Fuel Consumption Optimization For Smart Hybrid Electric Vehicle During A Car-Following Process

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ymssp
Fuel consumption optimization for smart hybrid electric

vehicle during a car-following process
Liang Li, Xiangyu Wang, Jian Song n
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
a r t i c l e i n f o
abstract
Article history:
Received 19 December 2015
Received in revised form
29 February 2016
Accepted 1 March 2016
Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) provide large potential to save energy and reduce emission, and smart vehicles bring out great convenience and safety for drivers. By combining
these two technologies, vehicles may achieve excellent performances in terms of dynamic,
economy, environmental friendliness, safety, and comfort. Hence, a smart hybrid electric
vehicle (s-HEV) is selected as a platform in this paper to study a car-following process
with optimizing the fuel consumption. The whole process is a multi-objective optimal
problem, whose optimal solution is not just adding an energy management strategy (EMS)
to an adaptive cruise control (ACC), but a deep fusion of these two methods. The problem
has more restricted conditions, optimal objectives, and system states, which may result in
larger computing burden. Therefore, a novel fuel consumption optimization algorithm
based on model predictive control (MPC) is proposed and some search skills are adopted
in receding horizon optimization to reduce computing burden. Simulations are carried out
and the results indicate that the fuel consumption of proposed method is lower than that
of the ACC EMS method on the condition of ensuring car-following performances.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Smart hybrid electric vehicle
Multi-objective optimal problem
Fuel consumption optimization
Car-following
Model predictive control
1. Introduction
Environment pollution and petroleum problems have become more and more serious, which pushes vehicle technologies
into the aspects of energy conservation and environment protection [1]. Wherein, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) provide large
potential to save fuel consumption and reduce pollutant emission [2,3]. An HEV is a vehicle driven by more than one power
source, and usually refers to a combination of internal combustion engine (ICE) and electric motor (EM). It has various driving
mode under different conditions, such as ICE driving alone, EM driving alone, ICE and EM driving together, EM regenerative
braking and so on, which makes it easily to adjust IEC operation points in a high-efciency area [46]. On another side, intelligence and net-connection of vehicles are a trend, which can bring out great convenience and safety for drivers [710]. Advanced
driver assistant system (ADAS) is being applied in passenger vehicles gradually, which contains adaptive cruise control (ACC),
automatic parking, lane-change assistance, etc. [11]. By combining these two vehicular technologies, vehicles may achieve
excellent performances in terms of dynamic, economy, environmental friendliness, safety, and comfort. Therefore, in this paper, a
smart hybrid electric vehicle (s-HEV) is selected as a platform to study a car-following process with optimizing fuel consumption.
Many works have given a deep insight in the energy management strategy (EMS) for HEVs and the car-following control
which is a kind of ACC for intelligent/smart vehicles. Hu et al. studied energy efciency of a series plug-in hybrid electric bus
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: daesj@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn (J. Song).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.03.002
0888-3270/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: L. Li, et al., Fuel consumption optimization for smart hybrid electric vehicle during a carfollowing process, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.03.002i
L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()
(PHEB) with different EMSs and battery sizes based on the tank-to-wheel (TTW) analysis [12]. Li et al. proposed a correctional DP-based EMS of PHEB, which improved the economic performance in a city-bus-route [13]. A MPC-based EMS is put
forward to solve the fuel consumption optimization which is formulated as a nonlinear constrained optimal control problem
in [14]. Besides, an adaptive energy management was proposed for a PHEV based on driving pattern recognition and
dynamic programming [15]. Among all the approaches, MPC-based method is one of most popular kind of EMSs [14,16].
Meanwhile, MPC is also the most common method to realize ACC. For example, Sarkouri et al. used a nonlinear MPC to
realize an automated switching to cruise control [17], and Li et al. proposed a fast online computation of MPC and applied it
to a fuel economy-oriented ACC [18]. Besides, supervised adaptive dynamic programming was also used for a full-range ACC
problem [19], and a method of kernel-based least squares policy iteration was proposed for a self-learning cruise control
[20]. In addition, the controls of vehicle dynamics, such as anti-brake system (ABS), traction control system (TCS), electronic
stability control (ESC), and tire force analysis, are also supposed to be considered in ACC [2123].
However, most of studies are focused on EMS or ACC alone. As for the car-following of an s-HEV, it is a multi-objective optimal
problem, which has more restricted conditions, optimal objectives, and system states. Kural et al. integrated an ACC into EMS for
HEV to estimate the look-ahead battery energy and if necessary apply pre-discharge strategies to fully benet the recuperation
energy during deceleration manoeuvres [24]. Luo et al. proposed a multi-objective decoupling hierarchical strategy [7] and a
coordinated control of tracking ability, fuel economy, and ride comfort [9]. The rst method has a clear structure and each control
hierarchy uses a practical algorithm so that it can be applied in a real electric control unit. The second method uses a multistep
ofine dynamic programming optimization and an online lookup table to realize the real-time control, which obtains better
performance than the rst one. In fact, the solution of the problem is not supposed to simply add an EMS to an ACC in series (an
ACCEMS method). An ACCEMS method can solve the problem but is not optimal, because an ACC just considers dynamic carfollowing performances and then an EMS can only decide the torque distribution of ICE and EM according to the desired vehicle
acceleration. It is worth noting that two different sequences of desired acceleration may achieve similar ACC performances but
have great differences in EMS results. Therefore, a deep fusion method with ACC and EMS is needed to solve the problem. The
contributions and novelties of this paper are as follows: 1) a car-following problem with optimizing fuel consumption for s-HEV
is formulated; 2) a novel fuel consumption optimization algorithm based on nonlinear MPC is proposed; 3) some search skills are
used in preceding horizon optimization to reduce the computing burden.
The rest paper is organized as follows. System dynamic models of an s-HEV are built in Section 2. Then, Section 3
introduces and formulates the problem. Next, an optimal fuel consumption control method is designed in Section 4. In
Section 5, simulations are carried out and results are analyzed. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper.
2. System dynamic models

