
6440
2390
1970
11,570
36,800
152,660
35,880
2120
1290
1170
1070
1200
200
8670
36,800
88,400
23,920
1060
640
590
170
600
100
2890
36,800
66,770
479,600
126,700
62,100
44,900
67,500
50,800
13,200
103,100
259,100
1,207,000
287,760
50,680
31,050
22,450
33,750
10,160
9430
58,910
259,100
763,290
143,880
10,140
6210
6610
5630
5080
940
44190
259,100
481,780
95,920
5070
3110
2810
900
2540
470
14,730
259,100
384,650
33%
24%
55%
41%
61%
45%
41%
30%
69%
51%
77%
57%
31%
23%
50%
37%
57%
42%
40%
30%
65%
48%
74%
55%
37%
27%
60%
44%
68%
50%
Friction reduction
Reduction in fuel Energya
a
HV2025
Table A3
Friction losses and potential friction reduction for different tribological contact mechanisms and types of vehicles.
Considering that reduced friction will result in reduced cooling and exhaust at same ratio 410% reduction in friction results in 7.4% reduction in fuel consumption.
111
112
Energy conversions
1 kWs
1 kJ
1 kWh
3.6 MJ
1 Mtoe
41 868 TJ
1 Btu
1054 J
Diesel fuel conversions
1l
0.832 kg
1 MJ
0.028 l
1l
35.9 MJ
1 kg
43.1 MJ
1 kg
43.16 kg CO2 emission
1l
42.63 kg CO2 emission
1l
1.4 euro on an average in Europe, Nov 2013
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
References
[1] IEA. Redrawing the energy-climate map. Paris, France: OECD/IEA International Energy Agency; 2013.
[2] US. DoE, 21st century truck partnership, Roadmap and technical white
papers. Department of Energy, USA, February 2013. https://www1.eere.
energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/program/21ctp_roadmap_white_pa
pers_2013.pdf; 11 October 2013.
[3] Holmberg K, Andersson P, Erdemir A. Global energy consumption due to
friction in passenger cars. Tribol Int 2012;47:22134.
[4] Nakamura T. Improvement of fuel efciency of passenger cars by taking
advantage of tribology. In: Proceedings of the JAST tribology conference;
Tokyo, Japan; 1921 May 2014. Japan Society of Tribology; 2014. 4 p. [in
Japanese].
[5] Rodrigue JP. The geography of transportation systems. 3rd ed.. New York,
USA: Routledge; 2013.
[6] ATAG (Air Transport Action Group). Aviation benets beyond borders. Oxford
Economics, Geneva, Switzerland; 2012.
[7] WEF Repowering transport. Project white paper. World Economic Forum,
Geneva, Switzerland; 2011.
[8] IEA. Key world energy statistics 2012. Paris, France: OECD/IEA International
Energy Agency; 2012.
[9] Paravantis JA, Georgakellos DA. Trends in energy consumption and carbon
dioxide emissions of passenger cars and buses. Technol Forecast Soc Chang
2007;74:682707.
[10] Franzese O, Davidson D. Effect of weight and roadway grade on the fuel
economy of Class-8 freight trucks. Tennessee, USA: Oak Ridge National
Laboratory; 2011.
[11] Holmberg K, Siilasto R, Laitinen T, Andersson A, Jsberg A. Global energy
consumption due to friction in paper machines. Tribol Int 2013;62:5877.
[12] Edwards R, Larive JF, Beziat JC. Well-to-wheels analysis of future automotive
fuels and powertrains in the European context. WTT Appendix 2: description
and detailed energy and GHG balance of individual pathways. Ispra, Italy:
Joint Research Centre, European Commission; 2011.
[13] Davis SC, Boundy RG, Diegel SW. Vehicle technologies market report.
Tennessee, USA: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 2011.
[14] Davis SC, Diegel SW, Boundy RG. Transportation energy data book. 31st ed..
