Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Integration Technology March 20 - 24, 2007, Shenzhen, China

A Hybrid Controller Design For Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle

Weimin Li
Department of Automation, Shanghai JiaoTong University Department of MAE, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong Email: wli@mae.cuhk.edu.hk

Guoqing Xu, Zhancheng Wang and Yangsheng Xu

Department of MAE, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong Email: {gqxu, zcwang & ysxu}@mae.cuhk.edu.hk

Abstract This paper presents a hybrid controller for hybrid electric vehicles using hybrid system theory. The hierarchical control structure of parallel hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) is introduced rst and the drive control problem of the vehicle is formulated using hybrid system theory. State machine theory is applied to solve the problem of vehicle operating mode transitions. Then a fuzzy torque distributor is developed to deal with power splitting problem between the engine and the motor so that these power sources are operated at high efciency. A backward-looking parallel HEV model was used for implementation and simulation of the controller. Potential fuel economy improvement has been shown by using this hybrid controller. Index Terms hybrid electric vehicle, state machine, fuzzy logic

I. INTRODUCTION Hybrid electric vehicles have attracted tremendous attention as a commercially viable alternative to either traditional vehicles or electric vehicles. An HEV has two kinds of motive power sources: a battery pack and an internal combustion engine that can each act independently or in combination. It combines some of the benets of electric vehicles (efcient and clean motive power supplied by an electric motor, regenerative braking) with the features of a conventional vehicle that consumers expect (convenient refueling, long driving range). However, these benets come with increased complexity in the powertrain design. Many approaches have been presented to deal with energy management of HEV [1]-[6]. Genetic algorithm and dynamic programming are global optimization approaches, but theyre limited by time consuming and needing to know the future driving prole. Fuzzy logic is robust, nearly optimum and easy to use, but we still need to nd a strong mathematic tool to model this system which consists of many subsystems. In recent years there has been considerable interest in using hybrid system theory to develop a systematic framework for the analysis and design of complex engineering systems [7].
This work was supported by the Innovation Technology Fund of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hybrid system methodologies are also applicable to switched systems where the system switches between various setpoints or operational modes in order to extend its effective operating range. The hybrid electric vehicle systems contain interacting discrete and continuous dynamics, and exhibit simultaneously several kinds of dynamic behavior, such as continuous-time dynamics, switching and logic commands, discrete events and the like. Therefore, it is a hybrid dynamical system. Hybrid system analysis and controller synthesis techniques may provide efcient approaches for the design and verication of system controller of hybrid electric vehicles [7] [8]. The focus of this paper will be to describe the development of a hybrid controller for an parallel HEV. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: section 2 will be devoted to the description of the hierarchical architecture of the hybrid electric vehicle systems. In section 3, the control structure of the hybrid electric vehicle systems will be modeled and the control design problem will be formulated using the hybrid dynamical control theory. In section 4, the. The simulation structure of the electric vehicle systems and the simulation results will be presented in section 5. The conclusions are drawn in section 6. II. HIERARCHICAL ARCHITECTURE OF PARALLEL HEV A. HEV system conguration By denition, a hybrid electric vehicle contains two power sources, an electric motor (or motors) and a gasoline or diesel engine. In general, the two power sources can be congured in one of two ways, either as a series hybrid or as a parallel hybrid. Series Hybrid: In this conguration, an ICE-generator combination is used for providing electrical power to the EM and the battery. Parallel Hybrid: The ICE in this scheme is mechanically connected to the wheels, and can therefore directly supply

1-4244-1092-4/07/$25.00 2007IEEE.

450

mechanical power to the wheels. The EM is added to the drivetrain in parallel to the ICE, so that it can supplement the ICE torque. In the specic parallel hybrid architecture shown in gure 1, the engine is connected to the driveline through a clutch and the motor/generator.

Fig. 1.

Schematic of the parallel hybrid electric vehicle drivetrain.

B. Hierarchical control Architecture based on hybrid system theory Many challenges exist for designing a Vehicle System Controller for an HEV. For one thing, the vehicle consists of many large subsystems (e.g. engine, motor, transmission, battery, brakes, etc.). In addition to being nonlinear and often time varying, each subsystem also has its own controller. Given this complexity, analytical design of an overall dynamic control system is nearly impossible and a unied control law can hardly be synthesized for the whole system. Also, competing objectives (e.g. fuel economy vs. driving performance) and system limitations (control authority, component capability, communication limitations, etc.) often lead to tradeoffs in controller design. Underlying these challenges is the desire to produce a control architecture that is easy to understand and interpret by the vehicle integration and calibration team. To combat these challenges, we adopted a supervisory hybrid system theory to deal with this problem. The overall system will be divided rst into three levels with different functions and behaviors, and then different control strategies will be designed for different levels and components. The different function levels and the subsystems with interactions can be formulated as the well-know hierarchical structure, i.e. the structure with supervision, coordination and execution levels as shown in gure 2. supervisory layer: the supervisory layer need to continuously monitor the drivers demands (acc/brake pedal signals, steering wheel signals), external environment (roadway type,

Fig. 2.

Hierachical architecture of the HEV Control systems.

level of congestion), vehicle status (vehicle speed) and possible system faults to gather any necessary information. Coordinator layer: Optimization of performance objectives is handled within this layer. Logic of the state machine is used in order to determine the proper vehicle operating state for optimal fuel economy and a fuzzy torque distributor is applied to deal with power splitting problem in hybrid propulsion. Execution layer: Dynamic control within each subsystem is handled by each individual subsystem controller. This type of hybrid control architecture affords a straightforward design that is easy to understand by the control system integrator and can be readily expanded for other HEV congurations by simply adding or deleting states along with their corresponding dynamic control. III. COORDINATOR LAYER CONTROLLER DESIGN The coordinator layer controller is responsible for determining the operating mode of the vehicle and dealing with power splitting between two power sources when in hybrid propelling mode. In order to describe and implement the event-driven systems, e.g. the high level controller of the coordinators, a powerful tool nite state machine theory and MATLAB / Stateow Toolbox were used to describe the discrete-event system structure and its transitions between different operation modes. Then a fuzzy torque distributor

451

TABLE I COLLECTION OF HEV OPERATION MODES

VSC State
OFF MOTOR DRIVE REGEN ENGINE DRIVE BOOST CHARGING ENGING STOP ENGINE START BLEEDING

Engine
Engine Off Engine Off Engine Off Engine On Engine On Engine On Engine Off Engine On Engine On

Clutch
Disengaged Disengaged Disengaged Engaged Engaged Engaged Disengaging Engaging Engaged

Motor
Off Tractive Force Generating Off Tractive Force Generating Tractive Force Tractive Force Tractive Force Vehicle off state

Description
Motor Propelling the vehicle Regenerative Braking Engine propelling the vehicle Engine and motor both propelling the vehicle Engine propelling the vehicle and charging the battery Motor propelling the vehicle and stopping the engine Motor propelling the vehicle and starting the engine Engine and motor both propelling the vehicle, but motor output torque at its most, the engine supplement the rest.

ENG_STARTED_FLAG &BOOST_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

Engine_start

ENG_STARTED_FLAG &CHARGE_FLAG &|BOOST_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

Charge

[BOOST_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

Boost

[[BRAKE_SWITCH &TRANS_ENGAGED &|REGEN_FLAG] [(ENG_ON_FLAG ||(IDLE_CRANK_FLAG& |REGEN_FLAG &(|BRAKE_SWITCH || |TRANS_ENGAGED))) & |FLG_SHIFTIN &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_FLAG

[ENG_STARTED_FLAG &|BOOST_FLAG &|CHARGE_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG &|BLEEDING_FLAG

REGEN_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_FLAG

[CHARGE_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &(DISALLOW_EN_MGT_FLAG ||MAX_SOURCE_CURRENT_ZERO_FLAG) &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG [BOOST_FLAG &|REGEN_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG &|BOOST_REQUEST_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG REGEN_FLAG &DISALLOW_EN_MGT_FLAG &(ENG_RESTART_OKAY_FLAG &|MAX_SOURCE_CURRENT_ZERO_FLAG |||SA_DISABLED_FLAG) (CHARGE_OFF_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG |||CHARGE_ENABLE_FLAG ||SA_DISABLED_FLAG) &|ENERGY_MGT_FLAG DISALLOW_BOOST_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG &|ENERGY_MGT_FLAG &(|REGEN_FLAG [(soc>soc_hi_limit &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG ||SA_DISABLED_FLAG) &trq_veh>=0 &|BOOST_FLAG &trq_veh<trq_eng_opt_min) &mode>123]

