Standard driving cycles are usually used to compare vehicles from distinct regions, and local driving cycles reproduce more realistic conditions in specific regions. In this article, we employed a simple methodology for developing local driving cycles and subsequently performed a kinematic and energy analysis. As an application, we employed the methodology for cars and motorcycles in Recife, Brazil. The speed profile was collected using a smartphone (1 Hz) validated against a high precision global positioning system (10 Hz), presenting a mean absolute error of 3 km/h. The driving cycles were thus developed using the micro-trip method. The kinematic analysis indicated that motorcycles had a higher average speed and acceleration (32.5 km/h, 0.84 m/s²) than cars (22.6 km/h, 0.55 m/s²). As a result of the energy analysis, it was found that inertia is responsible for most of the fuel consumption for both cars (59%) and motorcycles (41%), but for motorcycles the aerodynamic drag is also relevant (36%). With regards to fuel consumption, it was found that the standard driving cycle used in Brazil (FTP-75; 2.47 MJ/km for cars and 0.84 MJ/km for motorcycles) adequately represents the driving profile for cars (2.46 MJ/km), and to a lesser extent motorcycles (0.91 MJ/km) in off-peak conditions. Finally, we evaluated the influence of the vehicle category on energy consumption, obtaining a maximum difference of 38% between a 2.0 L sports utility vehicle and a 1.0 L hatchback.

通常使用标准驾驶循环来比较来自不同区域的车辆，而本地驾驶循环则在特定区域重现更为实际的条件。在本文中，我们采用了一种简单的方法来开发本地驾驶循环，随后进行了运动学和能量分析。作为应用，我们在巴西累西腓采用了汽车和摩托车的方法。速度曲线是使用经过高精度全球定位系统（10 Hz）验证的智能手机（1 Hz）收集的，平均绝对误差为3 km / h。因此，使用微行程方法开发了行驶周期。运动学分析表明，摩托车的平均速度和加速度（32.5 km / h，0.84 m / s ²）比汽车（22.6 km / h，0.55 m / s ^2）高。）。能量分析的结果表明，惯性是汽车（59％）和摩托车（41％）的大部分燃料消耗原因，但对于摩托车，空气阻力也很重要（36％）。关于燃料消耗，发现巴西使用的标准行驶周期（FTP-75；汽车为2.47 MJ / km，摩托车为0.84 MJ / km）足以代表汽车的行驶曲线（2.46 MJ / km），以及在非高峰条件下的电单车（0.91 MJ / km）。最后，我们评估了车辆类别对能耗的影响，得出了2.0升运动型多用途车与1.0升掀背车之间的最大差异为38％。