In this paper, a single-shaft parallel s-HEV equipped with an AMT is selected as the study platform, whose powertrain
structure is shown in Fig. 1. The powertrain system mainly contains a gasoline engine, an automated dry clutch, an electric
motor (EM), a power battery, a ve-speed AMT, and a braking system [25]. The engine and EM can provide traction
independently for the vehicle, and the EM can also provide braking force coordinated with the braking system. The clutch
can connect or disconnect the engine with the powertrain to ensure that the engine can operate in high-efciency area, but
the dynamics of clutch engagement and disengagement are not considered in this paper. The AMT can adjust operation
points for the engine and EM via changing transmission ratio [26].
The key parameters of the HEV are shown in Table 1, which are obtained from ADVISOR, and following text will
introduce and build simplied models of each part. Simplied models may neglect some dynamic characteristics of system
parts, but in this paper we emphasize the dynamics of the whole system far more than that of each part. Therefore, it is
proper and convenient using the simplied models to reect system dynamics because the detailed dynamics of each part
have little effect on that of the whole system.
Clutch
Actuator I
EM
Actuator II
Brake
System
Engine
Battery pack
Inverter
AMT
Fig. 1. Schematic graph of the single-shaft parallel HEV powertrain structure.
Table 1
Parameters of the single-shaft parallel HEV.
Components
Description
Engine
Type: four cylinder gasoline engine; Displacement: 1.9 L;

Maximum power: 63 kW @ 5500 rpm;
Peak torque: 145 N m @ 2000 rpm.
Type: permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM).
Maximum power: 49 kW; Maximum speed: 8000 rpm;
Peak torque: 274.4 N m as motor and 170 N m as generator.
Maximum current: 400 A.
Type: ve-speed AMT; Average efciency: 0.9;
Gear ratio: [3.79, 2.17, 1.41, 1, 0.86]; Final drive ratio: 4.55.
Type: NiMH Spiral Wound;
Nominal cell voltage: 1.2 V; Nominal voltage: 288 V;
Total cells: 480 (12 cells 40 modules); Capacity: 13 A h.
Mass: 1800/2300 kg; Frontal area: 2.66 m2;
Air resistance coefcient: 0.44;
Road resistance coefcient: 0.0125;
Tire radius: 0.343 m; Tire inertia: 4.829 kg m2 of each.
EM
Gear box
Battery
Vehicle
1000
280
260
30
Torque (Nm)
3D surface MAP
30
150
280
300
0
0
260
350
400
450
30
50
100
m)
N
(
ue
Torq
28
80
3200
300
200
5000 4000
3000 2000
1000
Speed (rp
m)
240
240
60
260
220
260
23
260
400
90
2
24 30
0
230
120
500
230
220
240
600
240
Fuel consumption rate (g/kWh)
150
350
400
450
2000
3000
4000
Speed (rpm)
2D contour MAP
35
400
450
5000
Fig. 2. MAP chart for engine fuel consumption rate.
2.1. Engine model

As for an engine model, what we concerns in our study is the characteristics of fuel consumption but not the dynamics.
Therefore, the dynamic response of engine torque is simplied as a rst-order process.
T Eng
T Eng
Eng s 1
where T Eng , T Eng , and Eng are the output torque, the desired torque, and the time-delay constant of engine, respectively.
The fuel consumption rate of engine can be regarded as a function of engine torque and engine speed, if the engine
dynamics are neglected. Then, the fuel consumption rate can be expressed as follows.
be f Eng T Eng ; Eng
where Eng is the output speed of engine, and be is the fuel consumption rate of engine whose unit is g=kWh. The values of
be can be obtained by a lookup table based on fuel consumption MAP of engine as shown in Fig. 2. It is worth noting that the
engine cannot operate at a speed lower than the idle speed (about 701 rpm) and the fuel consumption rate is very high
min
when then engine outputs a small torque, so a minimum speed min
Eng and a series of minimum torques T Eng Eng are dened
to ensure the engine operates at a high-efciency area. Therefore, in Fig. 2(b), the shaded area refers to the area where the
engine is not allowed to operate. When the engine is going to come into the shaded area under a certain condition, there are
two ways to avoid it: one is that the clutch disengages and the engine operates at an idle state, and another is that the EM
operates as a generator to increase the engine output torque.
80
65
70
65
8
85 8
2000
3D surface MAP
80
91
80
85
88
4000
Speed (rpm)
6000
91
55
91
93
91
88
93
-150
-180
85
85
88
93
95
-100
91
300
0
100
)
e (Nm
Torqu
88
85
65
-100
95
93
91
88
91
88
85
80 5
7
200
-200
91
85
85
80
75
-50
6000
Spe 4000
ed ( 2000
rpm
)
88
80
50
93
60
55
8000
75
100
95
Torque (Nm)
150
80
93
EM Efficiency (%)
90
85
200
95
100
93
280
250
95
8000
2D contour MAP
Fig. 3. MAP chart for EM efciency.
0.45
340
Open-circuit Voltage
Charging Resistance
Discharging Resistance
0.35
330
320
0.3
310
0.25
300
0.2
290
0.15
280
0
20
40 50 60
SoC (%)
75 80
Voltage (V)
Resistance ( )
0.4
100
Fig. 4. Relationships between some parameters and SoC.
Then, the fuel consumption per second FC (L/s) can be calculated as follows.
FC
T Eng U Eng Ube

3:6 109 U gas
where gas is the density of gasoline, whose value is 0:725 L=kg at the temperature of 20 C.
2.2. EM model
Similar to the engine, the dynamics of the EM is not what we concerns and also can be simplied as a rst-order process [27].
T EM
T EM
EM s 1
where T EM , T EM and EM are the output torque, the desired torque, and the time-delay constant of EM, respectively.
The efciency of EM can be obtained by a lookup table based on EM efciency MAP as shown in Fig. 3 and expressed as
follows.
EM f EM T EM ; EM
where EM is the efciency of EM and EM is the output speed of EM.

Then, the power that the battery should provide to EM P bat can be calculated as follows.
P bat T EM U EM U EM
where
is 1 when the EM operates as a generator and 1 when as a motor.
2.3. Battery model

The characteristics of battery parameters, such as open-circuit voltage, state of charge (SoC), state of health (SoH), are
complicated [28] and not the main concerns in our study. Therefore, the effects of temperature on battery are not considered, and then the relationships between open-circuit voltage, charging resistance and discharging resistance and SoC are
shown in Fig. 4. Considering the health of battery, the SoC is supposed to be restricted in a range from 0.5 to 0.75. It can be
found from Fig. 4 that the parameters do not change very much when the SoC varies from 0.5 to 0.75, so it is reasonable to
regard these parameters as constants.
For convenience, a simplied battery model with appropriate precision needs to be built, which simplify the battery as a
voltage source with an internal resistance. Then, the gradient of SoC with time can be written as follows [16].
q
V bat V 2bat 4Rbat P bat
dSoC
7

2Rbat Q bat
dt
where V bat , Rbat , and Q bat are the open-circuit voltage, the internal resistance, and the capacity of battery. It can be seen from
(7) that the maximum of battery is restricted by P bat rV 2bat =4Rbat .
2.4. Vehicle model
The vehicle model in this paper refers to a longitudinal dynamic model of a vehicle, which is described as follows.
_ w T veh T l
I veh
where I veh , T veh , and T l are the equivalent inertia, the driving torque on wheels and the resistant torque of vehicle, and w is
the rotational speed of wheels.
The driving torque on wheels is provided by engine, EM and braking system, and the resistant torque contains a friction
resistance, a gradient resistance, and an air resistance. Hence, they are expressed as follows [25].
I veh mveh r 2w 4I w i2g i20 I Eng I EM
T veh T ig i0 T Eng T EM T Brk
10

1
T l mveh g sin f r cos C D Av2veh U rw
2
11
where mveh is the mass of vehicle, r w is the radius of a wheel, I w is the inertia of a wheel, ig is the ratio of AMT, i0 is the ratio
of nal drive, I Eng is the inertia of engine, I EM is the inertia of EM, T is the transmission efciency, T Brk is the braking torque
provided by braking system which is a negative value, g is the gravitational acceleration, is the gradient of road, f r is the
fraction coefcient of road, C D is the air resistance coefcient, A is the frontal area of vehicle, and vveh is the longitudinal
speed of vehicle. Besides, there are some relationships between the speeds: ig i0 w Eng EM and w r w vveh .
3. Problem formulation
As mentioned in Section 1, the fuel consumption optimization during a car-following process is a multi-objective
optimization problem based on system models. Hence, in this section, the problem is formulated as follows.
3.1. System states space equation
The system states are not only the vehicle states but also the battery states, so state vector is dened as

T
x sveh ; vveh ; SoC T , and control vector is dened as u T Eng ; T EM ; T Brk ; ig , where sveh is the travel distance and the
acceleration of current vehicle. Then, considering that the road gradient and the states of preceding vehicle can be obtained

T
for a smart vehicle by a radar, these external inputs are dened as d ; sref sveh ; vref , where sref , vref , and aref are the
travel distance, the longitudinal speed and the acceleration of preceding vehicle. Therefore, the system states space equation
can be written as follows.
x_ f sys x; u; d
12
According to the models built in Section 2, there are some constraints for control variables, which are:
max
min
max
T min
Eng Eng r T Eng r T Eng Eng T EM EM r T EM rT EM EM ig A 3:79; 2:17; 1:41; 1; 0:86
T min
Eng ,
T max
Eng ,
T min
EM ,
13
T max
EM
and
can be calculated by the MAPs of engine and EM. For convenience, we assume that the
where
automatic shifting logic is dependent of EMS and only relevant to the vehicle longitudinal speed, which means ig f T vveh .

T
Then, the control vector can be simplied as u T Eng ; T EM ; T Brk .
3.2. Dynamic optimizing indexes

As for a car-following process, the dynamic optimizing indexes usually include following distance s sref sveh , relevant
speed v vref vveh , relevant acceleration a aref aveh and vehicle jerk jveh daveh =dt, where aref and aveh are the
accelerations of preceding vehicle and current vehicle obtained by differential of longitudinal speed. The evaluations for
each dynamic index are analyzed as follows.
Considering the driving safety, minimum following distance is supposed to be larger than minimum braking distance.
The braking distance can be estimated as
sBrk vveh Brk
v2veh
2aBrk
14
where sBrk is the braking distance, Brk is the response time of braking system, and aBrk is the braking deceleration. Here, we
assume that Brk is 0.5 s and maximum braking deceleration is 8 m/s2. Hence, minimum following distance smin should be
set as follows.
smin 2 0:5 Uvveh 0:0625 Uv2veh
15
As for maximum following distance, it depends on drivers' behaviors. Usually, it is also relevant to vehicle speed, so here
we set the maximum following distance smax as follows.
smax 10 vveh 0:0825 U v2veh
16
Then, according to the minimum and maximum following distance, optimal following distance area is dened as follows.
ssup
opt U smax 1 U smin
sinf
opt U smin 1 U smax
17
inf
where ssup
opt and sopt are the upper bound and the lower bound of optimal following distance area, and is the adjustment
inf
coefcient. If 0:5, then ssup
opt sopt , which means the optimal following distance area becomes an optimal line.
As shown in Fig. 5, the following distance is supposed to be controlled in the optimal area. When s is out of the optimal
area, there should be a cost item, and when it is larger than maximum distance, the cost item should be very large. Considering the driving safety, s is not allowed to be smaller than minimum distance. Therefore, the cost function of s is
dened as follows.
8
1;
s o smin
>
>
>

>
>
s sinf
>
opt
>
U 2 ;
smin r s o sinf
>
opt
> f 1 U tan smin sinf
>
opt
>
>

<
sup
sinf
s
sup
J s s opt 2 opt ;
18
sinf
opt r s r sopt
>
>
>
>
>
2
>
>
f 2 Us ssup
ssup
>
opt ;
opt o s r smax
>
>
>
sup 2
2
>
: f 3 Us smax f 2 Us sopt ; s 4 smax
where f 1 , f 2 , and f 3 are the cost coefcients, ensuring f 3 4 4 f 2 .

As for relevant longitudinal speed and acceleration, the evaluations also depend on drivers' behaviors, and here we use
their quadratic form to dene the cost function.
J v g 1 U v2 J a g 2 U a2
19
Following Distance (m)
where g 1 and g 2 are the cost coefcients.
160
Minimum Distance
Maximum Distance
Optimal Distance Area
120
80
40
0
20
40
60
80
100
Longitudinal Speed (km/h)
120
140
Fig. 5. Following distance with the longitudinal speed of vehicle.
At last, the vehicle jerk concerns the driving comfort, so it should be restricted by cost function.
8

< h1 Uj2 ; jveh 4 2 m=s3
veh

J jerk
j r 2 m=s3
: 0;
veh
20
where h1 is the cost coefcient. During driving process, slight jerk is inevitable, so there is no cost item when jjveh j is less
than 2 m/s3. Besides, if the vehicle is not at a braking state, the maximum jerk is supposed to be less than 6 m/s3.
From the above, the cost function of dynamic optimizing indexes can be dened as follows.
Z tf
J s J v J a J jerk dt
21
J Dyn
0
where t f is the period of MPC predictive horizon that is described in Section 4.2. The cost functions in Eqs. (18)(20) indicate the
Rt
Rt
Rt
Rt
dynamic performances at a moment of car-following process, so the integrated indexes 0f J s dt, 0f J v dt, 0f J a dt, and 0f J jerk dt
refer to the totals of following distance, relevant speed, relevant acceleration, and jerk in the whole MPC predictive horizon,
respectively. Hence, J Dyn can reect the car-following dynamic performances in MPC predictive horizon as a total cost function.
3.3. Economic optimizing indexes
In order to optimize fuel consumption, economic optimizing indexes should be dened for gasoline consumption of
engine and power consumption of EM. Generally, equivalent consumption minimum strategy (ECMS) is used in EMS of HEVs
to balance the consumption of engine and EM, which means power consumption is equivalent to fuel consumption by
corresponding rules. Considering that the electric power stored in battery is transformed by engine output power, the
equivalent fuel consumption of EM can be calculated as follows.
When engine outputs power and EM acts as a generator, we have
P bat T EM U EM U EM T Eng2EM U Eng U EM
) FC EM
3:6 109 U gas UFC

U EM
be
be U P bat
3:6 109 U gas U EM
22
23
where FC EM is the equivalent fuel consumption of EM, be is the average fuel consumption rate, and EM is the average
generation efciency.
Considering the health of battery, the SoC of battery should be restricted in a range from 0.5 to 0.75, so an electric power
coefcient pe is dened as
8
SoC Z0:75
>
< 0:001;
pe SoC 6 U SoC 5; 0:5 o SoC o0:75
24
>
: 1000;
SoC r0:5
In order to avoid negative values of cost function, an additional item pe FC min
EM is added. Therefore, the cost function of
economic optimizing indexes can be dened as follows.
Z tf
J Eco
FC pe FC EM pe FC min
25
EM dt
0
where
FC min
EM
is the minimum equivalent fuel consumption of EM calculated by P min

bat .
3.4. Comprehensive optimizing index

Finally, considering both dynamic indexes and economic indexes, a cost function of comprehensive optimizing index is
dened as
J Opt J Dym U J Eco
26
where is a coefcient to adjust the proportion of dynamic indexes and economic indexes in cost function. The value of
should be determined with considering the values of J Dym and J Eco . The magnitudes of J Dym and J Eco are 102 and 10 1 in most
conditions, respectively, so the magnitude of should be chosen as 103 to balance the proportion of dynamic indexes and
economic indexes, which sets J Dym and J Eco at a same magnitude.
Therefore, the problem in this paper is to optimize the cost function (26) to satisfy the system (12) and the restriction (13).
Fig. 6. Schematic of optimal fuel consumption control method based on MPC.
4. Fuel consumption optimization method

In this section, a fuel consumption optimization method based on a nonlinear MPC is proposed to solve the problem, as shown
in Fig. 6. The optimization algorithm needs enumerate all eligible control vectors to search the optimal solution because the system
is nonlinear, which may result in large computing burden. Hence, some search skills are used in the optimization algorithm.
4.1. Discretization of predictive model
According to Eqs. (7)(12), the discretization of system predictive model can be written as follows.
1
sveh k 1 sveh k vveh k U T s aveh k U T 2s vveh k 1 vveh k aveh k UT s
2
q
V bat V 2bat 4Rbat P bat k
SoCk 1 SoCk
UTs
2Rbat Q bat
27
where T s is the sample time and set as 0.1 s in this paper, and the expressions of aveh k and P bat k are
aveh k

1
U ig k Ui0 T Eng k T EM k T Brk k T l vveh k; k Urw
I veh T
P bat k EM k U T EM k U EM k
28
The discretization of predictive model can also be written in a simplied form as (12):
xk 1 f dsys xk; uk; dk
29
4.2. Optimizing Algorithm for MPC

It can be seen that the predictive model (29) is nonlinear due to the nonlinearities of T l and SoC. Therefore, the predictive
outputs xk i; i 1; 2; ; P will be a really complex function of xk, uk, and dk, so that we cannot calculate an analytical
solution for optimal control law easily in receding horizon optimization. That is to say, all eligible control vectors are supposed
to be enumerated to search the optimal solution. However, it may result in large computing burden, so some simplications
for MPC and some search skills for the preceding horizon optimization are used to improve the computing efciency.
Firstly, predictive horizon P and control horizon m of MPC should be determined. Considering that the sample time is set
as 0.1 s, it is proper to set P less than 10 to ensure the whole predictive horizon is less than 1 s. Then, m is set as 1, which
means the control vector is assumed to be a constant during predictive horizon. Besides, we also assume that the acceleration of preceding vehicle is a constant during predictive horizon.
Secondly, the acceleration of current vehicle aveh and the torque of EM T EM are selected as enumerated objectives. aveh is
3
restricted by the maximum jerk of current vehicle jmax
veh which is set as 6 m/s , and the eligible maximum and minimum
max
accelerations (amax and amin ) for k 1T s are aveh k 7 jveh UT s , respectively. Meanwhile, T EM is also restricted by T min
EM and
T max
EM . In fact, we can calculate T veh by using aveh and T Eng by using T veh and T EM . As for T Brk , it is set as zero unless the EM
cannot provide enough braking torque, and if so T EM is set as T min
EM and the rest braking torque is complemented by the
braking system. Hence, the enumeration range can be decreased.
Thirdly, two loops are used to enumerate aveh and T EM . The loop of aveh is set as the outer one and that of T EM is set as the
inner one. In the outer loop, the dynamic states of current vehicle can be calculated and then the cost of dynamic indexes is
obtained. It is obvious that if the cost of only dynamic indexes is more than current optimal cost, the result must be worse
and there is no need to enumerate T EM and calculate the cost of economic indexes. This is an important search pruning,
which can reduce the computing burden effectively. Meanwhile, if the speed of engine is lower than minimum value, the
vehicle should be driven by EM alone and there is no need to enumerate T EM , too. In addition, during enumeration, if one of
T Eng and T EM is out of restricted range, the loop should continue.
Finally, based on the skills of search pruning in last paragraph, it can be inferred that the earlier the optimal solution
appears, the better the effect of search pruning is. Hence, a stochastic enumeration strategy is used to get an eligible aveh .
To sum up, the steps of algorithm for receding horizon optimization of MPC are listed as follows:
Algorithm for receding horizon optimization of MPC
n
o
Initialize J min ; amin ; amax ; skveh ; vkveh ; sk ; vkref ; ikg and etc: ;
if sk o smin then
emergency braking;
end if
while aveh A amin ; amax do
calculate T veh ;
max
if T veh 4 T max
Eng T EM then continue;
fskveh i; vkveh i; jkveh igf skveh ; vkveh ; i 1; 2; ; P;
n
o
calculate J ks i; J kv i; J ka i; J kjerk i ; i 1; 2; ; P;
o
P n
P
J ks i J kv i J ka i J kjerk i ;
J Dys
i1
if J Dys 4 J min then continue;

if Eng o min
Eng then
min
fT Eng 0; T EM T veh ; T Brk 0g or fT Eng 0; T EM T min
EM ; T Brk T veh T EM g;
calculate Q kEM i;
P
P
J Eco
pe Q kEM i;
i1
if J Dys U J Eco o J min then

n
o
n
o
k1
k1
1
1 k1
and skveh
update J min ; T Eng
; T EM
; T kBrk
; vveh ;
end if
else
max
for T EM T min
EM : 1: T EM do
fT Eng T veh T EM ; T Brk 0g or fT Eng 0; T Brk T veh T EM g;
max
if T Eng not in T min
Eng ; T Eng then continue;
calculate fFC k i; FC kEM ig;

P
P
J Eco
fFC k i pe FC kEM ig;
i1
if J Dys U J Eco o J min then

n
o
n
o
k1
k1
1
k1 k1
and sveh
update J min ; T Eng
; T EM
; T kBrk
; vveh ;
end if
end for
end else
end while
5. Simulations and results

In this section, an s-HEV model is built in MATLAB/SIMULINK based on the data in ADVISOR. The results of proposed
method are analyzed and also compared with the results of ACC EMS method.
Table 2
Simulation parameters.
Parameters
Symbols
Values
Parameters
Symbols
Values
Predictive horizon
Control horizon
Average fuel consumption
P
m
8
1
240
Distance cost efcient I

Distance cost efcient II
Distance cost efcient III
f1
f2
f3
0.2
2
100
88
1000
0.4
Speed cost efcient

Acceleration cost efcient
Jerk cost efcient
g1
g2
h1
0.01
0.01
0.1
Average generation efciency

Cost function efcient
Optimal distance efcient
be g=kW h
EM (%)

