97325

MODELING REGENERATIVE BRAKING AND STORAGE FOR VEHICLES

Frank Wicks
AIAA Member A N S Member ASME Member E E E Senior Member SAE Member
Kyle Donnelly
Student Member ASME
Mechanical Engineering Department

Steinmetz Hall
Union College
Schenectady, New York 12308
establishing a realistic representation of the driving cycle
and the Characteristicsof the regenerative braking system
to be used in terms of control system, the algorithm to
determine under what conditions the storage should be
charged or discharged, along with establishing any
possible decrease in the maximum power requirement
from the primary engine or electric drive system that can
result from the storage capability.

The fuel saving benefits of regenerative braking and

storage for vehicles are often described but not quantified.
For example, the federal government and automobile
manufacturers are sponsoring a Program for a New
Generation of Vehicles (PGNV) with a goal of obtaining
a performance of 80 mpg in a family size car. It is
typically suggested that such a vehicle will be a hybrid
engine and electric drive with regenerative braking. The
authors note that while regenerative braking has the
potential of saving fuel, it may also do more harm than
good as a result of additional weight, less than ideal
charge/discharge efficiency on the batteries or storage
flywheels and the limited portion of the entire driving
cycle when regenerative braking can be utilized. The
authors also noted that if regenerative braking can have a
net benefit, it would be on a heavy vehicle such as a
municipal bus because of the frequent stop and go
requirements for both traffic light and passengers. Thus
the authors initiated a study of regenerative braking on
such a vehicle. The resulting analysis presented in this
paper includes data following municipal busses to define
the driving cycle, modeling the bus power requirements
&om weighk aerodynamics and rolling resistance, and then
calculating the fuel saving that could result from an ideal
regenerative braking system.

While it is widely accepted that the more fuel

efficient vehicles of the future will have a regenerative
braking system, the research reported in this paper was
motivated by a skepticism of whether regenerative braking
really can provide any substantial net benefits and the
apparent shortage of research that provides a realistic
analysis for the benefits of regenerative braking for even
one vehicle and driving cycle.
Thermodynamics and vehicle dynamics as related to
the conversion of energy provide the starting point for
such an analysis. The 1st law teaches that energy can be
neither created nor destroyed, but can be converted from
one form to another. The 2nd law distinguishes between
the orderly energy of a force and motion working together
which is necessary to propel a vehicle and disorderly or

1. Introduction

random energy of molecules in motion in the form of

elevated temperature or heat crossing a boundary because
of a temperature Merence which are forms of energy that
can not propel a vehicle.

It is easy to qualitatively describe the benefits fi-om

regenerative braking of vehicles, but a much more difficult
analysis is required to quanti@ these benefits. Such an
analysis requires determining a vehicles power
requirements as a function of the driving cycle,

The brakes degeneratively convert the orderly

kinetic andor potential energy of a vehicle into disorderly
energy. The stopping action can be considered as two
thermodynamic processes. The first process is fnction in
which the orderly energy of the vehcle is converted into

2030

disorderly thermal energy of the brakes during the

stopping process as indicated by a temperature rise. The
second process is the heat transfer from the brakes to the
surroundings during the brake cooling process.

2. Mathematical Model for Vehicle Power

The first step toward the evaluation of the potential

benefits of regenerative braking is to develop a set of
equations to define the power requirements for any
vehicle. A similar model has been used developed for
performing vehicle power requirement analysis for other
purposes such as electric vehicle range and performance,
effects of soft tires and additional fuel consumption
resulting fiom raising the speed limits (Reference 1,2
and 3).

Thus, all of the available energy or exergy is

irreversibly lost in the process of stopping a vehicle with
the brakes. Altematively, the first step in evaluating the
potential benefits of regenerative braking is to define the
vehicle and the driving cycle and pattern, and then
determine what portion of the total orderly energy that is
produced by the engine is absorbed by the brakes.

The principles of conservation of energy and

Newton's laws of motion yields equation 1 which takes the
fonn of power supplied Ptotal is equal to power consumed
by the vehicle at all times.

It is also noted that there can be a tremendous

variation of the potential for regenerative brakmg between
MHent types of vehicles. On one extreme a vehicle that
travels substantial differences between stops and then
stops gradually with some of the kinetic energy absorbed
by aerodynamic drag and tire rolling resistance would
derive virtually no benefit from regenerative braking,
while a vehicle such as a municipal bus with a driving
cycle that requires rapid acceleration, a short distance at
full speed, then rapid braking to a full stop, and a short
time in the stopped condition should represent a situation
in which regenerative braking will have maximum value.

b
tpower demand term is the rate of change of
The f
kinetic energy whch corresponds to the mass times
acceleration times velocity per equation 2.

Since a detailed analysis of the benefit for the full

spectrum of vehicles, driving cycles, and regenerative
braking systems is beyond the scope of any analysis, the
authors decided to determine the upper limit of the benefit
of regenerative braking on a municipal bus which is a
heavy vehicle with such a driving cycle and thus should
realize the most benefit from regenerative braking.

The second term is the rate of change of potential

energy which is the vehicle weight times the vertical
component of the velocity which is grade times velocity as
defined by equation 3 .

It is also recogtllzed that a poorly specified, designed

and/or operated regenerative braking system could
actually result in a net loss of orderly energy and thus an
increase in fuel consumption and costs. An example of
such a system would be a combination of much additional
weight of batteries, a long distance between stops, then
rapid stops so that the rate of decrease of lunetic energy is
much greater than the rate at which mechanical power can
be converted to electricity and then to stored chemical
energy and then followed acceleration at a higher rate than
can be sustained by the chemical to electrical to
mechanical energy conversion processes.
Thus, for the purpose of establishing the upper limit
or maximum benefit that could be achieved, the authors
also made the recognizably unrealistic assumption of an
ideal regenerativebraking system in the form of a flywheel

which can be defined as having a 100% chargeldischarge

efficiency and no additional weight on the vehicle.

2031

-dPE
-

-mggrv

dt

(3)

The third term is the power consumed by the tires

which is the rolling resistance of the tires. This requires
a tire coefficientthat is the ratio of tire rolling resistance to
vehicle weight. The power consumed by the tires is the
product of the tire coefficient, the weight and the speed as
shown in equation 4.

P,,

= Ct

m g V

(4)

The aerodynamic power consumed is the drag force

times the vehicle velocity. The force is one half the
product of the drag coefficient, frontal area, air density, air
speed which is the vector difference of vehicle and wind
speed and the vehicle speed as shown in equation 5.

- Cd A rho (v
paem 2

w ) ~v

Driving Cycle
(5)

3. Municipal Bus Analysis

The next step was to iden@ the specific vehicle and
driving cycle to be analyzed for the potential benefits of
regenerative braking.

For the purpose of establishing the driving pattern

and/or cycle the authors followed a bus over the route. No
two cycles were expected to be the same, and the authors
confirmed the expected variations. Thus, it was decided
to define the following average driving cycle from the
dnving pattern observations:

i.

From a stop the bus accelerates to 35 mph over 14

seconds and a distance of 471 feet. The model
unrealistically shows an initial f i t e power will
result in an infiite initial acceleration. Thus, for
modeling purposes we assumed and calculated a
constant force and thus constant acceleration of 6
ft/sec/\2 or. 186 G for the first three seconds and then
a constant power of 180 hp for the remaining eleven
seconds.

11.

The bus traveled at a constant speed of 35 mph for

19 seconds and distance of 975 feet and a
cumulative distance of 1446 feet. The calculated
constant power was 33.2 hp.

VEHICLE
The selected vehicle is a municipal bus shown in
Figure 1 that operates over the f&een mile between
downtown Albany and Schenectady with about t h e
stops.

...

111.

The bus then decelerated at a constant -5.13 fVsec"2

rate or -. 1593 G for 11 seconds and over a distance
of 277 feet to a full stop for a cumulative distance of
1723 feet.

iv.

The bus remained stopped for 12 seconds.

