AU2017201464B2 - A method of determining operational efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle - Google Patents

Abstract

A method to determine operational efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle, including quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score, quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train 5 parameter quantified score, quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score, quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score, quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score, quantifying a pollution parameter to form a pollution parameter quantified score and quantifying a o safety parameter to form a safety parameter quantified score, wherein each of said parameter quantified scores are weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. 1/6 10 3239 32a -34~ 34a 3036 36a 38 38a tnmtn kbt~aWf ~ ~~ ~44 4 2 \rNj&.v 52 52a *....'-A~ 54 54a 50$ , 56 59 56a '~~l{~lI13P:~it~ 58 Ms t 58a N~k ~~62 6662a 66 80 6 " '' ~ 8 4a 202 Figre

Description

1/6

10

3239 32a

-34~ 34a

3036 36a 38 38a tnmtn kbt~aWf ~ ~~ ~44 4 2

\rNj&.v 52 52a *....'-A~ 54 54a 56 59 56a 50$ , '~~l{~lI13P:~it~ 58 Ms t 58a

N~k ~~62 6662a

66 ~ 6"''84a

202

Figre

A METHOD OF DETERMINING OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY OF A HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE

FIELD OF INVENTION The present invention relates to fuel and operational efficiencies of heavy duty vehicles.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Fuel efficiency for heavy duty vehicles is difficult to compare as there are many different vehicle configurations and different uses for heavy duty vehicles. The differences in vehicle configurations and uses result in different fuel usage by different heavy duty vehicles. There is no current method to measure fuel usage efficiency in heavy duty vehicles that addresses the complex issues of vehicle types and uses.

OBJECT OF THE INVENTION It is an object of the present invention to overcome or at least alleviate one or more of the above problems with determining fuel and operational efficiencies of heavy duty vehicles and/or provide the consumer with a useful or commercial choice.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The inventor has addressed the problem of measuring and comparing heavy duty vehicle fuel efficiency and operational efficiency by identifying factors that affect different parameters in the consideration of these efficiencies. Then the inventor determined ways to measure these factors and combine the results to provide meaningful information of fuel efficiency and operational efficiency of heavy duty vehicles. The inventor developed a two step process that could address the problem of evaluating the fuel efficiency and operational efficiency of any heavy duty vehicle. The inventor then added a further step of using the fuel efficiency and operational efficiency values for each heavy duty vehicle to form a comparative analysis. In one aspect, the present invention broadly resides in a method to determine fuel efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle, including but not limited to quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; o quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; wherein each of said parameter quantified scores are weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form a fuel efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the engine type includes diesel engine, petrol engine, hybrid engine and/or electric engine. The fuel type preferably includes petrol, diesel, bio diesel, bio diesel blend, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, battery and/or fuel cell. Preferably the transmission type includes automatic transmission, manual transmission, semi automatic transmission, non-synchronized transmission, synchronised transmission, constant variable transmission and/or electronic transmission. The transmission arrangement preferably includes automated clutching and/or automated shifting. Preferably the aerodynamic parameter further includes factors including aerodynamic mirrors, aerodynamic exhaust and/or a low coefficient of drag. Preferably the other exterior attachments include a bull bar and/or a bug deflector. Preferably the inclusion of a bull bar and/or a bug deflector on a heavy duty vehicle is quantified as a negative value. Preferably the tyre type includes low rolling resistance tyres.