Longitudinal Speed (km/h)
10
130
120
Preceding vehicle
Current vehicle
90
60
30
0
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
1200
1400
1600
Travel Distance (km)
Fig. 7. Results for the longitudinal speed of preceding vehicle and current vehicle.
35
30
Preceding vehicle
Current vehicle
20
10
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Time (s)
Fig. 8. Results for the travel distance of preceding vehicle and current vehicle.
5.1. Simulation parameters

The parameters of HEV are shown in Section 2 Table 1. The mass of vehicle is set as 2000 kg with half-load. Then, cycle
ABR02 is selected as the driving cycle of preceding vehicle, which lasts 1639 s and where the average speed is about 70 km/h
and the maximum speed is about 129.2 km/h. In addition, the road gradient is assumed as zero during the cycle. The
parameters of proposed method are listed in Table 2.
5.2. Results analysis
The longitudinal speed of preceding vehicle and current vehicle is shown in Fig. 7. The preceding vehicle follows the
ABR02 driving cycle. It can be seen that the speed of current vehicle tracks that of preceding vehicle well, although there are
many conditions of rapid acceleration and deceleration.
As shown in Fig. 8, during the whole process, the vehicles travel for approximate 31.9 km. In Fig. 9, because the following
distance is relevant to the longitudinal speed, it changes with time and its curve shape is similar to that of speed. Besides,
the actual following distance is between the maximum and minimum following distance, which means the car-following
result is satisfying. It is worth noting that, combined with Fig. 7 and from the zoom area, we can see that the following
distance varies from neighborhood of maximum to neighborhood of minimum during deceleration process, and varies
oppositely during acceleration process. That is because in this way the acceleration or deceleration of current vehicle will be
more assuasive than preceding vehicle, which may reduce not only the jerk of vehicle but also fuel consumption.
Fig. 10 shows the jerk of preceding vehicle and current vehicle. Obviously, the jerk of current vehicle is smaller than that
of preceding vehicle. The jerk of current vehicle is restricted in a range of 7 5 m=s3 during most time. In fact, if we see the
gear position variations in Fig. 11, it can be seen that the large jerks occur at the shifting points, because the transmission
ratio changes after a shifting process, which results in the driving torque changing acutely. Therefore, although the detailed
process of shifting is not considered here, the jerks caused by shifting cannot be avoided.
As mentioned in Section 3.1, the shifting strategy is dened as a simple one-parameter shifting method, which means the
gear position is only depended by longitudinal speed. For convenience, the neutral gear position is not considered, so the
gear position during the whole process is shown in Fig. 11 without the neutral gear position.
Fig. 12 shows the operation points of engine and EM during the while process. As mentioned before, one of the advantage
of a HEV is that the operation points of engine can be adjusted in the high-efciency area. Hence, as shown in Fig. 12, a
majority of engine operation points concentrate in the area where be is less than 240 g=kW h, while the EM operation
points spread dispersedly. Besides, the points where engine does not output torque are not plotted in the gure, so it seems
that the points in left is less than that in right.
Finally, Figs. 13 and 14 show the variations of SoC and fuel consumption with time. The SoC is set as 65.00% initially, and
the value becomes 66.24% at last. Besides, during the whole process the SoC is in a range from 60% to 70%, which is benecial
to battery health. The fuel consumption is 2.975 L gasoline at last. Assuming that the average fuel consumption rate is
240 g=kW h, we can convert the incremental energy of battery (SoC varies from 65.00% to 66.24%) to the saving gasoline
(0.0165 L). Therefore, the equivalent fuel consumption is 2.959 L gasoline. Then, the fuel consumption per hundred kilometers is approximate 9.276 L/(100 km). It is worth noting that in this simulation the engine is at idle state, and if the idlestop technology is used the fuel consumption will be reduced more.
11
150
120
Maximum following distance

Actual following distance
Minimum following distance
90
75
60
50
30
0
zoom 25
0
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
01400
1235
1200
1255
1600
Fig. 9. Results for the following distance between preceding vehicle and current vehicle.
25
Jerk (m3/s)
15
5
0
-5
Preceding vehicle
Current vehicle
-15
-25
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
1200
1400
1600
Fig. 10. Results for the jerk of preceding vehicle and current vehicle.
Gear Position
5
4
3
2
1
0
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
1200
1400
1600
Fig. 11. Results for the gear position of current vehicle.
40 0
45 0
-100
5000
-150
-180
80
91
85
88
Torque (Nm)
26 0
30
28 0
0
23 0
-50
65
85
88
65
55
1000
8
85 8
858
91
2000
3000
Speed (rpm)
Speed (rpm)
9
91
88
95
4000
35
0
91
88
85
95
3000
85
85
80
75
93
2000
80
50
93
400
450
35 0
40 0
450
100
91
350
30
20
800
75
80
75
28 0
300
0
30
80
320 0
260
0
28
24 0
24 0
60
150
26 0
22 0
65
200
26 0
0
23
90
26 0
Torque (Nm)
120
24 0
24 0
22 0
95
2
24 3 0
0
230
93
280
250
150
4000
5000
SoC (%)
Fig. 12. Operation points of engine (Right) and EM (Left).

75
70
65
60
55
50
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
1200
1400
1600
Fig. 13. Results for the SoC of current vehicle battery.
5.3. Comparison with ACC EMS

The ACC EMS method is also carried out in simulation, which refers to that a MPC-based ACC is applied to obtain the
desired acceleration of current vehicle for next step, and then a MPC-based EMS is used to distribute the requested torque of

Fuel Consumption (L)
12
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
200
400
600
800
Time (s)
1000
1200
1400
1600
Fig. 14. Results for the fuel consumption of current vehicle.

