上海交通大学学报

上海交通大学学报

• • 上一篇    

不同风速测量方法对新能源轻型汽车行驶阻力影响

  

  1. 1.招商局检测车辆技术研究院有限公司，重庆  401329；

    2. 四川大学 空天科学与工程学院，成都  610065；

    3. 重庆大学 航空航天学院，重庆  400044
  • 作者简介:牛飞飞（1988－），硕士，高级工程师，从事新能源汽车性能测试研究；E-mail: cjniufeifei@cmhk.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金（52205192）

Impact of Different Wind Speed Test Methods on Driving Resistance of New Energy Light-duty Vehicles

  1. 1. China Merchants Testing Vehicle Technology Research Institute Co., Ltd., Chongqing 401329, China; 

    2. School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China; 

    3. College of Aerospace Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China

PDF (PC)

2

摘要： 为了提高新能源轻型汽车行驶阻力的测试效率和精确性，对两种风速测量方法及对应的滑行方法进行对比分析，从而根据不同车速条件车型选择出合适的行驶阻力测试方法。根据轻型汽车现行滑行标准的试验流程，对固定风速仪法和车载风速仪法进行全面对比分析，并对车载风速仪法的空气动力学方程进行推导和简化，最后使用多辆样车在相同环境条件下进行滑行试验并分别进行数据分析对比。测试结果显示，在车速较低时车载风速仪法测得的风速较为准确，在车速较高时车载风速仪对车的空气阻力影响变大从而导致测得的结果有一定偏差。因此，在最高车速较低时推荐选择车载风速仪法进行试验，在最高车速较高时推荐选择固定风速仪法进行试验，能精确测量道路行驶阻力；此外，空气动力学方程推导和简化也使得计算更加简洁高效。

关键词: 新能源轻型汽车, 滑行试验, 车载风速仪法, 固定风速仪法, 国Ⅵ污染物排放标准

Abstract: To improve the efficiency and accuracy of testing driving resistance in new energy light-duty vehicles, a comparative analysis of two wind speed measurement methods and their corresponding coasting test procedures is conducted in this study. The objective is to identify the most appropriate method for testing driving resistance under varying vehicle speed conditions. Experimental procedures specified in the existing coasting test standards for light-duty vehicles are followed to compare the stationary anemometer method with the onboard anemometer method. The aerodynamic equation for the onboard anemometer method is derived and simplified. Multiple vehicle prototypes are tested under identical environmental conditions, and the collected data are analyzed and compared. Findings indicate that at lower speeds, the onboard anemometer method yields more accurate wind speed measurements. However, at higher speeds, aerodynamic effects from the onboard anemometer on the vehicle increase, resulting in measurement deviations. Consequently, the onboard anemometer method is recommended for vehicles with lower maximum speeds, while the stationary anemometer method is more suitable for vehicles with higher maximum speeds to ensure precise driving resistance measurements. Furthermore, the derivation and simplification of the aerodynamic equation enhance the computational efficiency and accuracy of the testing process.

Key words: new energy light-duty vehicles, coast down, onboard anemometer method, stationary anemometer method, Emissions Standard of China Ⅵ

中图分类号: