Figure 1.
Comparison of noise reduction data results
Figure 2.
Lithotripsy
Figure 3.
Contribution rate and cumulative contribution rate
TABLE I.
PRINCIPAL COMPONENT LOAD MATRIX
| Characteristic parameters | M1 | M2 | M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deceleration time ratio Td/% | 0.323 | 0.351 | -0.223 |
| Driving Clustering S/km | 0.893 | 0.234 | 0.065 |
| Run time T/S | 0.782 | 0.251 | -0.342 |
| Acceleration time ratio Ta/% | 0.396 | -0.186 | 0.061 |
| Cruise time ratio Tc/% | 0.641 | 0.335 | -0.075 |
| Average speed Va/(km·h−1) | 0.499 | 0.763 | 0.125 |
| Deceleration time ratio Vd/(km·−1) | 0.778 | 0.415 | 0.132 |
| Speed standard deviation Vstd/(km·h−1) | 0.498 | 0.333 | 0.054 |
| Acceleration standard deviation astd/(km·−1) | 0.125 | 0.267 | -0.077 |
| Average acceleration aa/(m·s−2) | 0.024 | 0.523 | 0.053 |
| Average deceleration aa/(m·s−2) | 0.266 | -0.433 | -0.059 |
| Idle time ratio Ti/(m·s−2) | 0.165 | -0.351 | 0.853 |
Figure 4.
Relationship between cluster number and CH index
Figure 5.
K-means clustering results
Figure 6.
Scatter plot of segments in two-dimensional feature space
Figure 7.
Clustering results of fragments in two-dimensional feature space
Figure 8.
Synthetic driving conditions
Figure 9.
Time and acceleration diagram
Figure 10.
Scatter plot of instantaneous fuel consumption of speed and acceleration
TABLE II.
COMPARISON OF THE METHOD IN THIS PAPER AND TRADITIONAL K-MEANS RESULTS
| Method | Eigenvalue mean relative error/% | Cluster average accuracy/% | Average time/s | SAFDdiff/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional K-means clustering | 8.1 | 93 | 215 | 2.12 |
| Clustering of this article | 4.6 | 98 | 127 | 1.17 |
Figure 11.
SAFD difference between experimental data and synthetic conditions