Transfer Report

2012
MPhil to PhD Transfer Report: Modelling and Simulation of

an Aftermarket Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Wisdom Enang (073164034)

University of Bath
10/22/2012
MPhil Transfer Report October 22, 2012
Summary
The gradual decline in global oil reserves and presence of ever so stringent emissions
rules around the world, have created an urgent need for the production of automobiles with
improved fuel economy. HEVs (hybrid electric vehicles) have proved a viable option to
guarantying improved fuel economy and reduced emissions.
The first part of this research work focuses on offering an insight in to some existing
research literature in the field of HEVs (hybrid electric vehicles). HEV modelling approaches
have been presented as well as some HEV control approaches. The HEV control approaches
presented could be sub classified in to real time and offline optimization techniques, most
of which are either causal rule based or non-causal algorithm based. Model predictive and
intelligent controllers which make use of real time GPS traffic and driving information to
decide the appropriate control decision (power split between energy devices) were also
investigated and were found to offer a viable fuel saving sub-optimal HEV energy
management control strategy.
The second part of this research work focuses on the mathematical modelling and
control of an aftermarket market hybrid electric vehicle. The aim of the control strategy is to
minimize fuel consumption. The mathematical modelling of the HEV subsystems is
presented and then the performance of the model is validated against experimental data.
An electric assist rule based control strategy is implemented on the vehicle and shown to
offer a 12.58% fuel savings over the NEDC (New European Drive Cycle).
The last part of this research work focuses on outlining potential areas in HEV
development and energy management which will be investigated further during the course
University of Bath | Summary 1

of my PhD program. An outline of the anticipated PhD thesis chapters and their respective
compositions are outlined towards the end of the research work.

Table of Contents
Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 11
HEV Configurations ................................................................................................... 12
Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle............................................................................. 12
Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle .......................................................................... 13
Recent Developments on HEV .................................................................................. 15
2 Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 17
HEV Modelling Approaches ....................................................................................... 17
Kinematic Approach ........................................................................................... 18
Dynamic Approach ............................................................................................. 21
HEV Control Strategies .............................................................................................. 22
Rule Based Control Strategy .............................................................................. 23
2.2.1.1 Electric Assist Rule Based Control Strategy .................................................... 24
2.2.1.2 Adaptive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy ........................................................... 25
2.2.1.3 Predictive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy ......................................................... 26
Optimization Based Control Strategy ................................................................ 27
Global Optimization Based Control Strategy .................................................................... 28
2.2.2.1 Linear Programming Optimal Control Strategy.............................................. 28
2.2.2.2 Dynamic Programming Optimal Control Strategy ......................................... 28

2.2.2.3 Pontryagins Minimum Principle Control Strategy ........................................ 36
Real time Optimization Based Control Strategy ............................................................... 39
2.2.2.4 Model Predictive Control Strategy ................................................................. 39
3 HEV Modelling and Control .............................................................................................. 43
Modelling Purpose .................................................................................................... 43
Description of drive train architecture...................................................................... 43
Driver Modelling........................................................................................................ 45
Vehicle Dynamics Modelling ..................................................................................... 47
Vehicle Movement ............................................................................................. 49
3.4.1.1 Rolling Resistance() ..................................................................... 51
3.4.1.2 Aerodynamic Force () ........................................................................ 52
3.4.1.3 Grading Resistance () ...................................................................... 53
Aftermarket Parallel HEV operating modes....................................................... 54
Electric machine modelling ....................................................................................... 59
Battery Modelling...................................................................................................... 63
Battery Power load estimation .......................................................................... 64
Battery Current Esitmation ................................................................................ 65
Battery state of charge estimation .................................................................... 66
Engine Modelling....................................................................................................... 68
Engine optimal operating line ............................................................................ 72

Brake modelling......................................................................................................... 73
Brake modelling in conventional HEVs .............................................................. 73
Vehicle model validation ........................................................................................... 76
Power split between power devices ......................................................................... 77
Application of electric assist control strategy to HEV ........................................ 77
HEV braking control ........................................................................................... 85
Electric assist control strategy results ............................................................... 89
4 Conclusions and Further work .......................................................................................... 94
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 99
PhD research project Gantt chart .......................................................................................... 101

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle ................................................................................... 12
Figure 2: Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle ................................................................................. 14
Figure 3: All wheel drive parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle ........................................................ 15
Figure 4: Series/Parallel hybrid electric vehicle ....................................................................... 16
Figure 5: Information flow in a Kinematic or Backward HEV model, from
(Guzzella, et al., 2007).............................................................................................................. 19
Figure 6: Information flow in a quasi-static powertrain model (Guzzella, et al., 2007) .......... 20
Figure 7: HEV Control Strategy Classification .......................................................................... 23
Figure 8: Multi Decision Process .............................................................................................. 30
Figure 9: Sequence of feasible power splits in dynamic programming for HEVs:
Source (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009)................................................................................................. 35
Figure 10: Sample reference trajectory, actual trajectory, and control sequence for MPC:
Source (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009)................................................................................................. 40
Figure 11: Aftermarket parallel hybrid electric vehicle ........................................................... 44
Figure 12: Driver subsystem Implementation in Simulink....................................................... 46
Figure 13: Parallel HEV regenerative braking power flow ....................................................... 55
Figure 14: Parallel HEV power-assist power flow .................................................................... 56
Figure 15: Parallel HEV motor only power flow....................................................................... 56
Figure 16: Parallel HEV recharge control power flow .............................................................. 57
Figure 17: Parallel HEV engine only power flow ...................................................................... 58
Figure 18: Vehicle dynamics implementation in Simulink ....................................................... 59
Figure 19: Efficiency Map (Electric Motor Traction) ................................................................ 61

Figure 20: Efficiency Map (Electric Motor Regeneration) ....................................................... 61
Figure 21: Electrical subsystem implementation in Simulink .................................................. 62
Figure 22: Implementation of state of charge calculation algorithm in Simulink ................... 67
Figure 23: Parallel HEV configuration ...................................................................................... 68
Figure 24: Engine fuel consumption map ................................................................................ 71
Figure 25: Engine model implementation in Simulink ............................................................. 72
Figure 26: HEV braking control ................................................................................................ 75
Figure 27: Cumulative fuel consumption validation plot ........................................................ 76
Figure 28: Rule based control strategy top layer..................................................................... 78
Figure 29: HEV controller layer showing main transition events ............................................ 80
Figure 30: Traction mode control algorithm ........................................................................... 80
Figure 31: HEV braking mode control algorithm ..................................................................... 85
Figure 32: NEDC drive cycle speed profile ............................................................................... 89
Figure 33: NEDC vehicle power split ........................................................................................ 89
Figure 34: HEV operating modes for NEDC drive cycle ........................................................... 90
Figure 35: Instantaneous fuel consumption comparison ........................................................ 91
Figure 36: Cumulative fuel consumption comparison ............................................................. 91
Figure 37: Engine operating points of HEV (Rule based controller) ........................................ 92
Figure 38: HEV state of charge profile for electric assist control strategy .............................. 93

Table of Equations
Equation 2.1 ............................................................................................................................. 29
Equation 2.2 ............................................................................................................................. 29
Equation 2.3 ............................................................................................................................. 33
Equation 2.4 ............................................................................................................................. 33
Equation 2.5 ............................................................................................................................. 34
Equation 2.6 ............................................................................................................................. 35
Equation 2.7 ............................................................................................................................. 36
Equation 2.8 ............................................................................................................................. 36
Equation 2.9 ............................................................................................................................. 37
Equation 2.10 ........................................................................................................................... 37
Equation 2.11 ........................................................................................................................... 37
Equation 2.12 ........................................................................................................................... 38
Equation 3.1 ............................................................................................................................. 45
Equation 3.2 ............................................................................................................................. 49
Equation 3.3 ............................................................................................................................. 50
Equation 3.4 ............................................................................................................................. 50
Equation 3.5 ............................................................................................................................. 50
Equation 3.6 ............................................................................................................................. 51
Equation 3.7 ............................................................................................................................. 51
Equation 3.8 ............................................................................................................................. 53
Equation 3.9 ............................................................................................................................. 54
Equation 3.10 ........................................................................................................................... 55

Equation 3.11 ........................................................................................................................... 57
Equation 3.12 ........................................................................................................................... 57
Equation 3.13 ........................................................................................................................... 58
Equation 3.14 ........................................................................................................................... 60
Equation 3.15 ........................................................................................................................... 63
Equation 3.16 ........................................................................................................................... 65
Equation 3.17 ........................................................................................................................... 65
Equation 3.18 ........................................................................................................................... 65
Equation 3.19 ........................................................................................................................... 65
Equation 3.20 ........................................................................................................................... 66
Equation 3.21 ........................................................................................................................... 66
Equation 3.22 ........................................................................................................................... 69
Equation 3.23 ........................................................................................................................... 69
Equation 3.24 ........................................................................................................................... 70
Equation 3.25 ........................................................................................................................... 70
Equation 3.26 ........................................................................................................................... 70
Equation 3.27 ........................................................................................................................... 70
Equation 3.28 ........................................................................................................................... 71
Equation 3.29 ........................................................................................................................... 71

Nomenclature
HEV Hybrid Electric Vehicle
HEVs Hybrid Electric Vehicles
SOC State Of Charge
EV Electric Vehicle
GPS Global Positioning System
PMP Pontryagins Minimum Principle
MPC Model Predictive Control
NEDC New European Drive Cycle
ECMS Equivalent consumption minimization strategy
SOC_min Minimum battery state of charge
SOC_max Maximum battery state of charge

1 Introduction
Increased prices of fossil fuels and shortages of world fuel reserves have created an
eminent and urgent need for the production of automobiles with improved fuel economy. In
pursuit of these needs, vehicle manufactures around the world have explored permanent
options such as, production of more efficient combustion engines, improvement of fuel
efficiency using biodiesel fuel blends or other chemicals that will improve its combustion
properties, introduction of turbo charging technology, production of electric vehicles, and
production of Hybrid vehicles.
Whilst all of the above mentioned advancements in vehicle technology do prove to
be viable solutions in improving the vehicle fuel efficiency, hybrid vehicles seems most
promising over the short term period. Hybrid vehicles generally refer to vehicles fitted with
more than one type of energy transformer and energy storage for its propulsion. Energy
transformer options currently in use in hybrid systems today includes, heat engines,
hydraulic engines, fuel cells and electric motors. One important reason for introducing the
hybrid systems is to improve fuel economy and emissions. In hybrid electric systems which
includes electric or pneumatic motors, this objective is achieved mainly by regenerating
some of the brake energy which will otherwise be dissipated as heat in to the electrical
energy for future use in vehicle accelerations and engine assist.
University of Bath | Introduction 11

HEV Configurations
In principal today there are two types of hybrid electric system configurations series
hybrid and parallel hybrid currently in use by automotive engineers.
Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle
The series hybrid electric system is a classification given to vehicles where an energy
transformer is placed in series with one or more electric motors for traction of the vehicle.
The main function of the internal combustion engine in this case is to generate electricity for
the battery which in turns feeds power to the traction motor either directly or by the
battery via an electric generator. This HEV configuration permits no direct mechanical
connection between the internal combustion engine and the propelling wheels. The series
hybrid electric vehicle could thus be described as being powered primarily by the electric
motor and secondarily by the internal combustion engine. Detailed in Figure 1 is a picture
of the series HEV configuration.
Figure 1: Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle

Internal combustion engines used in series HEV are generally small compared to those used
in conventional vehicles and only accounts for less than 50% of the maximum power needed
for propelling the vehicle. Several automotive companies e.g. Mitsubishi, Volvo and BMW
have explored the possibility of series hybrid electric vehicle development. Despite these in-
depth researches commercial application of the series hybrid electric vehicle development is
still very limited to heavy duty vehicles. Although series hybrid electric vehicles tend to have
a high efficiency at its engine operation, this benefit is quickly outweighed when we
consider the fact that it often requires very powerful batteries with a high energy density to
operate. The powerful batteries are needed because in most cases the motor may have to
produce 50% of the required total power demand on its own.
Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle
In the parallel configuration of HEV, both the engine and the electric motor work in
parallel to provide traction power. In this configuration the engine is mechanically
connected to the driving wheels via a gear box. The electric motor in this case is used to
support the engine during accelerations. Depending on the power of the motor, it could also
be used as the sole power source of the vehicle in idling situations and during start-ups. The
engine used in the parallel hybrid electric vehicle configuration is usually bigger than those
used in the series configuration, while the electric motor is comparatively small and less
powerful. The engines mechanical connection to the driving wheels in the parallel
configuration means it does have to follow the dynamic driving conditions of the vehicle,
thus reducing it potential for low emission levels. Detailed in Figure 2 is a picture of the

parallel HEV configuration. Parallel HEVs come in two sub configurations namely, the pre-
transmissions parallel and the post-transmissions parallel.
In the pre-transmissions parallel HEV configuration, the gear box is located on the
main drive shaft which implies that the gear speed ratios do apply to both the engine and
the electric motor. In this configuration the power summation occurs at the gear box and
torque from the electric motor is added to that of the engine at the input shaft of the gear
box. In the post transmission parallel HEV configuration the gear box is situated on the
engine shaft before the torque splitter and the electric motor, which means that the gear
speed ratios in this case only applies to the engine. In this configuration the electric motor
torque is usually added to that of the engine at the output shaft of the gear box. Should the
HEV control strategy implemented on a post transmission parallel HEV configuration require
a motor only transmission, the use of a disconnect device such as a clutch could be
employed to disengage the gear while running the electric motor independently.
Figure 2: Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle

Recent Developments on HEV
HEV development today is mostly geared towards the use of series hybrid electric
systems in heavy-duty vehicles primarily in buses and the use of parallel hybrid electric
systems for light duty vehicles. Specifically developments of the parallel hybrid electric
vehicle have focused on implementation of optimal and sub optimal control algorithms
which enable the internal combustion engine to run to only in areas of high efficiency.
In a comparative sense parallel HEVs have received more research attention
compared to the series HEV and this is as a result of the flexibility in its power train design
as well as the elimination of the need for a large traction motor in the parallel HEV
configuration. One of such development has been the implementation of the parallel hybrid
technology on an all-wheel drive vehicle as shown in Figure 3. This sort of application is
most beneficial if the internal combustion engine is used to power the rear wheels while the
electric motor is used to power the front wheels. Configuring the setup this way, means that
the high vehicle weight borne by the front wheels of the vehicle gets put to an
advantageous use during regenerative braking, thus leading to high braking energy
recapture.
Figure 3: All wheel drive parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle

The all-wheel drive parallel hybrid electric vehicle configuration also offer an advantage
when it comes to vehicle longitudinal stability control in slippery conditions .
Another recent product of parallel HEV research and development is the series
parallel hybrid electric vehicle configuration. This design depends primarily on the presence
of two electric motors and a connection between both which can be either mechanical or
electrical. Where mechanical connections are used between the electric motors this is done
using a planetary gear power splitting device. The series parallel configuration offers the
advantage and possibility of having the engine completely decoupled from the vehicle, thus
making it possible for the vehicle to be powered using just the electric motors. Its fair to say
that this advantage partially becomes offset when energy loses during conversion of
mechanical energy to electrical energy is taken in to account. Although there exist a number
of series parallel hybrid electric vehicle configurations, one popular one worth noting and
mentioning is the Toyota THS design which was first pioneered on the Toyota Prius as
shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Series/Parallel hybrid electric vehicle

2 Literature Review
HEV Modelling Approaches
Owing to environmental concerns about global warming, pollutant emissions and
foreseen scarcity of global oil supplies: high energy efficiency, low fuel consumption and
reduced pollutant emissions have remained the main market drivers of the automotive
industry in recent years
Keeping up with these stringent demands over the years have necessitated an
exponential growth in the use of computational power across the automobile industry.
There exist at least 3 main stages of computational modelling currently employed in the
development of HEVs. These stages are:-
Detailed Modelling which is performed during the research and early development
stages of the HEV. This sort of modelling centres mainly on single power train
components such as internal combustion engine and electric motor. This sort of
modelling is aimed at providing detailed information about specific characteristics of
the component being modelled.
Software in the Loop (siL) modelling which is carried out at a later stage of the HEV
development cycle, but usually before any hardware production is made. The
employment of siL today has become popular in HEV control system development.
Hardware in the loop (HiL) modelling, which is carried out once production of
controllers have been completed, and validated.
University of Bath | Literature Review 17

Three possible approaches exist for HEV modelling at the detailed modelling stage of the
development process: the kinematic or backward approach, the quasi static or forward
approach, and the dynamic approach.
Kinematic Approach
(Genta, 1997), describes the kinematic approach shown in Figure 5, as a backward
methodology where the input variables are the speed of the vehicle and the grade angle of
the road. In this method the engine speed is being determined using simple kinematic
relationships starting from the wheel revolution speed and the total transmission ratio of
the driveline. The tractive torque that should be provided to the wheels to drive the vehicle
according to the chosen speed profile can be calculated from the main vehicle
characteristics e.g. (vehicle mass, aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance).
The calculated engine torque and speed is then used alongside with a statistical fuel
consumption and NOx model to make an instantaneous fuel consumption or emissions rate
prediction. The kinematic approach makes the assumption that the vehicle meets the target
performance, so that the vehicle speed is supposed known a priori; thus enjoying the
advantage simplicity and low computational cost.
According to (Guzzella, et al., 2007) although the backward or kinematic modelling
method ensures that the driving speed profile will be exactly followed, on the other hand
there exist no guarantees that the given vehicle will actually be able to meet the desired
speed trace, since the power request is directly computed from the speed and it is not

checked against the actual power train capabilities. Another flaw of this modelling
technique is its negligence of thermal transient behaviour of engines which are noticeable
after an engine cold start.
The simplification of transient conditions as a sequence of stationary states limits this
modelling method to an option considerable mainly for preliminary estimation of vehicle
fuel consumption and emissions.
Figure 5: Information flow in a Kinematic or Backward HEV model, from
(Guzzella, et al., 2007)
Quasi Static Approach
The quasi static approach of HEV modelling as show in Figure 6 makes use of a driver
model typically a PID which compares that target vehicle speed (drive cycle speed) with the
actual speed profile, and then generates a power demand profile which is needed to follow
the target vehicle speed profile by solving the differential motion equation of the vehicle.
Once the propulsion torque and speed of the engine have been determined,
instantaneously fuel consumption can be estimated using a statistical model as already
explained in the kinematic or backward approach.