Thus, for this reference cycle which is shown in

Figures 2,3 and 4 the bus travels a total distance of 1723
feet or .33 miles over a period of 56 seconds. The 180 hp
during acceleration is 3.2 times the 56.2 hp average for the
cycle. The 180 hp peak during acceleration is also 5.4
times the 33.2 hp required for constant speed.

Figure 1 Vehicle for Regenerative Braking Analysis

Next is the need for obtaining or estimating the
values of the various vehicle parameters that define the
power requirements. The net weight of 23,000 lbs plus
30 passengers results in a total estimated weight of
27,500 lbf or 854 slugs of mass.
Atire wftkient of .01 was estimated which means
230 lbf to overcome tire rolling resistance. For
aerodynamic drag a frontal area of 80 square feet and drag
coefficient of 1 were estimated.

Figure 2 Velocity vs Time

2032

It is also recognized that the aerodynamics and tire

drag also provide some of the braking power and that this
energy can not be rxovered by a regenerative braking
system Thus, the distribution of energy transfer during
the braking process was calculated and is presented in
Table I.
Table I
Stopping Energy Distribution

Tires

Btu

kJ

907

95 1
41 6

395
Brakes 1316 1 1388 5
Total 1446 3 1525 9

Aero

1-

("el

Ft -ibs kwh
7058? 3 c o 3

307004

001

'1023951 8 0 39
1125241 5 0 4 2

%,of total Cost(cent5)

63
0 27
27
0 12
91 0
386
1000
4 24

Examination of table I shows that 91% of the

stopping energy is absorbed by the brakes, while only
6.3% is absorbed by the tires and 2.7% by aerodynamic
drag. Thus, for rapid stopping the brakes absorb most of
the enera. An alternative strategy of anticipating stops by
earlier removal of engine power and some coasting would
save fuel but lengthen the time between stops.

Figure 3 Acceleration vs Time for Cycle

BRAKING POWER TO ENGINE POWER RATIO

A concise indicator of the potential benefits for
regenerative braking is the ratio of energy consumed by
the brakes to the amount of work produced by the engine
over the cycle. The average engine power of 56.2 hp for
the 56 second cycle corresponds to 2,227 Btdcycle.
Alternatively the 13 16 Btdcycle absorbed by the brakes
corresponds to an average cycle braking power of 33.2 hp.
The average power from this bus with ideal
regenerative braking would be the difference between
existing average power of 56.2 hp and average braking
power of 33.2 hp. Thus, the engine power for this bus on
this driving cycle and with ideal regenerative braking
would be reduced to a constant 23 hp.

FUEL COST ANALYSIS

This section will assume a fuel cost of 120,000
Btdgal, a cost of $!.20/gal and an engine efficiency of
35% which is representative of the best existing diesel
engines.

Figure4 Power vs Time for Acceleration and

Constant Velocity
DEGENERATIVE STOPPING ANALYSIS
The existing bus stops with what can be defined as
degenerative braking since all orderly kinetic energy that
could have been recovered by a regenerative braking
system is degraded to useless disorderly energy by the
friction process in the brakes.

2033

The corresponding fuel cost will be $4.09 per

operating hour of which $2.41 is absorbed by the brakes,
which is the potential savings from an ideal regenerative
braking system.

The remaining question is to determine the amount

of energy that must be stored or discharged from flywheel.
This is done by integrating the flywheel power shown in
Figure 5 to obtain the amount of discharged energy
relative to the fully charged condition as shown in
Figure 6.

4. Ideal Regenerative Braking System Analysis

The previous section established that the constant
power requirement from the engine with ideal regenerative
braking would be 23.2 hp. This section will examine how
the regenerative storage system will operate such that the
net change in stored energy is zero for each cycle.
The corresponding flywheel power is shown in
Figure 5 . Power from the flywheel is defined as positive
and flywheel charging is defined as negative. During the
acceleration with a 180 hp requirement 156.8 hp will be
released from the flywheel and the other 22.2 hp will be
produced by the engme D u n g constant speed with a
33 2 hp requirement 22.2 hp will be produced by the
engine and the remaining 1 1 hp will be provided by the fly
wheel.

