4-25

 

Dynamic programming process and rule extraction from the result,

 

85

4-26

 

Implementing dynamic programming as a rule-based algorithm in SIMULINK,

 

85

5-1

 

Energy balance of a fully loaded Class 8 tractor-trailer on a level road at 65 mph, representing the losses shown in Table 5-1,

 

91

5-2

 

University of Maryland, streamlined tractor, closed gap, three-quarter trailer skirt, full boat tail,

 

93

5-3

 

National Research Council of Canada: smoke pictures, cab with deflector (right),

 

93

5-4

 

Kenworth 1985 T600 aerodynamic tractor,

 

94

5-5

 

Aerodynamic sleeper tractor aerodynamic feature identification,

 

94

5-6

 

2009 model year Mack Pinnacle (left) and Freightliner Cascadia (right) SmartWay specification trucks,

 

96

5-7

 

Aerodynamic and tire power losses for tractor-van trailer combination,

 

96

5-8

 

Tractor-trailer combination truck showing aerodynamic losses and areas of energy-saving opportunities,

 

97

5-9

 

Volvo full sleeper cab (left) and day cab (right),

 

97

5-10

 

Peterbilt Traditional Model 389 (left) and Aerodynamic Model 387 2 (right) (SmartWay),

 

99

5-11

 

ATDynamics trailer tail (left) and FreightWing trailer skirt (right),

 

101

5-12

 

Nose cone trailer “eyebrow,”

 

101

5-13

 

Laydon vortex stabilizer (left) and nose fairing (right),

 

101

5-14

 

Trailer bogie cover,

 

102

5-15

 

Summary of trailer aerodynamic device fuel consumption reduction,

 

102

5-16

 

Drag coefficient for aerodynamic tractor with single or double trailers,

 

104

5-17

 

Laydon double trailer arrangement with trailer skirts and vortex stabilizers on both trailers,

 

104

5-18

 

Refrigerated van trailer with Freight Wing skirts,

 

106

5-19

 

Freight Wing skirts on flatbed trailer,

 

106

5-20

 

New 40-ft-long container built by TRS Containers (left) and container chassis (right),

 

106

5-21

 

Container chassis with Freight Wing trailer skirt,

 

106

5-22

 

Tank trailer with Freight Wing skirts,

 

106

5-23

 

Sturdy-Lite curtain side design for flatbed trailers,

 

107

5-24

 

Walmart’s 2008 low fuel consumption tractor trailer,

 

107

5-25

 

Mack truck with aerodynamic device combination,

 

108

5-26

 

Nose Cone fairing on face of straight truck,

 

108

5-27

 

Laydon skirt on straight truck,

 

109

5-28

 

Rolling resistance technology, 1910-2002,

 

112

5-29

 

New-generation wide-base single tire (right) to reduce the rolling resistance of conventional dual tires (left),

 

112

5-30

 

Example rolling resistance coefficients for heavy-duty truck tires,

 

113

5-31

 

Tractor-trailer tandem-axle misalignment conditions,

 

114

5-32

 

Weight distribution of major component categories in Class 8 tractors,

 

117

5-33

 

Typical weights of specific components in Class 8 sleeper tractors,

 

117

5-34

 

Truck weight distribution,

 

118

5-35

 

Truck weight distribution from 2008 weigh-in-motion,

 

118

5-36

 

Truck weight versus trip frequency for six trucks of a single fleet operator,

 

119

5-37

 

Effect of weight on truck fuel economy for a monitored fleet of six trucks with combination of dual and wide single tires for a variety of drive routes,

 

119

5-38

 

Weight reduction opportunities with aluminum,

 

121

6-1

 

Comparison of 2015-2020 new-vehicle potential fuel-saving technologies for seven vehicle types,

 

132

6-2

 

New retail Class 8 truck sales, 1990-2007,

 

151



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement