Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Four control strategies were simulated and compared on The power equations used by the vehicle control
the basis of energy consumption and fuel consumption strategy during EV mode are as follows
for this study:
Peng = {0 for Seng = Off (1)
1. Electric Vehicle/Charge-Sustaining (EV/CS)
2. Differential Engine Power
3. Full Engine Power Pmc = min PLoad , Pmc Seng = Off (2)
4. Optimal Engine Power max
STRATEGY DESCRIPTIONS On for Pload 0.9 Pmc , Seng = On (3)
+
S eng = max
Off
EV/CS STRATEGY - The EV/CS control strategy was for Pload 0.9 Pmc , Seng = On
max
included as the baseline strategy for comparison. Given
a UDDS trip distance of 32 km, the controller drove the Off
for Pload Pmc , S = Off
first 16 km by using energy from the battery, which max
depleted the battery state-of-charge (SOC) from 90%
SOC to 30% SOC. The engine turned on only if the road If the SOC was high, the vehicle operated in EV mode,
load exceeded the power capability of either the battery as shown in Figure 2. When the power demand at the
or the motor, although the battery and motor had been road exceeded the maximum power that the motor could
sized for the UDDS cycle. Therefore, the engine never deliver, the engine turned on, delivering the additional
turned on during these simulations, because the power needed to follow the drive cycle. Note that when
electrical system limits were never reached. The the engine turned on, the term EV mode was no longer
remaining 16 km were then driven by using a applicable, and so the vehicle switched to CD mode.
combination of the engine and battery while the SOC When the SOC dropped low enough, the strategy
was maintained. This is the CS operation of the strategy. switched to CS mode (also shown in Figure 2). The
Figure 2 gives a representative SOC trajectory for the strategy during the CS mode was the basic split strategy
EV/CS strategy. in PSAT. A brief overview of the power equations
describing its operation are provided below.
90
Ki
80
Pess dmd = K p ( SOC t arg et SOC ) + ( SOC t arg et SOC ) (4)
s
70
EV 0 for Seng = Off (5)
Peng =
60 +
load Pessdmd
P for Seng = On
SOC
50
The battery power Pessdmd maintained the SOC of the
40
CS battery during CS operation. The engine operated along
30 its optimal efficiency curve. Once the power of the
engine was known, the torque and speed were also
20
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
known, as shown in Figure 3.
time (s)
48 13,039
64 11,216 The bottom part of Figure 4, labeled CD strategy,
96 8,910 shows one possible operation for a CD control strategy.
The same reasoning used for the EV/CS example can
be applied to this trip to compute the energy required
EXPLANATION FOR HOW A CD STRATEGY from the engine during the CD control strategy
LOWERS FUEL CONSUMPTION WHEN operation, which is
COMPARED TO AN EV/CS STRATEGY
2E 2E 2E
CD
Eengine = 0+ +0+ +0+ (16)
A PHEV benefits from a predetermined route because its
control strategy can schedule the blending of power from
fuel high
engine high
engine engine
high
E ess
As the electric consumption, , approaches 0, the
d
fuel consumption approaches the charge-sustaining
value, and the total energy consumption also
approaches the charge-sustaining value.
Figure 6: Full Engine Power Strategy Engine Start
Threshold Parameter Values
lim ECTotal = lim EC cs (22)
d d
RESULTS
From Figure 7, one can see that there was no Figure 7: Vehicle Energy Consumption versus
appreciable difference between the results of the EV/CS Trip Distance for Each Control Strategy
strategy and the Differential Engine Power strategy. The
Differential Engine Power strategy used the engine In Figure 8, the percent increase in fuel energy
earlier than the EV/CS strategy; however, the strategy consumption, when compared to the EV/CS strategy, is
ran the engine at lower power, which resulted in a lower plotted versus the trip distance. Clearly, the Differential
average efficiency for the engine. The results of the Full Engine Power strategy and the Optimal Engine Power
Engine Power strategy had the greatest decrease in fuel strategy had no significant improvement over the EV/CS
energy consumption. Figure 8 shows that this decrease strategy and, actually, for some trip distances, had
was as large as 9% for the 32-km trip distance. As trip worse fuel energy consumption.
distance increased, the energy savings dropped to
around 2%, which is well within the error margin of the
simulation. The Optimal Engine Strategy performed
worse than the Full Engine Power strategy. This result
was unexpected, because the reduction in energy
consumption of a CD strategy over an EV/CS is
theorized to come from an increase in engine efficiency.