Tennessee, USA: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 2012.
[15] EU. Energy in gures. Statistical pocket book 2012. Brussels, Belgium:
European Union; 2012.
[16] EUTransport in gures. Statistical pocket book 2012. Brussels, Belgium:
European Union; 2012.
[17] Ntziachristos L, Samaras Z. Exhaust emissions from road transport: EMEP/
EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009, updated May 2012: passenger cars,
light-duty trucks, heavy-duty vehicles including buses and motorcycles.
Copenhagen, Denmark: European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme,
European Environment Agency; 2012.
[18] Ealey LA, Gross AC. The global market for buses, 20002010. Bus Econ
2008;2:6976.
[19] Nylund NO. Fuel savings for heavy-duty vehicles. Summary report 2003
2005. Project report VTT-R-03125-06. VTT Technical Research Centre, Espoo,
Finland; 2006. Available from: http://www.motiva./les/1027/2006_HDE
nergy_summaryreport_eng_nal.pdf. [English version].
[20] KytoM, Erkkil K, Nylund NO. Heavy-duty vehicles: safety, environmental
impacts and new technology, RASTU. Summary report 20062008. Project
report VTT-R-04084-09-EN. VTT Technical Research Centre, Espoo, Finland;
2009. http://www.vtt./inf/julkaisut/muut/2009/VTT-R-04084-09-EN.pdf;
25 January 2014.
[21] Erkkil K, Laine P, Nylund NO, Silvonen P, Murtonen T, Lappi M., et al. Energy
efcient and intelligent heavy vehicle HDENIQ. Final report. Research
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
[51]
[52]
[53]
[54]
[55]
[56]
[57]
[58]
[59]
[60]
[61]
[62]
[63]
[64]
[65]
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
[70]
[71]
[72]
[73]
[74]
[75]
[76]
[77]
[78]
[79]
[80]
[81]
113
[82] 2nd ed.. Bruce RW, editor. Handbook of lubrication and tribology. Theory and
design, vol. II. London: CRC Press, Taylor and Frances Group; 2012.
[83] Taylor RI, Kitahara T, Saito T, Coy RC. Piston assembly friction and wear: the
inuence of lubricant viscometry. In: Proceeding of the international
tribology conference, Yokohama, Japan; 29 October2 November 1995;
Japanese Society of Tribologists; 1995. III:14231428.
[84] Reichert J, Schfer P. Reibungsreduzierende Motorabdichtung bei (Reduced
friction in engine sealing system for truck engines). MTZ Mot Z
2010;71:25864 ([in German]).
[85] Fahr M, Hanke W, Klimesch C, Rehl A. Reibungsreduzierung bei Kolbensystemen im Ottomotor (Friction reduction in power cylinder systems of gasoline
engines). MTZ Mot Z 2011;72(78):55864 ([in German]).
[86] Johansson S, Nilsson PH, Ohlsson R, Anderberg C, Rosn B-G. New cylinder
liner surfaces for low oil consumption. Tribol Int 2008;41:84559.
[87] Johansson S, Nilsson PH, Ohlsson R, Rosn BG. Experimental friction evaluation of cylinder liner/piston ring contact. Wear 2011;271:62533.
[88] Johansson S, Frennfelt C, Killinger A, Nilsson PH, Ohlsson R, Rosn BG.
Frictional evaluation of thermally sprayed coatings applied on the cylinder
liner of a heavy duty diesel engine: pilot tribometer analysis and full scale
engine test. Wear 2011;273:8292.
[89] Priestner C, Allmaier H, Priebsch HH, Forstner C. Rened simulation of
friction power loss in crankshaft slider bearings considering wear in the
mixed lubrication regime. Tribol Int 2012;46:2007.
[90] Castle R, Arrowsmith S. Modelling lubricant related fuel economy in heavy
duty diesel engines. In: Dowson D, Priest M, Dalmaz G, Lubreht AA, editors.