Figure 6: Information flow in a quasi-static powertrain model (Guzzella, et al., 2007)
The suitability and accuracy of the quasi-static modelling approach depends very
much on nature of simulation studies to be conducted. Studies according to (Vassallo, et al.)
show that the quasi-static modelling approach provides reasonable accuracy when it comes
to the evaluation of the fuel consumption and NOx of a vehicle equipped with conventional
power train. (Vassallo, et al.), however also pointed out in that same study that using the
same approach for the same driving cycle and power train, will yield less accurate results for
the prediction of soot emissions. The research study further explained that for pollutants
like soot, that the acceleration transients and related turbo-lag phenomena significantly
contribute to the cycle cumulative emissions, thus necessitating a more detailed engine
simulation model which is capable of properly capturing engine transient behaviour in more
details.

Dynamic Approach
In the dynamic modelling approach, the internal combustion engine behaviour
during transients is also modelled in addition to the longitudinal vehicle dynamics. The
engine transient behaviour is modelled by means of a detailed one dimensional fluid
dynamic model. For example the intake and exhaust systems of the internal combustion
engine in the dynamic modelling approach are represented as a network of ducts connected
by the junctions that represent either physical joints between the ducts, such as area
changes or volumes or subsystems such as the engine cylinder. Solutions to the equations
governing the conservation of mass, momentum and energy flow for each element of the
network can then be obtained using a finite difference technique. This makes it possible for
highly dynamic events such as abrupt vehicle accelerations to be properly and reliably
simulated with reasonable accuracy as shown in the research work of (Pettiti, et al., 2007).

HEV Control Strategies
HEVs have been shown to significantly improve automotive fuel economy and reduce
emissions whilst still meeting drivers power demand, maintaining satisfactory vehicle
performance, and driver feel (Ehsani, et al., 2004) . Regardless of the HEV configuration in
question employing the right power split between the energy sources (ICE and electric
motor) is crucial to the achievement of an improved fuel economy and reduced emissions.
To this attempt several power split control strategies have been proposed, evaluated and
employed to different HEV configurations. Typically inputs to the power split controller of
HEVs often include drivers power demand, vehicle speed or acceleration, battery state of
charge, present road load, and in some occasions intelligent future traffic condition from
Global Positioning System (GPS). The controller outputs signal contain set of control
decisions which specify whether or not the HEV should operate in any of the following
modes:-
1. Engine only mode (Engine operates alone)
2. Assist mode (ICE and electric motor operates)
3. Electric motor only mode (Electric motor operates alone)
4. Regenerative mode (Electric motor is used for kinetic energy recovery)
5. Recharge control mode (Engine produces power used in charging electric batteries)
Minimization of fuel consumption and emissions without a compromise of vehicle
performance, and battery state of charge are often the main control objective of most HEV
control strategies. HEV control strategies could be broadly classified in to rule based control

strategy and optimization-based control strategy as detailed in the control strategy
classification chart in Figure 7.
Figure 7: HEV Control Strategy Classification
Rule Based Control Strategy
Rule based control strategy is the most common way of implementing a real time
supervisory control in an HEV. The control rules are often based on human intelligence,
heuristics or mathematical models and are aimed at the objective of enabling the ICE to
operate at high efficiency points as well as enabling energy recuperation via regenerative
braking.
Rule based controllers are generally unable to guarantee the optimality of the
solution found, as well as satisfy the desired final integral constraint for example charge
sustainability. In order to remedy this, the control rules must make sure that the integral

constraint (SOC) remains between its prescribed lower and upper bounds. Rule based
control strategies are easy to form and implement on running vehicles as they are often
made up of If then control statements. Notwithstanding the simplicity, rule based
controllers could be made robust by making the rules detailed and complex enough to take
care of any special event that may affect the vehicle.
In the rule based controller there exist no standard way of making the control rules
and no way to determine a priori that the given set of rules is appropriate for the given
application, however there is a possibility that the rule based control could be used in
conjunction with other algorithm based control e.g. optimal control. Rule based controllers
could further be subcategorized in to deterministic rule based and fuzzy rule based control
strategy. In the deterministic rule based control strategy, rules are decided with the aid of a
fuel economy or emissions map of the engine in question. Implementations of these are
often performed via pre-computed look up tables.
2.2.1.1 Electric Assist Rule Based Control Strategy
One of the most successfully applied deterministic rule based HEV control strategies
is the electric assist control strategy. In this strategy the ICE works as the sole source of
power supply and the electric motor is only used to supply additional power when
demanded by the vehicle. In many of the widely employed rule based control strategy the
following rules apply:-

1. Below a certain vehicle power demand, the vehicle works purely as an electric
vehicle (EV) and only the electric motor is made to supply all total power demand.
This rule is generally set to avoid the engine operating in low engine efficiency
points. The possibility of this rule however depends on the size of the electric motor
and batteries employed on the HEV.
2. The electric motor is used for power assist, should the vehicle power request exceed the
maximum engine power, at the engines operating speed.
3. The electric motor charges the battery during regenerative braking
4. The ICE is made to produce an extra torque to sustain the battery SOC should the battery
SOC go below the set minimum value of SOC.
2.2.1.2 Adaptive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy
Fuzzy logic controllers in general originate from rule based controllers, however in fuzzy
logic controller the linguistic representation of the control inputs are converted in to
numerical representation with membership function in the fuzzification and defuzzification
process.
(Schouten, et al., 2003) using the fuzzy logic technique developed a fuel optimization
control strategy for parallel HEVs. Their method is mainly based on efficiency optimization
of the different parts of the vehicle which includes the engine, the electric motor, and the
battery. Considering the battery SOC, the output of the controller is used to track the work
of the vehicle parts so as to ensure that they work at a high efficiency point.

The adaptive fuzzy control strategy is becoming increasingly popular in automotive
applications on HEV, because it creates the possibility for the simultaneous optimization of
fuel efficiency and emissions. Despite the promise of optimization using this technique, it is
important to note that fuel economy and emissions are often conflicting objectives and as
such an optimal solution cannot be achieved to the satisfaction of all objectives. An
application of adaptive fuzzy logic controllers in solving conflicting objective control
problems including NOx, CO and HC emissions have been demonstrated in the research
work of (Rajagopalan, et al., 2003).
(Poursamad, et al., 2008) also successfully applied the concept of adaptive fuzzy logic
control in solving a multi-objective (fuel consumption and emissions) HEV energy
management problem. In this study they proposed a genetic-fuzzy control strategy which
works by employing the genetic-algorithm to tune the already decided fuzzy logic
membership functions.
2.2.1.3 Predictive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy
The predictive fuzzy logic utilizes prior information about a planned driving trip. This
information is often acquired with the aid of a Global Positioning Systems (GPS) which
provides knowledge about the type of obstacles that the vehicle is bound to encounter e.g.
heavy traffic, and steep grade etc. The predictive fuzzy logic controller utilizes this
information to execute control actions which account for the specific situation observed by
the GPS. Typical inputs to the predictive fuzzy logic controller are vehicle speed, speed state
of the window in a look-ahead window and the elevation of the sampled points along a

predetermined route from the GPS. The predictive fuzzy logic controller calculates the
optimal ICE torque contribution for each vehicle speed based on the available history of the
vehicles motion and speculation of the possible vehicles motion in future. It then outputs a
normalized GPS signal in the order of (-1, +1) which detects whether the battery should be
charge or discharged respectively.
Optimization Based Control Strategy
Optimization based control strategies decide the control signals which either in the
global optimization case: minimizes the sum of the objective function over time or in the
local optimization case: instantaneously minimizes the cost function. In this type of control
strategy a set mathematical technique is used in calculating a sequence of control actions
such that the optimization criterion is met, be it the minimization of the integral cost
function or instantaneous minimization of the cost function for every time step.
The effectiveness of a global optimal control technique relies solely on the knowledge of
the entire driving cycle a priori, and since this is usually difficult to determine in real life,
global optimal techniques are usually referred to as non-causal which cannot be applied in
real time but is useful as a control benchmark to which all other causal real time controllers
could be compared to. Linear programming, dynamic programming and genetic algorithms
etc. have been applied as global optimization techniques for optimal energy management of
HEVs.