Table 3
Comparison of simulation results.
Method
Fuel consumption
Increment of SoC
Fuel consumption per hundred kilometers
Fuel consumption optimization

ACC EMS
2.975 L
3.109 L
1.24%
0.16%
9.276 L/(100 km)

9.740 L/(100 km)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
20
Maximum
Minimum
Optimal Area
Actual I
Actual II
30
40
Time (s)
50
60
Fig. 15. Comparison of the following distance of two methods in rst 60 s.
engine and EM according to the desired acceleration. This strategy ensures the dynamic following performance to be
optimal rstly and optimizes fuel consumption secondly. The cost functions of dynamic indexes and economic indexes are
same as that of fuel consumption optimization method (proposed method), so the results of simulation are also similar to
that of proposed method. Here, we only analyze some differences.
The SoC and fuel consumption at last are 65.16% and 3.109 L gasoline. The equivalent fuel consumption is 3.107 L gasoline,
so the fuel consumption per hundred kilometers is approximate 9.740 L/(100 km). Compared with the results before, the
fuel consumption of ACCEMS method is 5% more than that of proposed method. The comparisons of these two methods
are shown in Table 3.
It is worth noting the differences of the following distance of two methods. For convenience, the rst 60 s of the whole
process is taken out to analyze the following distance, as shown in Fig. 15, where the solid line (Actual I) refers to the results
of proposed method and the dot line (Actual II) refers to the results of ACC EMS. It can be seen that the dot line is within
the optimal following distance area while the solid line is out of the optimal area sometimes, which means the ACC EMS
has a better following performance because the ACC is prior to EMS. That is to say, the fuel consumption optimization
method sacrices dynamic performance to obtain the better economic performance. In fact, a driver is not sensitive to the
reduction of dynamic performance in this extent, but the improvement of economic performance is concerned by a driver.
6. Conclusions
This paper proposes a method of fuel consumption optimization by using a nonlinear MPC for s-HEV during a carfollowing process, which fuses the ACC and EMS but is not a simple addition of two methods. To reduce the computing
burden, some search skills are used in optimizing algorithm of MPC. Simulations are carried out in MATLAB/SIMULINK, and
results show that for a 2000 kg SUV, on the condition of ensuring the car-following performances, the fuel consumption per
hundred kilometers is 9.276 L/(100 km), which is 5% less than that of ACCEMS method. The proposed method may have a
disadvantage of large computing burden, but as the onboard computers develop so fast the computing burden is not an
intricate problem. The studies in the future will focus on two aspects: one is studying more high-efciency and better-effect
methods to achieve more comfort and economic car-following process, and another is taking the shifting process, mode
13
transition and engine idle-stop technology into account for the car-following process of s-HEVs. Besides, the bench tests and
vehicle experiments are also the emphases we are working on.
Acknowledgment
The authors are very grateful to the China government by the support of this work through the National Science Fund for
Excellent Young Scholars of the People's Republic of China (Grant no. 51422505), and the National Key Technology R&D
Program of the Ministry of Science and Technology (Grant no. 2013BAG14B01).
References
[1] D. Crolla, D. Cao, The impact of hybrid and electric powertrains on vehicle dynamics, control systems and energy regeneration, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 50
(2012) 95109.
[2] H. Zhang, J. Wang, Y. Wang, Optimal dosing and sizing optimization for a ground vehicle diesel engine two-cell selective catalytic reduction system,
Trans. Veh. Technol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2015.2476760.
[3] H. Zhang, J. Wang, Y. Wang, Nonlinear observer design of diesel engine selective catalytic reduction systems with NOx sensor measurements, IEEE/
ASME Trans. Mechatron. 20 (4) (2015) 15851594.
[4] X. Hu, J. Jiang, B. Egardt, D. Cao, Advanced power-source integration in hybrid electric vehicles: multicriteria optimization approach, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 62 (12) (2015) 78477858.
[5] X. Zhu, H. Zhang, D. Cao, Z. Fang, Robust control of integrated motor-transmission powertrain system over controller area network for automotive
applications, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 5859 (2015) 1528.
[6] C. Yang, X. Jiao, L. Li, Y. Zhang, L. Zhang, J. Song, Robust coordinated control for hybrid electric bus with single-shaft parallel hybrid powertrain, IET
Control Theory Appl. 9 (2) (2014) 270282.
[7] Y. Luo, T. Chen, K. Li, Multi-objective decoupling algorithm for active distance control of intelligent hybrid electric vehicle, Mech. Syst. Signal Process.
6465 (2015) 2945.
[8] C. Hu, H. Jing, R. Wang, F. Yuan, M. Chadli, Robust H1 output-feedback control for path following of autonomous ground vehicles, Mech. Syst. Signal
Process. 7071 (2016) 414427.
[9] Y. Luo, T. Chen, S. Zhang, K. Li, Intelligent hybrid electric vehicle ACC with coordinated control of tracking ability, fuel Economy, and ride comfort, IEEE
Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 16 (4) (2015) 23032308.
[10] G. Tagne, R. Talj, A. Charara, Design and validation of a robust immersion and invariance controller for the lateral dynamics of intelligent vehicles,
Control Eng. Pract. 40 (2015) 8192.
[11] M. Lio, F. Biral, E. Bertolazzi, M. Galvani, P. Bosetti, D. Windridge, A. Saroldi, F. Tango, Articial co-drivers as a universal enabling technology for future
intelligent vehicles and transportation systems, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 16 (1) (2015) 244263.
[12] X. Hu, N. Murgovski, L.M. Johannesson, B. Egardt, Energy efciency analysis of a series plug-in hybrid electric bus with different energy management
strategies and battery sizes, Appl. Energy 111 (2013) 10011009.
[13] L. Li, C. Yang, Y. Zhang, L. Zhang, J. Song, Correctional DP-based energy management strategy of plug-in hybrid electric bus for city-bus-route, IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol. 64 (7) (2015) 27922803.
[14] H. Borhan, A. Vahidi, A. Phillips, M. Kuang, I. Kolmanovsky, S. Carrano, MPC-based energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle, IEEE
Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 20 (3) (2012) 593603.
[15] S. Zhang, R. Xiong, Adaptive energy management of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle based on driving pattern recognition and dynamic programming,
Appl. Energy 155 (2015) 6878.
[16] L. Li, S. You, C. Yang, B. Yan, J. Song, Z. Chen, Driving-behavior-aware stochastic model predictive control for plug-in hybrid electric buses, Appl. Energy
162 (2016) 868897.
[17] P. Sarkouri, A. Ordys, Nonlinear model predictive control approach in design of adaptive cruise control with automated switching to cruise control,
Control Eng. Pract. 26 (2014) 160177.
[18] S. Li, Z. Jia, K. Li, B. Cheng, Fast online computation of a model predictive controller and its application to fuel economy-oriented adaptive cruise
control, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 16 (3) (2015) 11991209.
[19] D. Zhao, Z. Hu, Z. Xia, C. Alippi, Y. Zhu, D. Wang, Full-range adaptive cruise control based on supervised adaptive dynamic programming, Neurocomputing 125 (2014) 5767.
[20] J. Wang, X. Xu, D. Liu, Z. Sun, Q. Chen, Self-learning cruise control using kernel-based least squares policy iteration, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.
22 (3) (2014) 10781087.
[21] L. Li, G. Jia, J. Chen, H. Zhu, D. Cao, J. Song, A novel vehicle dynamics stability control algorithm based on the hierarchical strategy with constrain of
nonlinear tyre forces, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 53 (8) (2015) 10931116.
[22] Y. Wei, C. Oertel, Y. Liu, X. Li, A theoretical model of speed-dependent steering torque for rolling tyres, Veh. Syst. Dyn. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
00423114.2015.1111391.
[23] L. Li, X. Ran, K. Wu, J. Song, Z. Han, A novel fuzzy logic correctional algorithm for traction control systems on uneven low-friction road conditions, Veh.
Syst. Dyn. 53 (6) (2015) 711733.
[24] E. Kural, B. Aksun, Integrated adaptive cruise control for parallel hybrid vehicle energy management, IFAC Pap. OnLine 4815 (2015) 313319.
[25] Y. Sun, L. Li, B. Yan, C. Yang, G. Tang, A hybrid algorithm combining EKF and RLS in synchronous estimation of road grade and vehicle' mass for a hybrid
electric bus, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 6869 (2016) 416430.
[26] X. Zhu, H. Zhang, Z. Feng, Speed synchronization control for integrated automotive motor-transmission powertrain system with random delays, Mech.
Syst. Signal Process. 6465 (2015) 4657.
[27] B. Alt, F. Antritter, F. Svaricek, M. Schultalbers, Multivariable speed synchronisation for a parallel hybrid electric vehicle drivetrain, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 51
(3) (2013) 321337.
[28] Y. Zou, X. Hu, H. Ma, S. Li, Combined state of charge and state of health estimation over lithium-ion battery cell cycle lifespan for electric vehicles,
J. Power Sources 273 (2015) 793803.