The type of brakes preferably includes regenerative brakes. Regenerative brakes are typically used with hybrid or electric engines. Preferably the inertia parameter further includes factors including energy storage devices such as batteries, capacitors, hydraulic or pneumatic accumulators, which can store the energy recovered by regenerative brakes. Preferably the wheel type includes wheel weight. Preferably the method further includes quantifying an auxiliary equipment parameter to form an auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score. Preferably the auxiliary equipment parameter includes factors including type of air conditioning. o The type of air conditioning preferably includes electrically powered air conditioning and/or scroll compressor air conditioning. Preferably the auxiliary equipment parameter further includes factors including window types and/or door opening systems. Preferably the window types include tinted windows and/or double glazed windows. Preferably the auxiliary equipment parameter further includes factors including auxiliary electrical equipment that can operate while the engine is switched off. In a further aspect, the present invention broadly resides in a method to determine fuel efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle, including but not limited to quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; quantifying an auxiliary equipment parameter to form an auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score, said auxiliary equipment parameter includes factors including type of air conditioning; wherein each of said parameter quantified scores are weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form a fuel efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the method further includes quantifying a telemetry parameter to form a telemetry parameter quantified score. Preferably the telemetry parameter includes factors including a telemetry system and telemetry display. Preferably the telemetry system includes measuring speed, measuring acceleration, measuring braking, measuring fuel consumption and/or other driver performance characteristics. Preferably the telemetry display includes displaying fuel consumption, average speed, acceleration, braking and/or other driver performance characteristics to a driver of the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably each factor when quantified receives a value. If a factor has a positive effect on fuel efficiency, the factor when quantified preferably receives a positive value. If a factor has a negative effect on fuel efficiency, the factor when quantified preferably receives a negative value. Preferably the addition of the values of all the factors in a particular parameter provides the parameter quantified score. Preferably the values of the quantified score of each of the parameters are added to form the fuel efficiency score. The calculated fuel efficiency score can be represented in a variety of forms including a number value, graphic representation and diagrammatic representation. The calculated fuel efficiency score can be provided in a digital format and/or in a label or paper format. Preferably the method further includes printing a label that depicts the fuel efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the method further includes attaching the label to the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the label includes the engine efficiency parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the drive train parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the aerodynamic parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the inertia parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the telemetry parameter quantified score. Preferably the method further includes modifying one or more of the factors of the heavy duty vehicle to increase the parameter quantified scores. In another aspect, the present invention broadly resides in a method of comparing fuel efficiency of two or more heavy duty vehicles, including but not limited to quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; wherein for each heavy duty vehicle, each of said parameter quantified scores is weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form a fuel efficiency score, and wherein the fuel efficiency scores for each heavy duty vehicle are compared to determine which heavy duty vehicle has a higher fuel efficiency score. In a further aspect, the present invention broadly resides in a method to determine operational efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle, including but not limited to quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; o quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; quantifying a pollution parameter to form a pollution parameter quantified score, said pollution parameter includes factors including emission standard compliance; quantifying a safety parameter to form a safety parameter quantified score, said safety parameter includes factors including electronic stability control, automatic braking system; wherein each of said parameter quantified scores is weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably, the emission standard compliance includes Euro V compliance, Euro VI compliance, EEV compliance, the use of a hybrid engine, the use of an electric engine and/or the use of a fuel cell powered electric engine. Preferably the safety parameter further includes factors including a reverse camera, collision warning system, driver alert system, driver assistance system, anti lock braking system, collision avoidance systems, active steering, autonomous driving controls, lane change system and/or lane departure system. Preferably the automatic braking system is an automatic emergency braking system. Preferably the method further includes quantifying an auxiliary equipment parameter to form an auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score. Preferably the auxiliary equipment parameter includes factors including type of air conditioning.