9 Figure 10 clearly shows that the Optimal Engine
Strategy had the highest engine efficiency, but this high
efficiency came at the cost of operating the engine at a
power much higher than that required by cycle. This
excess power unnecessarily charged the battery, which
brought down the overall efficiency of the vehicle.
Figure 7 also shows that as trip distance increases, the Figure 8: Percent Increase in Fuel
energy consumption asymptotically approaches the Consumption When Compared to the EV/CS
vehicle energy consumption in CS mode. Equation 20 Strategy for Different Trip Distances
expresses this relationship.
The fuel energy reduction for the three strategies shown
in Figure 8 can be attributed to four powertrain
characteristics and how these characteristics change as
trip distance is increased:
1. Engine Efficiency
2. Battery Percent Charging from the Engine
3. Transmission Efficiency
4. Regenerative Braking Percent Recovered
ChF =
( )
x100 (23)
P u P dt eng eng
Reflecting these fractions to their respective component Removing like terms from each side gives
inputs gives the following two equations:
cs cd
1 ECUDDS Eeng Eeng
FC eng = (26) cs
pwt
cs
eng = cd
pwt (d ) cd
eng (d ) (31)
LHV eng eng
pwt
d d
This gives
(1 )ECUDDS
EC ess = (27)
ess ess cspwt eng
cs
pwt
EC CD
= EC CS (32)
(d )
fuel cd cd fuel
pwt eng (d )
Expressing the battery energy consumption in terms of
engine energy consumption gives
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Peng Power delivered by the engine
This work was supported by DOEs FreedomCAR and
Vehicle Technology Office under the direction of Lee S eng Engine-on current state
Slezak. The submitted manuscript has been created by
UChicago Argonne, LLC, Operator of Argonne National
+ Engine-on next state
Laboratory (Argonne). Argonne, a U.S. Department of S eng
Energy Office of Science laboratory, is operated under
Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. The Engine is on and consuming fuel
On
U.S. Government retains for itself, and others acting on
its behalf, a paid-up nonexclusive, irrevocable worldwide Engine is off
license in said article to reproduce, prepare derivative
Off
works, distribute copies to the public, and perform
publicly and display publicly, by or on behalf of the Pessdmd Power demand by the control for the battery
Government.
Kp Battery SOC control proportional constant
1 Integration factor
s
Peng Charge-sustaining strategy engine on power eng
pwt
Average efficiency of the pathway from the
on threshold for hysteresis engine to the wheels through the
transmission
Peng Charge-sustaining strategy engine off power
off threshold hysteresis FCeng Fuel consumption for the engine
Peng Engine power on threshold for Differential ECess Energy consumption for the battery
threshold Engine Power, Full Engine Power, and
Optimal Engine Power strategies
ess Average efficiency of the battery during a
Engine power at which it has peak efficiency trip
Poptimal
ess Average efficiency of the pathway from the
pwt
low Average engine efficiency for a low-power battery to the wheels through the
eng
portion of a generic drive cycle transmission
eng
high Average engine efficiency for a low-power EV / CS
ECUDDS Energy consumption at the wheels of the
portion of a generic drive cycle vehicle to drive a UDDS cycle when
operating with the EV/CS strategy
E Unit of energy to drive low-speed portion of
generic drive cycle CD
ECUDDS Energy consumption at the wheels of the
vehicle to drive a UDDS cycle when
ev / cs
Eengine Fuel energy consumed when operating in operating with the EV/CS strategy
fuel EV/CS mode
CS
Eeng Energy delivered by the engine on a trip
CD Fuel energy consumed when operating in when operating with the charge-sustaining
E engine strategy
fuel charge depleting mode
pwt (d )
cd Average efficiency of the pathway from the
m fuel Total mass of fuel consumed on a repeating
engine to the wheels when operating in
UDDS cycle trip
charge-depleting mode as a function of trip
Lower heating value of the fuel distance
LHV
Fraction of energy at the vehicles wheels u (Ptx ) 1 when transmission output power is greater
delivered by the engine than 0
eng Average energy efficiency of the engine u ( Pess ) 1 when battery power is negative (i.e., when
during a trip battery is charging)