Global Optimization Based Control Strategy
2.2.2.1 Linear Programming Optimal Control Strategy

Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy
(Tate, et al.) employed the use of linear programming in solving HEV energy management
problems. In this study the non-linear fuel optimization model of the HEV is approximated
and solved using linear programming, and was shown to lead to a globally optimized
solution. The approximation of the optimization model however poses a problem when
considering the application of linear programming method to solving energy management
problems for other HEV architectures than the series architecture.
2.2.2.2 Dynamic Programming Optimal Control Strategy
The dynamic programming technique is a technique originally developed by Bellman
which aims to find optimal control policies using a multi-stage decision process. As defined
by Bellman the principle of optimality could be expressed verbally thus:-
An optimal control policy has the property that no matter what the previous decision
(i.e., controls) have been, the remaining decisions must constitute an optimal policy
with regard to the state resulting from those previous decisions (Lewis, et al., 1995.)
Dynamic programming algorithm is a discrete multi-stage optimization problem which a
decision based on the optimization criterion is chosen from a finite number of decision
variables at each time step.

Mathematically the Bellman principle of optimality could be expressed thus:
Considering a discrete system:-
+1 = ( , ) Equation 2.1
Whose control policy is = { , , . } where ( ) for all
The cost of starting at 0 is
(0 ) = ( ) + (, ) Equation 2.2
=0
is the instantaneous cost function
The optimal cost function is the cost function that minimizes the cost function in Equation
2.2 such

That (0 ) = ( )
0
The optimal control policy = {0 , 1 ..1

) is such that (0 ) = (0 ) .
Bellmans dynamic programming algorithm could be applied using 2 methods which are the
backward recursive method and the forward method.
In the backward recursive method the optimal sequence of control actions is
obtained proceeding backwards from the final state and choosing at each time step the path
that minimizes the cost to go (Integral cost from the time step until the final state). By
symmetry most dynamic programming problems solved using the backward recursive
method could also be solved using the forward dynamic programming technique. Although
both techniques do lead to the same set of optimal control policies for the entire problem,
but there is a difference in the by-products produced by both methods. When solving a
problem using the backward dynamic programming technique, the by-products obtained
are the optimal values from every state in every stage to the end; whereas in solving a
problem by forward dynamic programming, the corresponding by-products would be the
optimal values from the initial states(s) in the first stage to every state in the remaining
states.
The multi-stage decision in Figure 1 represents an aircraft routing network. A and B
represent the initial and final cites respectively which are connected by other nodes: C, D, E,
F G, H and I which represent the intermediate cities. The problem here is to find the path
from A to B which ensures that the aircraft goes from A to B in the shortest time assuming
that the travel time for each leg of the journey is represented by the number next to it.
Figure 8: Multi Decision Process
Considering the size of the problem it is possible to consider all possibilities and then pick
the one which corresponds to the minimum travel time, however this involves lots of
computational time and in cases where lots of decision possibilities are involved then the
problem could be impossible to solve using brute force computation under a reasonable
time frame. Using the Bellmans principle of optimality it is possible to reduce the number of
evaluations needed to solve the shortest path problem in Figure 8.

Using the backward recursive method or the forward dynamic programming method the
dynamic programming algorithm solves the optimization problem using the following steps:-
1. Divide the entire route in to several stages,
2. Find the optimal route for each stage and
3. Finally, using the principle of optimality, combine the different optimal segments in
to one single optimal route or (trajectory).
To further understand the application of the backward dynamic programming recursive
method in solving optimization problems, a detailed solution of the problem outlined in
Figure 8 is provided below. Source (Subbaram Naidu, 2002).
Stage 5: k = k f = N = 4
This is just the starting point, there is only one city B and hence there is no cost involved.
Stage 4: k = 3
There are two cities H and I at this stage and we need to find the most economical route
from this stage to stage 5. Working backward, we begin with B which can be reached by H or
I. It takes 2 units to fly from H to B by using control or decision u = -1 (downward or right)
and hence let us place the number 2 within parenthesis under H. Similarly, it takes 3 units to
fly from I to B by using control or decision u = +1 (upward or left) and hence place the
number 3 just near to I. Let us also place an arrow head to the corresponding paths or
routes. Note there is no other way of flying from H to B and I to B except as shown by the
arrows.
Stage 3: k = 2

Here, there are three cities E, F, G and from these nodes we can fly to H and I. Consider first
E. The total cost to fly from E to B will be 2 + 4 = 6 by using control or decision u = -1
(downward or right) and let us place units 6 in parenthesis at the node E. Secondly, from F,
we can take two routes F, H, Band F, I, B, by using decisions u = + 1 (upward or left) and u = -
1 (downward or right) and the corresponding costs are 2 + 3 = 5 and 3 + 5 = 8, respectively.
Note, that we placed 5 instead of 8 at the node F and an arrow head on the segment F H to
indicate the optimal cost to fly the route F, H, B instead of the costlier route F, I, B. Finally,
consider G. There is only one route which is G, I, B to go to B starting from G. The cost is the
cost to fly from G to I and the cost to fly from I to B.
Stage 2: k = 1 by the same procedure as explained above, we see that the node C has
minimum cost 9 and the node D has minimum cost 7.
Stage 1: k = 0
Here, note that from A, the two segments AC and AD have the same minimum cost
indicating either route is economical.
Optimal Solution
This is easy to find, we just follow the route of the arrow heads from A to B. Note that there
are two routes to go from stage 0 to stage 1. Thus, the most economical (optimal) route is A,
C, F, H, B or A, D, F, H, B. The total minimum cost is 11 units.

Application of dynamic programming to HEVs
The application of dynamic programming to solving the energy management
problem in HEV has been shown in the research work of (Brahma, et al., 2000) and (Perez,
et al., 2009). (Johannesson, et al.) in their research work have further improved the dynamic
programming algorithm in order to make it more robust. They modelled the speed input
signal in the form of Markov Chain and then applied the dynamic programming algorithm
to the HEV model to obtain the optimal control signal.
In order to apply dynamic programming to solving energy management problems
for HEVs the problem needs to be formulated as detailed below:-
+1 = ( , ) Equation 2.3
Where is the vector of control variables Output power request from electric motor.
is the vector of state variables of the system Battery state of charge. The sampling time
has been selected to be one second.
The aim of optimization is to find the optimal input which minimizes the total
cost function over the entire driving cycle. The cost function could be single objective (fuel
consumption) or multi-objective (fuel consumption and emissions). For HEVs the cost
function to be minimized could be expressed as:-
= = ( , ) Equation 2.4
=0
where is the time length of the driving cycle and is the instantaneous fuel consumption
rate. Limitations in the operating range of the electric motor and the battery means that
constraints must be applied to the state (battery SOC) and control policies (electric motor

torque) as shown below in order to ensure that both the electric motor and battery operate
within their lower and upper bounds.
State Constraint
_ ( , ) _ ( , ) Control Constraint
Setting up an HEV energy management problem in the fashion outlined in Equation 2.4
means that the optimization algorithm will tend to deplete the battery state of charge
() in order to attain a minimal fuel consumption, however if there is need for the
maintenance of the battery state of charge at the end of the driving cycle then a final state
constraint on the SOC should be imposed. This adds a soft quadratic penalty function to the
overall cost function outlined in Equation 2.4 such that the new cost function for the charge
sustaining optimization problem becomes;
= = ( , ) + (() )2 Equation 2.5

=0
Where is the desired () at the final time and is the weighting factor.
Dynamic programming Solution to HEVs
In order to find a solution to the optimal control problem of HEVs using dynamic
programming a grid of possible power splits, or solution candidates is created as shown In
Figure 9.

Figure 9: Sequence of feasible power splits in dynamic programming for HEVs:

Source (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009)
Using the backward recursive method the problem (proceeding backwards from the
end of the driving cycle()), the optimal cost to go is calculated at each grid point and
stored in the cost matrix. The procedure is extended to the next grid point ( 1), and the
cost to go at that grid point is calculated using Equation 2.6.

( ) = [(1 ), 1 + ( )] Equation 2.6
Once the procedure has been applied to the entire drive cycle, the path with the lowest
total cost represents the optimal solution.