Battery_drive
KEY_CRANK_FLAG &|CRANK_INH

Regen
REGEN_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_FLAG

REGEN_FLAG &(ENG_RESTART_OKAY_FLAG |||SA_DISABLED_FLAG) &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

Engine_drive

BOOST_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR _STALL_FLAG

[(|REGEN_FLAG &(L_FLAG||VS_ENG_DRV_FLAG)) ||(SA_DISABLED_FLAG &|ENG_RESTART_OKAY_FLAG)] &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG BLEEDING_FLAG &ENG_STARTED_FLAG &|BOOST_FLAG &|CHARGE_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_

|REGEN_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &(ENG_STOPPED_FLAG ||BRAKE_SWITCH)

|BLEEDING_FLAG &|ENERGY_MGT_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG &|BOOST_FLAG BLEEDING_FLAG &|CHARGE_FLAG &|DISALLOW_EN_MGT_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

REGEN_FLAG &|KEY_OFF_FLAG &|SA_DISABLED_FLAG &(ENG_STOPPED_FLAG ||BRAKE_SWITCH)

Engine_stop

ENERGY_MGT_FLAG ||KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG ENERGY_MGT_FLAG ||KEY_OFF_OR_STALL_FLAG

Bleeding

Fig. 3.

HEV operation mode transitions based on Matlab/Stateow.

(FTD) associated with each operating mode to specify the vehicle demands to each subsystem controller. Fuzzy Logic Control is very suitable for hybrid vehicle control because it is very robust, and tolerant to imprecise measurement and to component variability. A. State machines In a very general way, we consider systems that can be described as beginning in a starting state and progress from state to state in discrete jumps according to a set of specied rules. In general, systems are nondeterministic, that is, the next state might not always be determined by the previous

state. The basic mathematical model to describe complex systems is called a state machine. A state machine is formed of a set of states Q, a set of allowable starting states q0 , and a set of allowed transitions between states . An execution of a state machine is a (possibly innite) sequence of states. A collection of all possible operating modes of the vehicle and their meaning is listed in table I. Transitions between different operating modes are shown in gure 3. These operating modes are easy to understand except the difference between Boost and Bleeding. Boost means engine and motor both propel the vehicle, while engine works at its optimum point

452

and motor supplements the rest power requirement. While in Bleeding mode, the State of Charge (SOC) of battery pack is higher than normal range, which is danger to battery and vehicle, but at the same time, the vehicle torque required is larger than motors maximum power output. Therefore, the motor will operate at its maximum torque output point, and the engine supplement the rest power required. From this example we can see that the prioritization of the state transition is based on driver demand, energy management and system safety. Highest priority transitions typically are associated with system faults. Driver demand dictates the next level of priority. In general, satisfying the drivers desire to deliver torque to the wheels takes precedence over energy management. B. Fuzzy Torque Distributor The main task of this unit is to generate proper engine torque command in a way that promotes energy saving, resulting in eco-driving while satisfying the drivers demand. When the Engine is turned on, that is the system progress into any of the following states: ENGINE DRIVE, BOOST, CHARGING AND BLEEDING states, a Fuzzy torque distributor (FTD) is applied to deal with power splitting between engine and motor. It follows the idea of load leveling, where the EM is used to provide assist or generate, while running the ICE at an optimum. The idea behind this approach is to vary an optimal ICE torque, based on batterys state of charge (SOC) constraints. Care is taken in the rule base to make sure the FTD does not shift too much from this optimal point so as to compromise the overall efciency of the system. The FTD will use two inputs: the battery pack SOC and the driver desired torque. Based on the above inputs, the ICE operating point is set. The output from FTD is the engine torque.The membership function and surface are shown in gure 4-6.

Fig. 5.

Input membership function 2 of fuzzy controller.