Tribological research and design for engineering systems, 41. Amsterdam,
The Netherlands: Elsevier. Tribology Series; 2003. p. 491500.
[91] Fox IE. Numerical evaluation of the potential for fuel economy improvement
due to boundary friction reduction within heavy-duty diesel engines. Tribol
Int 2005;38:26575.
[92] Deuss T, Ehnis H, Freier R, Knzel R. Reibleistungsmessungen am befeuerten
Dieselmotor Potenziale der Kolbengruppe (Friction power measurements
of a red diesel engine Piston group potentials). MTZ Mot Z 2010;71
(5):32630.
[93] Deuss T, Ehnis H, Rose R, Knzel R. Reibleistungsmessungen am befeuerten
Dieselmotor Einuss von Kolbenschaftbeschichtungen (Friction power
measurements of a red diesel engine Inuence of piston skirt coatings).
MTZ Mot Z 2010;71(5):32630.
[94] HP Wizard, Tire friction and rolling resistance coefcients, http://hpwizard.
com/tire-friciton-coefcient.html; 5 November 2013.
[95] Edwards R, Larive JF, Rickeard D, Weindorf W. Well-to-wheels analysis of
future automotive fuels and powertrains in the European context. WTT
Appendix 1-Version 4.0, conversion factors and fuel properties. Ispra, Italy:
Joint Research Centre, European Commission; 2011.
[96] Erdemir A. Engineered tribological interfaces for improved boundary lubrication. Tribol Int 2005;38:24956.
[97] Donnet C, Erdemir A. Historical developments and new trends in tribological
and solid lubricant coatings. Surf Coat Technol 2004;180181:7684.
[98] Erdemir A, Voevodin AA. Nanocomposite coatings for severe applications. In:
Martin P, editor. Handbook of deposition technologies for lms and coatings
science, applications and technology. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier;
2010. p. 679715.
[99] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A, Ronkainen H, Wallin K. Tribological analysis of
fracture conditions in thin surface coatings by 3D FEM modelling and stress
simulations. Tribol Int 2005;38:103549.
[100] Holmberg K, Ronkainen H, Laukkanen A, Wallin K, Erdemir A, Eryilmaz O.
Tribological analysis of TiN and DLC coated contacts by 3D FEM modelling
and stress simulation. Wear 2007;264:87784.
[101] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A, Ghabchi A, Rombouts M, Turunen E, Waudby R,
et al. Computational modelling based wear resistance analysis of thick
composite coatings. Tribol Int 2014;72:1330.
[102] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A. Wear models. In: Bruce R, editor. Handbook on
lubrication and tribology, vol. II: theory and design. 2nd ed.. New York, USA:
CRC Press; 2012. p. 121 (chapter 13).
[103] Doll G. Life-limiting wear of wind turbine bearings: root cause and solutions.
In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on wear of materials,
Philadelphia, USA; 37 April 2011.
[104] Enomoto Y, Yamamoto T. New materials in automotive tribology. Tribol Lett
1998;5:1324.
[105] Vetter J, Barbezat G, Crummenauer J, Avissar J. Surface treatment selections
for automotive applications. Surf Coat Technol 2005;200:19628.
[106] Erdemir A, Donnet C. Tribology of diamondlike carbon lms: current status
and future prospects. Topical review. J Phys D: Appl Phys 2006;39:R31127.
[107] Donnet C, Erdemir A. Tribology of diamondlike carbon lms: fundamentals
and applications. New York: Springer; 2008.
[108] Kano M. DLC coating technology applied to sliding parts of automotive
engine. New Diam Front Carbon Technol 2006;16:20110.
[109] Podgornik B, Vizintin J. Tribological reactions between oil additives and DLC
coatings for automotive applications. Surf Coat Technol 2005;200:19829.
[110] Podgornik B, Vizintin J. Action of oil additives when used in DLC coated
contacts. Tribology 2010;4:18690.