2.2.2.3 Pontryagins Minimum Principle Control Strategy
The Pontryagin minimum principle is a special case of Euler-Lagrange equation of the
calculus of variations. The principle stipulates that the optimal solution to the global
optimization problem must satisfy the condition of optimality.
Pontryagins minimum principle has been successfully applied by (Namwook, et al., 2011) in
solving HEV energy management problem. The successful application of the PMP
(Pontryagins minimum principle) depends importantly on the formulation of the optimal
control problem to be solved.
Given a plant with equation:-
= ( , , ) Equation 2.7
Where is the plant state and is the plant control input.
The performance index for the plant depicted in Equation 2.7 could be written in Equation
2.8 below thus:-

= ( , ) + ( , , ) Equation 2.8
0
And the boundary conditions as
(0 ) = 0 and ( ) =
The optimal solution for the performance index in Equation 2.8 could be obtained using the
following steps:-
Step 1: Form the Pontryagin (Hamiltonian) function thus:-

( , , , ) = ( , , ) + ( , , ) Equation 2.9
Step 2: Minimize the (Hamiltonian) such that ( )
( , , , ) ( , , , ) Equation 2.10
Step 3: Solve the set of state and costate equations below:-

= ( ) , = ( )

With boundary conditions 0 ([ + ( )] ) + ([() ] ) = 0

Application of Pontryagin Minimum principle to HEVs
For HEV applications the PMP problem formulation detailed above is adapted thus:-
Step 1:
The Hamiltonian function is formed as shown in Equation 2.11.
, )
( , , , ) = ( ) + ( Equation 2.11
= ( ) Electric motor power (KW)
( ) = Fuel Consumption ( )
= Costate
= time
= Battery State of charge at time (t)

Step 2: For optimality to be ensured the control inputs are chosen so that the
Hamiltonian condition below is satisfied:-
( , , , ) ( , , , ) Equation 2.12
Subject to the following constraints
Control constraint:
State constraint:
Final state constraint: (0 ) = ( ) : Applicable only in a charge sustaining HEV control
problem.
Step 3: The state and costate equation below is solved below with boundary conditions:

0 ( = 0) ([ + ( )] ) + ([() ] ) = 0

State Equation
= ( ) = ()
=

where, = Battery Current and = Maximum Battery Charge (Ampere- hour)
Costate Equation

= ( )

The boundary condition outlined in step 3 above ensures that any final state constraint is
met e.g in a charge sustaining situation where: (0 ) = ( ) or (0 = ) .

Real time Optimization Based Control Strategy
2.2.2.4 Model Predictive Control Strategy
Model predictive control (MPC) makes explicit use of a model of the plant process in
order to obtain the control signal which minimizes the objective function. Model predictive
control generally represents the solution of a standard optimal control problem over a finite
horizon, performed online using a model to predict the effect of a control on the system
output.
It works by instantaneously calculating the optimal control for the prediction horizon
but only applying the first element; then at the next time step, the prediction horizon is
displaced towards the future. The working principle of MPC relies heavily on high model
accuracy, as well as priori knowledge of reference trajectories which isnt directly possible in
vehicular applications. However, MPC have been shown by (Salman, et al., 2005) et.al to be
an effective real time predictive optimal controller when used with a navigation system. The
information supplied by the navigation system, corresponding to future states is sampled in
the look-ahead window along a planned route, and then optimal control theory is applied to
solve the energy management problem in real time using a preview driving pattern and
driving route information.
A detailed implementation steps for MPC is outlined in Implementation of Model
Predictive Control Strategy Extracted from (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009).

Implementation of Model Predictive Control Strategy
Figure 10: Sample reference trajectory, actual trajectory, and control sequence for MPC:
Source (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009)
1. The future outputs y for a determined horizon Np, called the prediction horizon, are
predicted at each instant k using the process model. These predicted outputs y(k + i|
k), i = 1, ..., Np depend on the known values up to instant k (past inputs and outputs)
and on the future control signals u(k + i | k), i = 0, ..., Nc - 1, which are those to be
sent to the system and to be calculated. Np indicates the length of the prediction
horizon and Nc Np is the length of the control horizon (expressed in number of time
steps).
2. The set of future control signals (from time k to time k + Nc - 1) is calculated by
optimizing a given criterion in order to keep the process as close as possible to the
reference trajectory or set point. This criterion usually takes the form of a quadratic

function of the errors between the predicted output and the reference trajectory. The
control effort is included in the objective function in most cases. An explicit solution
can be obtained if the criterion is quadratic, the model is linear and there are no
constraints, otherwise an iterative optimization method has to be used.
3. The control signal u(k | k) (i.e., the control at time k calculated based on the
information available at time k) is sent to the process while the next control signals
(u(k + 1 | k), u(k + 2 | k) etc.) are calculated but not used, because at the next
sampling instant y(k + 1) will be known and thus the optimal control value will be
recalculated. The procedure is repeated with this new value and the entire sequence
is brought up to date. Then u(k + 1|k + 1) is calculated (which in principle will be
different from u(k + 1 | k) because of the new information available) using the
receding horizon concept.
Few researchers have successfully applied MPC to the energy management of HEVs one
of those being (Back, et al., 2002) who attempted this application on a parallel HEV. In their
computation they assumed a constant speed and using GPS information was able to
estimate the road slope during the prediction horizon. Dynamic programming was then
used to obtain the optimal control sequence which minimizes the integral of the cost
function, which could represent the total fuel consumption in the single objective case or
fuel consumption and emissions in the multi-objective case. (Nuijten, et al., 2003) also
successfully applied a similar approach the receding horizon dynamic programming on a
conventional vehicle with a 42-volts electric power net and an alternator which is able to
supplement torque to the driveline as in when needed. (Vito, et al., 2007) also presented a

similar approach on a fuel cell hybrid vehicle. In this study, the MPC algorithm uses the
linearized model of the fuel cell to predict its dynamic response thus deciding what battery
power is needed in order to satisfy drivers demand while still minimizing the objective
function.

3 HEV Modelling and Control
Modelling Purpose
In a control application where reduction in fuel consumption is the primary objective,
it is important to develop vehicle models with a robust and accurate ability to predict fuel
consumption even under rapid transients.
This chapter will compose mainly of the development and control of an aftermarket
parallel hybrid electric vehicle in a Matlab/Simulink environment. The vehicle sub systems
aim to model to a high level of accuracy vehicle components which significantly affects fuel
consumption. Presentation of the vehicle model implementation as well preliminary
simulation and validation against experimental data will also be presented in this chapter.
Finally the chapter ends with the implementation of a simple electric assist rule based
control strategy which aims to reduce fuel consumption instantaneously.
Description of drive train architecture
The drive train to be further analysed throughout this report is introduced in Figure 11 and
it features an aftermarket parallel hybrid electric vehicle. The term aftermarket refers to the
addition of non-factory hybridization kits or accessories to a vehicle with the aim of
improving its fuel economy and reducing emissions.
The main concept behind the aftermarket electric hybridization is that an electric motor is
added to a conventional vehicle with the aim of improving fuel economy and reducing
University of Bath | HEV Modelling and Control 43

emissions whilst not voiding the manufacturers warranty of the vehicle. Unlike
conventional hybrid electric vehicles which have a central control unit capable of controlling
the engine and other machines on the vehicle e.g. the electric motor, the aftermarket
electric hybrid controls are only limited to electric motor thus ensuring that the overall
conventional vehicle warranty is preserved. This however implies that in the aftermarket
hybrid electric system the engine is always idling and cannot be switched off when not in
use to drive the road load e.g. during a motor only mode or when the vehicle is on a stand
still e.g. in a traffic condition or when the vehicle is braking.
Figure 11: Aftermarket parallel hybrid electric vehicle
In the HEV configuration shown in Figure 11 the electric motor is attached as a separate
subsystem to the axle leading out of the gear box. This means that the electric motor is
always in motion as long as the vehicle wheels are in motion.
Each time the vehicle wheel rotates at speed the electric motor rotates at a speed of
where:-
: Final drive ratio ( > 1)
: Motor gear ratio ( > 1)
: Wheel rotation speed

The speed scale up from the vehicle wheels to the electric motor as describe above means
that at high vehicle wheel speeds, the electric motor may be forced to rotate at speeds
outside it safe range of operation, thus risking the possibility of destroying the electric
motor. This problem however, could be curbed by limiting the speed range of the vehicle.
Driver Modelling
The driver in this HEV model is designed as a simple PID controller with the addition of an
anti-windup on the Integrator to prevent saturation. At each simulation time the extra
wheel torque needed for the vehicle to achieve the requested vehicle speed is calculated as
shown below:-
( )
= ( ) + ( ) +
Equation 3.1
Where:
: Torque needed to enable the vehicle meet the required speed trace
: Cycle Speed (m/s)
: Vehicle Speed (m/s)
: Proportional Gain
: Integral Gain
: Differential Gain