Preferably the method further includes quantifying a telemetry parameter to form a telemetry parameter quantified score. Preferably the telemetry parameter includes factors including a telemetry system and telemetry display. Preferably the addition of the values of all the factors in a particular parameter provides the parameter quantified score. Preferably the values of the quantified score of each of the parameters are added to form the operational efficiency score. The calculated operational efficiency score can be represented in a variety of forms including a number value, graphic representation and diagrammatic representation. o The calculated operational efficiency score can be provided in a digital format and/or in a label or paper format. Preferably the method further includes printing a label that depicts the operational efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the method further includes attaching the label to the heavy duty vehicle. Preferably the label includes a fuel efficiency score. Preferably the fuel efficiency score is a combination of the engine efficiency parameter quantified score, the drive train parameter quantified score, the aerodynamic parameter quantified score, the tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score and the inertia parameter quantified score. Preferably the fuel efficiency score further includes the auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score and the telemetry parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the pollution parameter quantified score. Preferably the label includes the safety parameter quantified score. In another aspect, the present invention broadly resides in a method of comparing operational efficiency of two or more heavy duty vehicles, including but not limited to quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; quantifying a pollution parameter to form a pollution parameter quantified score, said pollution parameter includes factors including emission standard compliance; quantifying a safety parameter to form a safety parameter quantified score, said safety parameter includes factors including electronic stability control, automatic braking system; wherein for each heavy duty vehicle, each of said parameter quantified scores is weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score, and wherein the operational efficiency scores for each heavy duty vehicle are compared to determine which heavy duty vehicle has a higher operational efficiency score. The features described with respect to one aspect also apply where applicable to all other aspects of the invention. Furthermore, different combinations of described features are herein described and claimed even when not expressly stated.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS In order that the present invention can be more readily understood reference will now be made to the accompanying drawings wherein: Figure 1 is a view of an efficiency score table; Figure 2 is a view of a vehicle score card combining efficiency score with a pollution score and a safety score; Figure 3 is a view of a label produced using the efficiency score, pollution score and safety score; Figure 4 is a vehicle score card for a light rigid truck; Figure 5 is a vehicle score card for an interstate semi trailer truck; and Figure 6 is a vehicle score card for a city bus.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT With reference to Figure 1, there is shown a fuel efficiency score table 10 of a heavy duty vehicle being a light rigid truck. To determine a fuel efficiency score 20 of the light rigid vehicle, engine efficiency parameter 30, drive train parameter 40, aerodynamic parameter 50, tyre rolling resistance parameter 60, inertia parameter 70 and auxiliary equipment parameter 80 are quantified and combined. The engine efficiency parameter 30 includes factors including the type of fuel that the light rigid truck might use, in this case flex fuelled 32 (for example bio diesel blended) or alternative fuel 34 such as liquid petroleum gas or natural gas. The engine parameter 30 also include the type of engine that the light rigid truck might have, such as a hybrid electric engine 36, or, a plug in hybrid electric engine, a battery powered electric engine or a fuel cell electric engine 38. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the engine efficiency parameter 30, a corresponding value 32a, 34a, 36a, 38a is achieved. The corresponding values 32a, 34a, 36a, 38a are added together to provide an engine efficiency parameter quantified score 39. The drive train parameter 40 includes factors including the type of transmission that the light rigid truck might have, in this case, an automated manual transmission 42 or an advanced intelligent automatic transmission 44. A corresponding value 42a or 44a is achieved if the rigid truck has an automated manual transmission 42 or an advanced intelligent automatic transmission 44. The values 42a or 44a are added together to provide a drive train parameter quantified score 46. The aerodynamic parameter 50 includes factors including a cab roof deflector 52, side faring 54, side guards 56 and streamlining 58 (i.e. the lack of exterior attachments). If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the aerodynamic parameter 50, a corresponding value 52a, 54a, 56a, 58a is achieved. The corresponding values 52a, 54a, 56a, 58a are added together to provide an aerodynamic parameter quantified score 59. The tyre rolling resistance parameter 60 includes factors including low rolling resistance tyres 62 and automatic tyre monitoring or inflation system 64. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the tyre rolling resistance parameter 60, a corresponding value 62a, 64a is achieved. The corresponding values 62a, 64a are added together to provide a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score 66. The inertia parameter 70 includes factors including regenerative braking 72, lightweight construction 74 and lightweight wheels in the form of aluminium wheels 76. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the inertia parameter 70, a corresponding value 72a, 74a, 76a is achieved. The corresponding values 72a, 74a, 76a are added together to provide an inertia parameter quantified score 78. The auxiliary equipment parameter 80 includes factors including auxiliary electrical equipment 82 that can operate while the engine is switched off and air conditioning 84 that can operate while the engine is turned off. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the auxiliary equipment parameter 80, a corresponding value 82a, 84a is achieved. The corresponding values 82a, 84a are added together to provide an auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score 86. The engine efficiency parameter 30, drive train parameter 40, aerodynamic parameter 50, tyre rolling resistance parameter 60, inertia parameter 70 and auxiliary equipment parameter 80 are weighted according to their predetermined level of importance. In the efficiency score table 10, the parameters are weighted to substantially accord to a duty cycle of the light rigid truck. The duty cycle of the light rigid truck reflects the percentage that each parameter contributes to the overall fuel efficiency, with the engine efficiency parameter 30 contributing 60 percent towards the overall fuel efficiency, the drive train parameter 40 contributing 4 percent to the overall fuel efficiency, the aerodynamic parameter 50 contributing 5 percent to the overall fuel efficiency, the tyre rolling resistance parameter 60 contributing 12 percent to the overall fuel efficiency, the inertia parameter 70 contributing 14 percent to the overall fuel efficiency and the auxiliary equipment parameter 80 contributing 4 percent to the overall fuel efficiency. These values are arbitrarily assigned in light of their considered importance. The value of each factor or parameter can change if the considered importance changes. Figure 1 shows a combined fuel efficiency score 20 of 100. This overall fuel efficiency score 20 can change providing that the parameter values remain proportionally the same in line with their considered importance. With reference to Figure 2, there is shown an operational efficiency score table 100 of a light rigid truck.