PDO

1-0

Figure 6 Change of Stored Energy on Flywheel for

One Driving Cycle

PO

The fully charged condition should exist at the

beginning of the acceleration process. The corresponding
amount of discharge relative to this fully charged condition
becomes 2,403 hp sec at the end of the acceleration
process and 2,643 hp sec at the end of the constant speed
process.

- 0 .
1-1-1

Figure 5 Power Transfer from and to Flywheel for

One Driving Cycle
During constant deceleration stopping, the engine
will continue to produce 22.2 hp, while the flywheel will
absorb power at a rate of 22.2 hp from the engine plus an
initial 361.2 hp from braking for a total initial power
transfer rate to the fly wheel of 383.4 hp.
The power transfer rate during the deceleration
ultimately decreases to 22.2 hp at the stopped condition
and for the remaining stopped time.

2034

Th~s2,643 hp sec represents the maximum variation

of change stored energy. Flywheels are not typically fully
discharged whch would correspond to a stop. More
typically, they vary between full and half speed operation.
Since stored energy is proportional to the square of the
speed, this means that 75% of the stored energy is
normally discharged.
4. Summary and Conclusions

The municipal bus was analyzed as a possibly best

case situation for the benefits of regenerative bralung
because it undergoes many daily cycles of rapid
acceleration, short distance at constant speed, rapid
deceleration and short time in the stopped condition.

Thls is the type of cycle in which the bus can travel

the greatest distance over a given time while also making
frequent stops for traffic lights and to load and discharge
passengers. This type of operation provides for minimum
time between stops and is sometimes called a "bang-bang
cycle" by systems engineers.

Acknowledgement:

The authors wish to thank the Niagara Mohawk

Power Corporation for the grant that helped make this
work possible.

References:
The municipal bus that was analyzed required a peak
power from the wheels of 180 hp but a cycle average
power fiom the wheels but a cycle average power of 56.25
hP.

"Developmentof a Model to Predict Electric Vehicle

Performance over a Variety of Driving Conditions",
presented at and published in the Proceedings of the
1992 Intersociety Energy Conversion Enpeering
Conference in San Diego.

The energy consumed for each braking process was

13 16 Btu which converts into an average braking power
of 33.2 hp. Thus, 59% of the work produced by the

"Potential Benefits fro m Applying Electric Vehicle

Technology to Engine Driven Vehicles", presented
at and published in the 1992 Intersociety Energy
Conversion Engineering Conference in San Diego.

engine is absorbed by the brakes.

The fuel cost for operating this bus without
regenerative braking is $4.09/hr. Such a bus might
operate 3,000 hours per year and thus have a yearly fuel
bill of $12,270, which could be reduced to $5,030 if an
ideal regenerative braking system was available.

"Estimating Present and Future Fuel Consumption

Impacts of Higher Speed Limits", Proceedings of the
Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering
Conference, Vol 111, pp 1577-158 1, Washington,
August, 1996.

While regenerative braking is generally assumed for

more fuel efficient vehicles of the future the authors
started with some skepticism of the potential and the
realistic net benefits.

This analysis showed a potential savings of 59% for

an i d e a l d and best case situation. The reduced size and
constant speed and power required of the engine should
yield both cleaner and more efficient operation.
The question remains of whether a practical system
can be developed that provides more savings than
additional cost for this most attractive regenerative
braking application. It is noted that longer and more
irregular dnving cycles will decrease the valuc of
regencrativc braking for the reasons of a smaller ratio of
averagc braking to engine power, more need for storage
and dificultics in developing a control algorithm for the
storage.

TO better quantify both the potential and realistic

benefit the authors suggest that a variety of vehicles be
instrumented in a manner in engine power to the road and
braking power are measured and recorded over a variety
of city and highway driving conditions. This data should
firstbe processed to determine the ratio of braking power
to e n p e power, and then be used with models of various
realistic types of regenerative braking to further
understand whether any kind of regenerative braking
system can result in net fuel savings and benefits for a new
generation of vehicles.

2035