[111] Ghlin R, Larsson M, Hedenqvist P. ME-C:H coatings in motor vehicles. Wear
2001;249:3029.
[112] Lampe T, Eisenberg S, Rodriguez Cabeo E. Plasma surface engineering in
automotive industry trends and future perspectives. Surf Coat Technol
2003;174175:17.
114
[113] Canter N. BAM: antiwear and friction-reducing coating. Tribol Lubr Technol
2009:145.
[114] Cook BA, Harringa JL, Anderegg J, Russell AM, Qu J, Blau P, et al. Analysis of
wear mechanisms in low-friction AlMgB14TiB2 coatings. Surf Coat Technol
2010;205:2296301.
[115] Farley J, Wrobel LC, Mao K. Performance evaluation of multilayer thin lm
coatings under mixed rolling-sliding contact conditions. Wear 2010;268:
26976.
[116] Al-Azizi A, Eryilmaz O, Erdemir A, Kim SH. Effects of nanoscale surface
texture and lubricant molecular structure on boundary lubrication in liquid.
Langmuir 2013;29:1341926.
[117] Andersson A, Koskinen J, Varjus S, Gerbig Y, Haefke H, Georgiou S, et al.
Microlubrication effect by laser-textured steel surfaces. Wear 2007;262:
36979.
[118] Kovalchenko A, Ajayi OO, Erdemir A, Fenske GR, Etsion I. The effect of laser
texturing of steel surface and speed-load parameters on lubrication regime
transition from boundary to hydrodynamic. Tribol Trans 2004;47:299307.
[119] Klingerman Y, Etsion I, Shinkarenko A. Improving tribological performance of
piston rings by partial surface texturing. Trans ASME, J Tribol 2005;127:
6328.
[120] Etsion I, Sher E. Improving fuel efciency with laser surface textured piston
rings. Tribol Int 2009;42:5427.
[121] Wang X, Yu H, Huang W. Surface texture design for different circumstances.
In: Proceedings of the 1st international brazilian conference on tribology,
TriboBR. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; November 2426 2010. p. 97107.
[122] Ryk G, Etsion I. Testing piston rings with partial laser surface texturing for
friction reduction. Wear 2006;261:7926.
[123] Britton RD, Elcoate CD, Alanou MP, Evans HP, Snidle RW. Effect of surface
nish on gear tooth friction. Trans ASME, J Tribol 2000;122:35460.
[124] Ishida Y, Usami H, Hoshino Y. Effect of micro dimples on frictional properties
in boundary lubrication condition. In: Proceedings of the world tribology
congress. Kyoto, Japan; September 611 2009.
[125] Van Voorst R. Polyglycols as base uids for environmentally-friendly lubricants. J Synth Lubr 2000;16:31322.
[126] Martin JM, Barros Bouchet MI, Sagawa T. Green tribology: lubricant compliant superhard DLC coatings. In: Proceedings of the 4th world tribology
conference, Kyoto Japan; September 611 2009.
[127] Barros Bouchet M, Martin JM. The future of boundary lubrication by carbon
coatings and environmentally friendly additives. In: Luo J, Meng Y, Shao T,
Zhao Q, editors. Advanced tribology. Bejing, China: Tsinghua University Press,
Springer; 2010. p. 5989 ([Proceedings of CIST & ITS-IFToMM2008]).
[128] Martin JM, Barros Bouchet MI, Matta C, Zhang Q, Goddard III WA, Okuda S,
et al. Gas-phase lubrication of a ta-C by glycerol and hydrogen peroxide:
experimental and computer modelling. J Phys Chem 2010;C114:500311.
[129] Choo JH, Forrest AK, Spikes HA. Inuence of organic friction modier on
liquid slip: a new mechanism of organic friction modier action. Tribol Lett
2007;27:23944.