The cycle speed is given as a look up table of speed and time trace. The gain values are
tuned using parameter estimation in MATLAB to find the values which best enables the
vehicles follow the required speed-time trace. This driver model is only suitable for
comparative studies and cannot be used for specific driver behaviour analysis.
Detailed in Figure 12 is the driver subsystem implementation in Simulink.
gear_demand [gear_demand]
cycle_gear_demand cy cle_gear_demand Goto1
wheel torque (Nm) [wheel_torque]
Goto2
cycle_speed_demand
cy cle_speed_demand (km/h) Shif t_f lag [-] [shift_flag]
Goto9
chassis_dyno_speed_dmd
Speed Signal [speed_signal]
Goto13
[vehicle_velocity] v ehicle_v elocity (m/s)
Power demand (w) [Power_demand]

From2
Goto15
Driver Subsystem
Figure 12: Driver subsystem Implementation in Simulink

Vehicle Dynamics Modelling
A vehicle typically consists of thousands of components most of which come from
various manufacturers, making it difficult, extremely time consuming and sometimes
impossible to model a vehicle completely at a component level. However, for the purpose of
a control strategy development a sophisticated mechanical and mathematical model
representing the longitudinal performance of the vehicle will be outlined in details in this
section.
Detailed below are the data used in modelling the Aftermarket parallel hybrid electric
vehicle which will be detailed subsequently in this section.
Vehicle Description
Vehicle Type Citroen Berlingo

Vehicle Model LX 625 L1
Fuel Diesel
Engine 1.6HDi 90hp
Transmission Gear 1 11/38
Gear 2 15/28
Gear 3 32/37
Gear 4 45/37
Gear 5 50/33
FD 17/73

Vehicle Parameters
Wheel radius 0.307 meters
Drag Coefficient 0.35
Frictional Coefficient 0.001
Vehicle mass 1360 Kg
Final drive ratio 4.2941
Car frontal area 22
Drive train efficiency 0.9
Maximum Engine Speed 6500 RPM
Battery Parameters
Battery Capacity 16 Ampere hours
Battery Resistance 0.024 Ohms
Minimum State of Charge 20
Maximum State of Charge 80
Electric Motor Parameters
Max Motor Speed 4400 RPM
Motor Gear Ratio 1.178
Environmental Parameters
Air Density 1.1765 g/3

Air Velocity 1.178
2
Coefficient of Gravity 9
Vehicle Movement
According to Newtons second law, the vehicle acceleration could be expressed thus:- for a
conventional vehicle.
( + + )
= Equation 3.2

Where:
: Tractive force of vehicle tyres from Engine (N)
: Rolling resistance force on all the vehicle wheels (N)
: Resistance force by grade (N)
: Aero dynamic drag force (N)
: Effective mass of vehicle (Kg)
: Acceleration (Rate of change of speed m/s2)
: Mass factor which is an effect of rotating components in a powertrain
: Drive train efficiency
In the case of the aftermarket hybrid vehicle in question, the vehicle longitudinal dynamics
could be expressed as follows:-

+ ( + + )
= Equation 3.3

The conventional vehicle acceleration as shown in Equation 3.2 could be further expressed
as:-
( ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.4

The acceleration for the aftermarket hybrid electric vehicle shown in Equation 3.3 could be
expressed as:-
( ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.5

In both Equation 3.4 and Equation 3.5 the following terms apply:-
: Final drive ratio
: Gear ratio
: Tractive force from internal combustion engine
: Motor force
: Motor gear ratio
The subsequent sub-sections will aim to define and drive mathematical equations
representing; , , as shown in Equation 3.2 to Equation 3.5.

3.4.1.1Rolling Resistance( )
When a vehicle is in forward motion, the movement produced by the forward shift of the
ground reaction force is called the rolling resistant moment as shown in Equation 3.6 below.
= Equation 3.6
Where:-
: Coefficient of Friction
: Normal load acting on the centre of the rolling wheel.
: Radius of rolling wheels
: Rolling resistant moment
To keep the wheel rolling, a force acting through the centre of the wheel is
required to balance the rolling moment. This force could be expressed thus as shown in
Equation 3.7:-
( = ) Equation 3.7
The coefficient of friction is a function of the tyre material, tire structure, tire
temperature, tire inflation pressure, tire geometry, road materials and the presence or
absence of liquids on the road.

3.4.1.2 Aerodynamic Force ( )
A vehicle travelling at a particular speed in air encounters a force resisting its motion.
This force known as aerodynamic drag results mainly from two components: shape drag and
skin friction.
Shape Drag:-
The forward motion of the vehicle pushes the air in front of it. Since the air is unable
to move out of the way, the air pressure tends to increase with the vehicle speed, thus
resulting in high air pressure in front of the vehicle. At the rear of the vehicle, the air behind
cannot instantaneously fill the space left by the forward motion of the vehicle, thus creating
areas of low pressure behind the vehicle. The resultant motion therefore creates 2 zones of
pressure that oppose the motion of the vehicle by pushing it forward in the front and
backward at the back, thus causing a shape drag.
Skin Drag:-
In the case of skin drag, air close to the skin of the vehicle moves almost at the same
speed with vehicle, while air far from the vehicle remains still. On the in between, air
molecules move at a range of speeds. The difference in speed between both air molecules
produces a skin drag effect.
Aerodynamic force ( ), is a function of the vehicle speed, vehicle frontal area, vehicle
density and coefficient of air drag.
This could be expressed mathematically as detailed in Equation 3.8:-

= 0.5 ( )2 Equation 3.8
Where:
: Air density
: Vehicle frontal area
: Aerodynamic drag coefficient
: Vehicle velocity
: Velocity of the air
(); +ve when the air velocity is opposite to the vehicle speed and ve when it is in the same
direction as the vehicle speed.
3.4.1.3 Grading Resistance ( )
As a vehicle goes up or down a slope, its weight produces a component, which is
always directed to the downward direction. This component either opposes the forward
motion (grade climbing or helps the forward motion (grade descending)).
The grading resistance could be expressed as mgsin:
Where:
: Effective mass of the vehicle (kg)
: Gravitational constant (m/s2)
sin : Sine component of the inclined vehicle angle.

Aftermarket Parallel HEV operating modes
With HEV configuration discussed in chapter 3.2, there exists the possibility of the following
modes of operation:
1. Regenerative braking
2. Power assist
3. Motor only
4. Recharge control
5. Engine only
In the regenerative braking mode as shown in Figure 13 the HEV uses the electric motor to
recover kinetic braking energy which would otherwise have been lost as heat to the
mechanical brakes. The captured braking kinetic energy is stored in the battery for use
during the motor only mode or power assist mode. The amount of energy recovery possible
at any instant is a function of the following factors:
1. Magnitude of braking power request
2. Battery state of charge
3. The maximum regenerative power available at a particular motor speed
The vehicle dynamics equation during the HEV regenerative braking mode could be
summarized in Equation 3.9.
( ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.9


Figure 13: Parallel HEV regenerative braking power flow
In the power assist HEV mode shown in Figure 14 the electric motor operates to
assist the engine in regions of low engine efficiency and high vehicle power request. The
amount of assist the electric motor is able to provide in this mode is dependent on the
following:-
2. Maximum level of tractive power available at a particular motor speed
3. Magnitude of tractive power request
The vehicle dynamics equation during the HEV power assist mode could be summarized in
Equation 3.10 below.
( + ) ( + + ) Equation
=
3.10
Where: the magnitude of for the power assist is+.