Fuel Consumption Optimization For Smart Hybrid Electric Vehicle During A Car-Following Process

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Fuel Consumption Optimization For Smart Hybrid Electric Vehicle During A Car-Following Process

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

Fuel consumption optimization for smart hybrid electric

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

2. System dynamic models

Fig. 1. Schematic graph of the single-shaft parallel HEV powertrain structure.

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Type: four cylinder gasoline engine; Displacement: 1.9 L;

Fuel consumption rate (g/kWh)

Fig. 2. MAP chart for engine fuel consumption rate.

2.1. Engine model

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Fig. 4. Relationships between some parameters and SoC.

T Eng U Eng Ube

where EM is the efciency of EM and EM is the output speed of EM.

is 1 when the EM operates as a generator and 1 when as a motor.

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

2.3. Battery model

T veh T ig i0 T Eng T EM T Brk

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

3.2. Dynamic optimizing indexes

smin 2 0:5 Uvveh 0:0625 Uv2veh

smax 10 vveh 0:0825 U v2veh

where f 1 , f 2 , and f 3 are the cost coefcients, ensuring f 3 4 4 f 2 .

Following Distance (m)

where g 1 and g 2 are the cost coefcients.

Fig. 5. Following distance with the longitudinal speed of vehicle.

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

3:6 109 U gas UFC

is the minimum equivalent fuel consumption of EM calculated by P min

3.4. Comprehensive optimizing index

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Fig. 6. Schematic of optimal fuel consumption control method based on MPC.

4. Fuel consumption optimization method

4.2. Optimizing Algorithm for MPC

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

if J Dys 4 J min then continue;

if J Dys U J Eco o J min then

calculate fFC k i; FC kEM ig;

if J Dys U J Eco o J min then

5. Simulations and results

Distance cost efcient I

Speed cost efcient

Average generation efciency

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Travel Distance (km)

5.1. Simulation parameters

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Following Distance (m)

Maximum following distance

Fig. 11. Results for the gear position of current vehicle.

Fig. 12. Operation points of engine (Right) and EM (Left).

Fig. 13. Results for the SoC of current vehicle battery.

5.3. Comparison with ACC EMS

L. Li et al. / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing ()

Fig. 14. Results for the fuel consumption of current vehicle.

Fuel consumption per hundred kilometers

Fuel consumption optimization

9.276 L/(100 km)

Following Distance (m)

Fig. 15. Comparison of the following distance of two methods in rst 60 s.