The operational efficiency score table 100 incorporates the fuel efficiency score table 10 from Figure 1. The fuel efficiency score 120 further includes telemetry parameter 130. The telemetry parameters 130 includes factors including a telemetry system 132 and telemetry display 134. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the telemetry parameter 130, a corresponding value 132a, 134a is achieved. The corresponding values 132a, 134a are added together to provide a telemetry parameter quantified score 136. The operational efficiency score table 100 includes pollution parameter 140. The pollution parameter 140 includes factors including Euro V compliance 141, EEV compliance 142, Euro VI compliance 143, the use of a hybrid engine 144, the use of a plug in hybrid electric engine, battery electric engine or fuel cell powered electric engine 145. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the pollution parameter 140, a corresponding value 141a, 142a, 143a, 144a, 145a is achieved. The corresponding values 141a, 142a, 143a, 144a, 145a are combined to provide a pollution parameter quantified score 146. The operational efficiency score table 100 also includes safety parameter 150. The safety parameter 150 includes factors including a reverse camera 151, electronic stability control 152, collision warning system 153, automatic emergency braking system 154, driver alert system 155 and a lane change/departure system 156. If the light rigid truck has any of the factors of the safety parameter 150, a corresponding value 151a, 152a, 153a, 154a, 155a, 156a is achieved. The corresponding values 151a, 152a, 153a, 154a, 155a, 156a are combined to provide a safety parameter quantified score 157. The fuel efficiency score 120, pollution parameter quantified score 146 and safety parameter quantified score 157 are weighted according to their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score 160 for the light rigid truck. As can be seen from the operational efficiency score table 100, the pollution parameter quantified score 146 has been weighted to make up 15 percent of the operational efficiency score 160, the fuel efficiency score 120 has been weighted to make up 70 percent of the operational efficiency score 160 and the safety parameter quantified score 157 has been weighted to make up 15 percent of the operational efficiency score 160.

The same considerations of assignment of values as with respect to the fuel efficiency score 20 of Figure 1 relate to the operational efficiency score 160. With reference to Figure 3, there is shown a label 200 which has been printed using the pollution parameter quantified score 146, the fuel efficiency score 120, the safety parameter quantified score 157 and the operational efficiency score 160 from the operational efficiency score table 100 from Figure 2. The operational efficiency score 160 is displayed as a coloured portion 210 of a curved bar 212. The curved bar 212 also has stars 214. This gives a quick overview of the operational efficiency of the light rigid truck. As can be seen from the label 200, the light rigid truck has an operational efficiency of three and a half stars out of a possible six stars. The label 200 also shows more detailed scores, showing the pollution parameter quantified score 220, the fuel efficiency score 230 and the safety parameter quantified score 240. With reference to Figures 4, 5 and 6, there are shown operational efficiency score tables 100, 300, 400 for a light rigid truck, an interstate semi trailer truck and a city bus respectively. The operational efficiency score tables 100, 300, 400 are weighted differently due to the configuration and application of the corresponding heavy duty vehicles. As the application for the light rigid truck is mostly driving in built up areas, the parameters 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 130 are weighted accordingly. In particular, the inertia parameter 70 is weighted at 12 percent of the operational efficiency score 160 as the light rigid truck is subject to stop/start traffic when driving in built up areas. Additionally, the aerodynamic parameter 50 is weighted at 5 percent of the operational efficiency score 160 due to the stop/start traffic and the fact that most of the driving occurs at speeds where aerodynamics does not play such an important factor. For the interstate semi trailer truck, the parameters 310, 320, 330, 340, 350, 360, 370 are weighted to take into account that the application for the interstate semi trailer truck is mainly highway driving. In particular, the inertia parameter 350 is weighted at 1 percent of the operational efficiency score 399 as the interstate semi trailer truck is subject to less stop/start traffic driving on highways compared to a light rigid truck that is subject to stop/start traffic when driving in built up areas. The aerodynamic parameter 330 is weighted at 20 percent of the operational efficiency score 399 as the aerodynamic parameter plays an important factor when the interstate semi trailer truck is traveling at highway speeds. The safety parameter 390 includes factors including adaptive cruise control 391 and dynamic steering 392, these factors become more important at higher speeds such as highway speeds. For the city bus, the parameters 410, 420, 430, 440, 450, 460, 470 are weighted to take into account that the city bus is configured to carry passengers and the application is mainly driving in built up areas with stop/start traffic. The inertia parameter 450 is weighted at 19 percent of the operational efficiency score 499 as the city bus is subject to stop/start traffic when driving in built up areas. The aerodynamic parameter 430 is weighted at 1 percent of the operational efficiency score 499 due to the stop/start traffic and the fact that most of the driving occurs at speeds where aerodynamics does not play such an important factor. The auxiliary equipment parameter 460 is weighted at 12 percent of the operational efficiency score 499 as keeping passengers comfortable uses more energy than just keeping a driver comfortable. The type of air conditioner used such as a variable air conditioner 461 or a scroll compressor air conditioned 462 as well as double glazed windows 463 and optimised door opening system 464 play an important factor in reducing the amount of energy used to keep the passengers comfortable.