Figure 14: Parallel HEV power-assist power flow
In the motor only mode shown in Figure 15, the HEV operates mainly as an electric
vehicle, while the engine is disengaged from the drive train by means of a clutch and
allowed to idle. Operating the HEV in this mode means that the entire energy which drives
the drivetrain comes from the batteries.
Factors which determine the HEVs ability to perform in this mode are as follows:-
2. Maximum level of tractive power available at a particular motor speed
3. Magnitude of tractive power request
Figure 15: Parallel HEV motor only power flow

The vehicle dynamics equation during the HEV motor only control mode could be
summarized in Equation 3.11 below.
( ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.11

In the recharge control mode as shown in Figure 16, the engine is used to drive the
road load, maintain the drive cycle speed request as well as recharge the batteries via the
electric motor. Operating an HEV in this mode imposes an extra cost (Fuel consumption and
Emissions) on it which is one of the reason operating the HEV in this mode is strongly
disapproved off except on occasions where the battery SOC (state of charge) has dropped
below the recommended lower boundary and needs to be brought back up to at least its
lower boundary so as to avoid damaging the battery cells.
The vehicle dynamics equation during the HEV recharge control mode could be summarized
in Equation 3.12 below.
( + ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.12

Where: the magnitude of for the recharge control mode is .
Figure 16: Parallel HEV recharge control power flow

In the Engine only mode as shown in Figure 17 below, the HEV load and speed
request are met solely by the internal combustion engine and the electric motor is left
rotating at the speed of ( ).
Where:-
: Final drive ratio ( > 1)
: Motor gear ratio ( > 1)
: Wheel rotation speed
Figure 17: Parallel HEV engine only power flow
The vehicle dynamics equation during the HEV engine only control mode could be
summarized in Equation 3.13 below.
( ) ( + + )
= Equation 3.13


Detailed below in Figure 18 is an implementation of the Vehicle dynamics calculation in
Simulink:
[wheel_torque] wheel torque (Nm)

v ehicle v elocity (m/s) [vehicle_velocity]
From4
Goto
[shift_flag] shif t f lag (-)
From11
[speed_signal] speed_signalWheel Tractiv e Force - Engine (N) -T-
From13 Goto3
[Motor_Torque] Motor Torque (Nm)
From7
Wheel Braking f orce (N)
[current_mode] Current_mode Terminator
From22
Vehicle Dynamics
Figure 18: Vehicle dynamics implementation in Simulink
Electric machine modelling
There exists a different range of electrical machines depending on the area of
application. Generally electric machines could be categorized mainly in to (DC and AC
machines, synchronous, asynchronous, etc.). For the purpose of powertrain control strategy
development, electrical machines could be modelled using a system level approach which
makes use of a 0D black box model to find the mechanical efficiency of the electrical
machine at each torque and speed point. The efficiency of the electrical machine, detailed in
Equation 3.14 (, ) is dynamically adjusted with respect to speed () and torque().
Depending on the instantaneous torque and speed a look up table will estimate the
mechanical efficiency of the machine.

The electrical power drawn from the battery by the electrical machine could be
modelled thus:-
= (, ) = (, ) Equation 3.14
Where:-
: Electric motor electrical power (KW)
: Electric motor mechanical power (KW)
(, ) : Electric motor efficiency function of speed and torque
: Electric motor speed (RPM)
: Electric motor Torque (Nm)
Figure 19 and Figure 20 shows the electric motor efficiency map both in traction and
regeneration. There exist a maximum torque for each electric motor speed point and this
could be shown inform of the limitations detailed below:-
Limitations to electrical machines
Traction : ( () ())
: ( )
Regenerative Braking : ( () ())
: ( )

The blue line in both Figure 19 and Figure 20 represent the maximum torque which
is attainable at each motor speed. The red line in Figure 20 represents the optimal braking
torque-speed curve which represents the point at each motor speed for which the greatest
energy recovery is obtained during regenerative braking.
Figure 19: Efficiency Map (Electric Motor Traction)
Figure 20: Efficiency Map (Electric Motor Regeneration)
Detailed in Figure 21 is a pictorial overview of the electrical subsystem implementation in
Simulink.

62
October 22, 2012
University of Bath | HEV Modelling and Control

3
Motor Speed (RPM)
Figure 21: Electrical subsystem implementation in Simulink

1
vehicle velocity (m/s)
[motor_speed]
[motor_torque]
motor_gear_ratio Goto
Goto1
Constant2
final_drive_ratio
2*pi/60
Constant1 Saturation2
Constant motor speed (rads/s) Saturation1
Wheel Circumf erence motor torque (Nm)
Wheel Circumference (m)2 K Ts
motor speed (rpm) cumulative_motor_power
60 z-1
Discrete-Time To Workspace
Constant5 Motor_Power Integrator2
2 To Workspace2
min
Motor Mechanical Power Demand (W)
Motor Traction Force
MPhil Transfer Report
MinMax
maximum_motor_power wheel_radius
Constant3 wheel radius (m)1
motor_traction_force
Scope1 motor traction force
To Workspace1
[motor_speed] Motor_Speed
Motor Speed (RPM)
From
Motor_Ef f (2) >= 0 2
Battery Power (w)
[motor_torque] Motor_Torque Switch Manual Switch
Motor Torque (Nm) Motor Efficiency
Saturation Battery Power
Use Switch to include Battery Efficiency
From1
0.5 Product
Motor Efficiency Map
Constant4
[motor_torque] 1
Motor Torque (Nm)
From2
Battery Modelling
Many models have been developed to represent the actual behaviour of the battery.
The simplest form of these models is centred on the batterys electrochemistry.
Electrochemical battery models ignore thermodynamic and quanta effects and
consequently are unable to model phenomena such as the time rate of change of voltage
under load. They are also unable to represent the batterys temperature and age effects.
The Shepherd model detailed below in Equation 3.15 is a well know and extensively used
form of the Electrochemical Battery.
= (1 ) Equation 3.15
Where:-
: Battery terminal voltage (volts)
: Open circuit voltage of a battery cell when fully charge (volts)
: Internal resistance of the battery (ohms)
: Battery Current (amps)
: Polarization resistance (ohms)
: Accumulate ampere-hours divided by the full battery capacity
Another well-known battery model type which is commonly used in HEV control strategy
development is the equivalent circuit battery model. In this sort of battery model, the
capacity of the battery is modelled by a capacitor, the effect of the voltage deviation in the

battery terminal is caused by temperature, and the battery state of charge is modelled by
means of variable resistors and controlled voltage sources.
The modelling approach taken in this research work is a simplified form of the circuit
battery model as will be shown in the upcoming sections:-
Battery Power load estimation
In a typical discharge and charge operation in an HEV, the power flow to and from the
battery could be modelled thus:-
Discharge: = ( ) (, )
Charge : = ( ) (, )
Where:
: Battery power
: Battery efficiency
: Motor tractive power
: Motor regenerative power
(, ) : Motor efficiency as a function of motor speed and motor torque
, the battery efficiency is dynamically adjusted based on the present state of charge
and battery thermal .

Battery Current Esitmation
A simple battery circuit model could be expressed as:
= Equation 3.16
Where:
: Battery voltage
: Battery open circuit voltage
: Battery current
: Battery Resistance
If the Equation 3.16 is multiplied by ( ) the equation becomes:
= 2 Equation 3.17
Which could be rewritten as:-
= 2 Equation 3.18
Equation 3.18 can be solved using quadratic formula to yield the battery current thus:-
2 4 Equation 3.19
=
2 2
Where:
: Battery Power (-ve during charging and +ve during discharging)

: Battery open circuit voltage
: Battery current (-ve during charging and +ve during discharging)
: Battery Resistance
Battery state of charge estimation
The battery state of charge (SOC) is a measure of charge left in a battery compared to the
maximum possible charge of the battery. In simulation the battery state of charge (SOC) is
calculated as an integral of battery current () over the maximum possible battery charge,
subtracted from the present state of charge.
Mathematically this could be expressed as:-

= 0 - during battery discharge Equation 3.20
0

= 0 - during battery charge Equation 3.21
0
Where:
: Future battery state of charge
0 : Present state of charge
0 : Present simulation time (s)
: Future simulation time (s)
: Battery current (Ampere)
: Battery capacity (Ampere-hour)

A Simulink implementation of the state of charge calculation algorithm is detailed in Figure
22 below.
Figure 22: Implementation of state of charge calculation algorithm in Simulink

Engine Modelling
Engine modelling in the development of an HEV control strategy centres mainly on the
use of mathematical and statistical methods to accurately predict the objective function to
be minimized (fuel consumption and or emissions).
Fuel consumption and or emissions are generally a function of engine torque and
engine speed. In the parallel HEV configuration, the engine has mechanical contact with the
vehicle wheels as shown in Figure 23 below.
Figure 23: Parallel HEV configuration
It was earlier discussed in section 3.4.2 that the HEV model considered in this research is
capable of operating in any of the following modes:-
1. Regenerative braking mode
2. Power assist mode
3. Motor only mode
4. Recharge control mode
5. Engine only mode

However the engine is only needed as a functional part of the power train during the
following operating modes: the power assist mode, recharge control mode and the engine
only mode. This means that during the other operating modes, the Engine mainly idles.
The general equation which expresses the load demand to the engine for all the 3 modes
mentioned above could be derived from Equation 3.5 as shown in Equation 3.22 and the
general engine speed equation as shown in Equation 3.23.

