Fuel 90 (2011) 23402342

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Short communication

Impact of altitude on fuel consumption of a gasoline passenger car

Efthimios Zervas
School of Science and Technology, Hellenic Open University, Riga Feraiou 167, 26222 Patra, Greece

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 5 October 2009
Received in revised form 12 November 2010
Accepted 3 February 2011
Available online 17 February 2011
Keywords:
Altitude
Fuel consumption
Gasoline
Passenger cars
Aerodynamics

a b s t r a c t
Engines of new passenger cars are tuned at the sea level. However, in several countries, a signicant part
of the engine operation is performed at higher altitudes than that of the sea level. The different air density
can have a signicant impact on fuel consumption. In the case of gasoline engines, the higher altitude theoretically leads to lower fuel consumption due to lower throttle frictions due to the wider throttle opening. From the other side, as the air is less dense at higher altitudes, the vehicle aerodynamic is changed
and this also leads to lower fuel consumption. This work studies, on three regulated driving cycles, the
impact of high altitude on the fuel consumption of a gasoline passenger car. The impact of changed vehicle aerodynamics of higher altitudes, through the change of deceleration times, on fuel consumption is
also analyzed.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

2. Experimental section

Engines of new passenger cars are tuned to operate with the

lowest possible fuel consumption having the same time the highest output power and torque and respecting the regulations for exhaust emissions. This engine tuning is usually performed at the sea
level. However, in several countries, a signicant part of the engine
operation is performed at higher altitudes than that of the sea level. This has a signicant impact on the local atmosphere quality
of many cities, as for example Mexico City which is found at an altitude of 2200 m above sea level, and on fuel consumption. Some
authors study the impact of altitude on exhaust emissions [1,2];
however no work studies the impact on fuel consumption.
In the case of gasoline engines, the lower density of air at higher
altitude leads theoretically to a decrease of fuel consumption due
to the lower negative loop of engine operation due to the decreased
frictions due to the wider throttle opening. The case of diesel engine is less evident. From the other side, as the air is less dense
at higher altitudes, the vehicle aerodynamic is changed. For this
reason the deceleration times of the vehicle increase and that have
also an impact on fuel consumption.
This work studies the impact of high altitude on the fuel consumption of a gasoline passenger car. The impact of higher altitude
is studied on three regulated driving cycles. Also, the change of
aerodynamics through the change of deceleration times is measured here and the fuel consumption of the higher altitude is
analyzed.

A Renault Clio equipped with a Euro3 gasoline engine of

1400 cm3 was used for these tests. The inertia of this vehicle is
2250 lbs and its SCx of 0.685. Two kinds of tests were performed
for the fuel consumption measurements: one almost at the sea level
(altitude of 70 m) and one at an altitude of 2200 m which is the altitude of Mexico City. The above tests were performed using an altimetric test bench located at an altitude of 70 m. This altimetric test
bench has the ability to decrease atmospheric pressure to simulate
high altitude. A commercial Euro3 fuels was used for these tests.
The above tests were performed on three regulated driving cycles:
the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and two driving cycles
from USA, the FTP and the Highway driving cycle. Fig. 1 shows
the driving proles of those cycles and Table 1 shows their main
characteristics. More details about the above driving cycles can be
found elsewhere [3]. The deceleration times were also measured
at the altitude of 70 m, but due to technical reasons, it was not possible to measure them at Mexico City altitude level (2200 m). For
these reason, the deceleration times were measured at the altimetric vehicle test bench, using the altitude of 700 m. Every test is repeated three times and average values are used. All tests used
here are validated after the principle that the car/driver must follow
the driving prole with a difference less than 1 km/h.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Driving cycle results

Tel.: +30 2610 367 566.

E-mail address: zervas@eap.gr
0016-2361/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2011.02.004

Fig. 2 shows the CO2 emissions on the three driving cycles

tested at the sea level altitude (70 m) and the altitude of 2200 m,

2341

E. Zervas / Fuel 90 (2011) 23402342

12

80

ECE
40

0
0

400

800

1200

Time (s)
100

Speed (km/h)

70m
2200m

120

EUDC

Phase-1

Phase-2

Phase-3

CO2 emissions (g/km)

Speed (km/h)

NEDC

80

40

80

FTP-75
60
0

40

NEDC

FTP

Highway

20

Fig. 2. CO2 emissions on the three driving cycles tested at the sea level altitude and
at the altitude of 2200 m. Error bars correspond to one standard deviation.

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Time (s)
always a decrease of fuel consumption according to theory. Fig. 2
shows that the impact of the driving cycle used, and consequently
of the driving prole used, on fuel consumption is quite signicant.