ADVANTAGES An advantage of the method of determining fuel and operational efficiency according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention includes the ability to rate and compare heavy duty vehicles having different configurations and/or applications, including heavy duty vehicles that have the same engine but different configurations and/or applications. Another advantage of the method according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention includes the ability to provide a simple visual overview of the operational efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle.

VARIATIONS It will of course be realised that while the foregoing has been given by way of illustrative example of this invention, all such and other modifications and variations thereto as would be apparent to persons skilled in the art are deemed to fall within the broad scope and ambit of this invention as is herein set forth. Throughout the description and claims of this specification the word "comprise" and variations of that word such as "comprises" and "comprising", are not intended to exclude other additives, components, integers or steps.

Claims (10)

1. A method to determine operational efficiency of a heavy duty vehicle, including quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; quantifying a pollution parameter to form a pollution parameter quantified score, said pollution parameter includes factors including emission standard compliance; quantifying a safety parameter to form a safety parameter quantified score, said safety parameter includes factors including electronic stability control, automatic braking system; wherein each of said parameter quantified scores are weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle.

2. A method as claimed in claim 1, further including quantifying an auxiliary equipment parameter to form an auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score, said auxiliary equipment parameter includes factors including a type of air conditioning.

3. A method as claimed in claim 1 or claim 2, further including quantifying a telemetry parameter to form a telemetry parameter quantified score, said telemetry parameter includes factors including a telemetry system and a telemetry display.

4. A method as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 3 further including printing a label that depicts the operational efficiency score for the heavy duty vehicle.

5. A method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the label includes a fuel efficiency score, said fuel efficiency score is a combination of the engine efficiency parameter quantified score, the drive train parameter quantified score, the aerodynamic parameter quantified score, the tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score and the inertia parameter quantified score.

6. A method as claimed in claim 5, when dependent on claims 9 and 10, wherein the fuel efficiency score further includes the auxiliary equipment parameter quantified score and the telemetry parameter quantified score.

7. A method as claimed in any one of claims 4 to 6, wherein the label includes the pollution parameter quantified score.

8. A method as claimed in any one of claims 4 to 7, wherein the label includes the safety parameter quantified score.

9. A method as claimed in any one of claims 4 to 8, further including attaching the label to the heavy duty vehicle.

10. A method of comparing operational efficiency of two or more heavy duty vehicles, including quantifying an engine efficiency parameter to form an engine efficiency parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said engine efficiency parameter includes factors including engine type and fuel type; quantifying a drive train parameter to form a drive train parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said drive train parameter includes factors including transmission type and transmission arrangement; quantifying an aerodynamic parameter to form an aerodynamic parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said aerodynamic parameter includes factors including deflectors, farings, side guards and other exterior attachments; quantifying a tyre rolling resistance parameter to form a tyre rolling resistance parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said tyre rolling resistance parameter includes factors including tyre type, pressure monitoring and pressure regulation system; quantifying an inertia parameter to form an inertia parameter quantified score for each heavy duty vehicle, said inertia parameter includes factors including type of brakes, lightweight construction and wheel type; quantifying a pollution parameter to form a pollution parameter quantified score, said pollution parameter includes factors including emission standard compliance; quantifying a safety parameter to form a safety parameter quantified score, said safety parameter includes factors including electronic stability control, automatic braking system; wherein for each heavy duty vehicle, each of said parameter quantified scores is weighted in light of their predetermined level of importance and combined to form an operational efficiency score, and wherein the operational efficiency scores for each heavy duty vehicle are compared to determine which heavy duty vehicle has a higher operational efficiency score.