[130] Amann T, Kailer A. Ultralow friction of mesogenic uid mixtures in
tribological reciprocating systems. Tribol Lett 2010;37:34352.
[131] Li J, Zhang C, Ma L, Liu Y, Luo J. Superlubricity achieved with mixtures of acids
and glycerol. Langmuir 2013;29:2715.
[132] Minami I. Ionic liquids in tribology. Molecules 2009;14:2286305.
[133] Somers AE, Howlett PC, MacFarlane DR, Forsyth M. A review of ion liquid
lubricants. Lubricants 2013;1:321.
[134] Qu J, Truhan JJ, Dai S, Luo H, Blau PJ. Ionic liquids with ammonium cations as
lubricants or additives. Tribol Lett 2006;22:20714.
[135] Qu J, Blau P, Dai S, Luo H, Meyer III HM. Ionic liquids as novel lubricants and
additives for diesel engine applications. Tribol Lett 2009;35:1819.
[136] Qu J, Blau P, Dai S, Luo H, Meyer III HM, Truhan JJ. Tribological characteristics
of aluminium alloys sliding against steel lubricated by ammonium and
imidazolium liquids. Wear 2009;267:122631.
[137] Martin JM, Ohmae N. Nanolubricants. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd;
2008.
[138] Raviv U, Giasson S, Kampf N, Gohy JF, Jerome R, Klein J. Lubrication by
charged polymers. Nature 2003;425:1635.
[139] Lee S, Mller M, Rezwan K, Spencer N. Procine gastric mucin (PGM) at the
water/poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) interface: inuence of pH and ionic
strength on its conformation, adsorption, and aqueous lubrication properties.
Langmuir 2005;21:834453.
[140] Yakubov GE, McColl J, Bonagaerts HH, Ramsden JJ. Viscous boundary
lubrication of hydrophobine surfaces by mucin. Langmuir 2009;25:231321.
[141] Burges SC, Choi JMJ. A parametric study of the energy demands of car
transportation: a case study of two competing commuter routes in the UK.
Transp Res Part D 2003;8:2136.
[142] Dressler N, Bernhart W, Shen J, Keese S, Fernandex A, Pietras F. Truck
powertrain 2020 Mastering the CO2-challenge. . Stuttgart, Germany:
Roland Berger Strategy Consultants; 2010. www.rolandberger.com ([15
January 2014]).
[143] Prasertsri S, Rattanasom N. Mechanical and damping properties of silica/
natural rubber composites prepared from latex system. Polym Test
2011;30:51526.
[144] Liechty J, Nelson S, Roeth M, Slick S, Cullen G. Tire pressure systems
condence report. XXX. USA: North American Council for Freight Efciency
(NACFE); 2013, http://nacfe.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/TPS-DetailedCondence-Report1.pdf; 15 January 2014.
[145] Wolf T. Neue Lagertechnologie ermo
glicht hohes CO2-Einsparpotenzial (New
bearing technology enables signicant CO2 savings). ATZ 2009;111(9):
66871 ([in German]).
[146] Bandi K. Fuel efciency improvements in heavy truck driveline systems
through advanced bearing design and technology. SAE technical paper 201236-0204; 2012.
[147] Kulkarni M, Shim T, Zhang Y. Shift dynamics and control of dual-clutch
transmissions. Mech Mach Theory 2007;42:16882.
[148] Waide B, Brunner C. Energy-efciency policy opportunities for electric
motor-driven systems. Energy efciency series, international energy agency
working papers; 2011. http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/
publication/name,3981,en.html.
[149] Gao Z, LaClair TJ, Daw CS, Smith D. Fuel consumption and cost savings of class
8 heavy-duty trucks powered by natural gas, 92th transportation research
board meeting; 2013, http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/Files/Pub38711.
pdf.
[150] Akutagawa K, Hein HR. Nano-technology and advanced materials design
technology for fuel efciency tyres. ATZ 2013;115:326.