Fig. 6.

Visualization of the Fuzzy Torque Distributor action.

For controller validation and testing, the ADVISOR models are used to simulate the PHEV in the Matlab / Simulink environment. ADVISOR, NRELs ADvanced Vehicles SimulatOR, is a set of model, data, and script text les for use with Matlab and Simulink. It is designed for rapid analysis of the performance and fuel economy of conventional, electric, and hybrid vehicles. The controller has been simulated with ADVISOR using the test procedure described in the SAE J1711 standard. The emissions and fuel usage results are compared with parallel assist control strategy. Computational simulation works were performed on the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) that is shown in gure 7.The simulation results are compared with Parallel Electric Assist Strategy in table II. V. CONCLUSION A hybrid controller consisting of a state machine combined with a fuzzy torque distributor was presented as the vehicle system controller for a parallel hybrid electric vehicle. The state machine is used to determine the proper vehicle operating mode for optimal fuel economy while the fuzzy torque distributor is applied to deal with power splitting problem in hybrid propulsion. Simulation has been down for a parallel HEV based on ADVISOR software and results show potential

Fig. 4.

Input membership function 1 of fuzzy controller.

IV. CONTROLLER VALIDATION AND TESTING In this section, we present the simulation study on the evaluation of proposed control strategy of a parallel HEV.

453

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Automation Dept, ShangHai JiaoTong University and MAE Dept,the Chinese University of HongKong for their helpful support and constant encouragement. R EFERENCES
[1] Anthony M. Phillips, Miroslava Jankovic, and Kathleen E. Bailey , Vehicle System Controller Design for a Hybrid Electric Vehicle, Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications Anchorage, Alaska, USA September 25-27, 2000 [2] Gregory A. Hubbard, Kamal Youcef-Toumi, System Level Control of a Hybrid-Electric Vehicle Drivetrain, Proceedings of the American Control Conference Albuquerque, New Mexico June 1997. [3] Niels J. Schouten, Mutasim A. Salman, and Naim A. Kheir, Fuzzy Logic Control for Parallel Hybrid Vehicles, in IEEE Transations on Control Systems Technology, Vol. 10, No. 3, May 2002, PP.460-468. [4] Reza Langan, Jong-Seob Won, Integrated Drive Cycle Analysis for Fuzzy Logic Based Energy Management in Hybrid Vehicles, The IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, June, 2003. [5] A.Hajizadeh Gastaj, Emami, M.Mohammadian, A Fuzzy-based Supervisory Robust Control For Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol.88, No.6, July 2002. [6] Antonio Sciarretta, Michael Back, and Lino Guzzella, Optimal Control of Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicles, IEEE Transations on Control Systems Technology, Vol. 12, No. 3, May 2004. [7] Xenofon D.Koutsoukos, Panos J.Antsaklis, James A.Stiver, Michael D.Lemmon, Supervisory Control of Hybrid Systems, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol.88, No.7, July 2000. [8] Rongjun Zhang, Yaobin Chen, Control of Hybrid Dynamical Systems for Electric Vehicles, Proceedings of the American Control Conference Arlington, VA June 25-27, 2001. [9] Yuan Zhu, Yaobin Chen, Guangyu Tian, Hao Wu, Quanshi Chen, A Four-Step Method to Design an Energy Management Strategy for Hybrid Vehicles, Proceeding of the 2004 American Control Conference Boston. Massachusetts June 30 -July 2, 2004.

Fig. 7.

UDDC Driving Cycle.

Fig. 8.

Engine Energy Efciency Map.

TABLE II SIMULATION RESULTS COMPARISON. When tested with the UDDC drive cycle, we see a signicant improvement in fuel economy as well as some improvement in the NOX emissions by using hybrid control strategy. The simulation result is compared with parallel electric assist strategy.

Control Strategy Parallel Electric Assist strategy Hybrid control Strategy

Fuel Economy (mpg)

CO Emission (g/mi)

HC Emission (g/mi)

NOX Emission (g/mi)

35

2.011

0.316

0.326

41.4

2.098

0.509

0.188

improvement both on fuel economy and engine efciency over other strategies such as Parallel Electric Assist Strategy.

454