100
80
60

3.2. Deceleration tests results

40
20
0
0

200

400

600

800

Time (s)
Fig. 1. The three driving cycles used in this study.

Table 1
Some characteristics of the three driving cycles used in this study.

NEDC
ECE
EUDC
FTP-75
Phase-1
Phase-2
Highway

Duration (s)

Distance
(km)

Max speed
(km/h)

Average speed
(km/h)

1180
780
300
2477 (with stop)
505
867
765

11.07
4.052
6.955
17.86
5.8
6.3
16.5

120

33.6

91.2

34.2 (without stop)

96.4

77.4

which corresponds to the altitude of Mexico City. This gure shows

that there is a decrease of 3.5% in the case of NEDC, when the vehicle is used at the altitude of 2200 m instead of the sea level altitude. However, this trend is not conrmed from the two US
cycles. The decrease on the FTP driving cycle on the 2200 m comparing to the sea level altitude is lower than that of NEDC: only
2.6%, while the Highway driving cycle shows the opposite trend:
an increase of 6.2% of fuel consumption at the altitude of Mexico
City comparing to the sea level one. It must be noticed that the
repeatability of the tests is very high as the standard deviation is
less than 2.5% in the worst case. We cannot nd an obvious reason
why the results of Highway driving cycle are opposite to the other
two driving cycles and no other researcher worked on this subject.
The only reason can be the higher average speed of this cycle.
The above results show that the impact of higher altitude than
that of sea level on fuel consumption is not evident and there is not

As shown before, the lower air density at higher altitude

changes aerodynamics of the vehicle and thus changes the deceleration times. Due to technical reasons, the measure of deceleration
times was not possible at the altitude of 2200 m above sea level.
These times were measured in the altimetric vehicle test bench
using an altitude of 700 m. Fig. 3 shows the difference between
the deceleration times as a function of the vehicle speed for the
two altitudes of 70 and 700 m. This gure shows that there is a signicant difference on deceleration times between the two altitudes. Our results are according to theory, as the altitude of
700 m has higher deceleration times. This difference depends on
vehicle speed: it is quite small at low speeds (less than 1%), but increases signicantly with speed to reach 6% at the speed of
120 km/h.

Diff. on the deceleration time (%)

Speed (km/h)

Highway

-2

-4

-6

-8
0

40

80

120

Vehicle speed (km/h)

Fig. 3. Difference of the deceleration times between the sea level altitude and the
altitude of 700 m.

2342

E. Zervas / Fuel 90 (2011) 23402342

130

CO2 emissions (g/km)

70m
2200m

This difference is about 1.5%. It is evident that this gain will be

higher at the altitude of 2200 m above sea level.
4. Conclusions

125

120

115

110

Altitude
Fig. 4. CO2 emissions on NEDC at the sea level altitude and at the altitude of 700 m
for the two different deceleration times.

This work studies the impact of high altitude on the fuel consumption of a gasoline passenger car on three regulated driving cycles. Even if there is a gain on fuel consumption of 3.5% in the case
of NEDC in the case of higher altitude, other regulated driving cycles do not show the same tendencies. The gain on the FTP is only
2.6% on the 2200 m, while the Highway driving cycle shows the
opposite trend: an increase of 6.2% of fuel consumption. The above
results show that the impact of higher altitude is not evident and
there is not always a decrease on fuel consumption and more work
is necessary to clarify the impact of higher altitude. From the other
hand, an altitude of 700 m increases deceleration times of the vehicle. This increase is a function of speed and can reach up to 6% at
the speed of 120 km/h, leading to a decrease in fuel consumption
on the NEDC of about 1.5%.
References

The deceleration times of the altitude of 700 m were used on

the vehicle test bench to measure CO2 emissions on the NEDC.
Fig. 4 shows the fuel consumption (expressed as CO2 emissions)
of the two altitudes using the deceleration times of the altitude
of 700 m. The NEDC on the sea level emits 126.7 g of CO2/km, while
the altitude of 700 m gives an emission rate of 124.85 g of CO2/km.

[1] Schifter I, Daz L, Lpez-Salinas E, Ramos F, Avalos S, Lpez-Vidal G, et al.

Estimation of motor vehicle toxic emissions in the metropolitan area of Mexico
City. Environ Sci Technol 2000;34(17):360610.
[2] Gamas ED, Diaz L, Rodriguez R, Lpez-Salinas E, Schifter I, Ontiveros L. Exhaust
emissions from gasoline- and LPG-powered vehicles operating at the altitude of
Mexico City. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 1999;49(10):117989.
[3] Zervas E, Bikas G. Impact of the driving cycle on the NOx and PM exhaust
emissions of diesel passenger cars. Energy Fuels 2008;22(3):170713.