( + ( + + )) Equation
( ) =
3.22
= Equation 3.23
Where:-
: Final drive ratio
: Gear ratio
: Tractive torque from internal combustion engine
: Motor torque
: Motor : Rolling resistance force on all the vehicle wheels (N)
: Resistance force by grade (N)
: Aero dynamic drag force (N)
: Frictional force (N)
: Effective mass of vehicle (Kg)

: Acceleration (Rate of change of speed m/s2)
: Mass factor which is an effect of rotating components in a powertrain
: Drive train efficiency
: Engine speed
: Wheel Speed
Equation 3.22 and Equation 3.23 for the engine torque and speed could be derived for all of
the HEV modes for which Engine is active thus:-
Power assist mode:
Equation
( + ( + + ))
( ) =
3.24
= Equation 3.25
Recharge control mode:
Equation
( + ( + + ))
( ) = +
3.26
= Equation 3.27

Engine only mode:

( + ( + + ))
( ) = Equation 3.28

= Equation 3.29
The calculated Engine torque and engine speed are applied to a pre-computed
static lookup table to determine the instantaneous cost function which could be fuel
consumption and or emissions. Most computations of the cost function table are done using
a second-order polynomial function. Detailed below is a copy of the engine fuel
consumption map for the HEV being modelled in this research work.
Figure 24: Engine fuel consumption map

The blue line in Figure 24 represents the curve joining the maximum engine torque for each
engine speed. This curve is obtained using the data obtained during the ramp test on the
chassis dynamometer.
Detailed in Figure 25 is a pictorial overview of the electrical subsystem implementation in
Simulink.
[idle_flag] idle f lag (-)
Fuel Consumption (g)
Fuel Consumption g
[Engine_torque] Engine_torque (Nm)
From18
Fuel Sav ings (%)
[engine_speed] Enginespeed (rpm) Fuel Savings %
From10
Engine
Figure 25: Engine model implementation in Simulink
Engine optimal operating line
One possible way of ensuring the minimization of the cost function (fuel
consumption and or emissions) in an HEV car is to run the engine on or close to the optimal
operating point. This point is found by statically minimizing a cost function of the fuel
consumption and or emissions over a combination of torque, speed values.

In order to do this the following procedures apply:-
1. Load the fuel consumption and or emissions map.
2. Interpolate the map and spread over fine user defined grid.
3. For a certain requested power value an iso-power curve is determined within the
bounds of the grids defined.
4. For all the points on the isopower curve the cost function is determined.
5. The torque and speed combination minimizing the cost function for each requested
power value is determined.
6. Joining these set of torque and speed points determined in (5) above yields the
engine optimal operating line which indicates the operating points in the engine
where fuel consumption is least for each power demand.
The optimal operating points of the engine are shown in Figure 24 as the red dotted line.
This line will proof useful in the evaluation and benchmarking of HEV control strategies.
Brake modelling
Brake modelling in conventional HEVs
One of the most important features of HEVs which makes it appealing is its ability to
recover significant amount of braking energy which in a conventional vehicle will be wasted
to the mechanical brakes as friction.
The electric motors employed on HEVs can be controlled to recuperate negative (braking)
torque in to electrical energy that can be stored in an energy storage e.g. batteries. During
braking the regenerative braking system may work in collaboration with the conventional
mechanical brake for the following reasons:-
1. The regenerative braking torque is not large enough to cover the required braking
torque.
2. SOC is too high which means the use of regenerative braking isnt advisable as it will
increase the batterys state of charge beyond a safe level.
Under these conditions, the friction mechanical brake works to supply the required braking
torque need to either supplement that of the regenerative brake or stop the car on its own.
When implementing regenerative braking in an HEV, the question to answer becomes: How
best to distribute the total braking torque required between the regenerative brake and the
mechanical brake so as to best recover the kinetic energy of the vehicle.
This problem could be solved through the implementation of a braking control algorithm
which is capable of distributing the requested braking torque in to regenerative braking
torque and mechanical friction torque taking to consideration factors like:
1. Battery state of charge (SOC)
2. Motor available regenerative torque (function of motor speed)
Detailed in Figure 26 is the brake control algorithm implemented in the simulation model
discussed in this research work.

Figure 26: HEV braking control

Vehicle model validation
The longitudinal simulation model of the aftermarket parallel HEV is validated here in
this section using the NEDC test. Rather than validate every subsystem in the vehicle,
emphasis will be laid on validating the vehicles ability to offer an accurate prediction of the
cost function in this case which is fuel consumption.
The simulations detailed in chapter 3 are conducted in an open loop fashion which
means there is no feedback loop in the driver model. The open loop nature of the vehicle
system makes it very appropriate for a validation test as a closed loop system is likely to
result in an unintended compensation of the simulated errors.
Detailed in Figure 27 is a cumulative fuel consumption validation plot for the
aftermarket HEV model presented in this research work. Data used for the measured fuel
consumption was obtained via an NEDC transient test on the chassis dynamometer with just
the engine in operation (hybrid turned off).
Figure 27: Cumulative fuel consumption validation plot

The overall plot indicates 99% accuracy in the simulated models fuel consumption
predictions.
Power split between power devices
This section aims to outline the implementation of a rule based electric assist control
strategy on the aftermarket parallel hybrid electric vehicle modelled at the beginning of
chapter 3. In this control strategy the internal combustion engine works as the main source
of power supply, and the electric motor is used to supply additional power, when demanded
by the vehicle. The electric motor is also used depending on the battery state of charge for
regenerative braking during braking events. The implementation of the electric assist rule
based control strategy is done using STATEFLOW as will be explained and shown in the
upcoming sections.
Modelling a control strategy with STATEFLOW involves the use of states and
transitions to form the basic building blocks of the system. The states of the controller
decide the vehicles operating mode. The transitions are requirements which must be met
in order to permit the transition from one vehicle operating mode to the other.
Application of electric assist control strategy to HEV
A charge depleting electric assist control strategy is employed to the HEV discussed in
this research work. However a lower and upper limit is imposed on the battery state of
charge to ensure a safe operation of the battery.

Pdemand
min_SOC
Pengine_max
motor_power
Pmotor
Pregen_max
Hy brid_switch
Pengine_min
max_SOC
current_mode
SOC
Pmotor_max
Fault_detect
Chart
Figure 28: Rule based control strategy top layer
The top layer of the rule based controller employed in this research work is shown in
Figure 28 and features the following inputs and outputs:
Pdemand Vehicle power demand
min_SOC Minimum state of charge permissible for battery to attain
Pengine_max Maximum power engine is able to supply (function of engine speed)

Pmotor Traction power given by electric motor
Pregen_max Maximum regenerative power the motor can supply (function of motor speed)
Hybrid_switch Switch used to activate the hybrid controller
Pengine_min Minimum power engine is able to supply
max_SOC Maximum state of charge permissible for battery to attain
SOC Battery state of charge
Pmotor_max Maximum power of the electric motor (function of motor speed)
Fault detect Use to stop simulation when a fault is detected in the controller
The second layer of the controller is shown in Figure 29.

Figure 29: HEV controller layer showing main transition events
At this layer 2 of the inputs detailed above are used: One is the Pdemand and the other
is the Hybrid_switch. The Pdemand input is used at this phased to determine if the vehicle is
operating in any of these modes:
Traction mode Vehicle power request is +ve
Neutral mode Vehicle is idling and the vehicle power and speed is zero
Braking mode Vehicle power request is -ve
When the HEV is in traction mode as shown in Figure 30 there are 3 possible modes
the HEV could operate. The HEVs ability to remain in an operation mode is governed by the
transition events.
Figure 30: Traction mode control algorithm

When the transition rule is met, the mode transition is activated and the HEV is able to
transit from its existing mode to the next operating mode while the vehicle is under
traction.
At every simulation time, the mode selector in the traction controller is used to determine
what mode the vehicle should operate in. For the sake of reducing the complexity of the
controller, this choice is limited to just motor only mode or engine only mode. As shown in
Figure 30 the following transition rules govern what HEV mode gets selected by the traction
mode selector:-
Control Syntax Control rules Destination mode
Pdemand<Pengine_min Vehicle power demand is less than engine Motor only mode
&& minimum permissible power and
Pdemand<Pmotor_max Vehicle power demand is less than
&& maximum available motor traction power
SOC>=min_SOC and
Battery state of charge is greater than or
equal to the allowable minimum state of
charge.
Pdemand>Pengine_min Vehicle power demand is greater than Engine only mode
&& engine minimum permissible power and
Pdemand<Pengine_max Vehicle power demand is less than
|| permissible engine power or
SOC<=min_SOC State of charge is less than or equal to the
allowable minimum state of charge.

Once the appropriate mode has been selected by the controller traction mode selector for
the HEV, the following transition rules determine what other sub-traction modes the HEV
can operate during the rest of the traction event:
Present Control Syntax Transition rules Future mode
mode
Engine only Pdemand<Pengine_min Vehicle power demand is less Motor only
mode && than engine minimum mode
Pdemand<Pmotor permissible power and
&& Vehicle power demand is less
SOC>=min_SOC than motor traction power and
Battery state of charge is
greater than or equal to the
allowable minimum state of
charge.
Engine only Pdemand>Pengine_min Vehicle power demand is Assist mode
mode && greater than engine minimum
SOC>=min_SOC permissible power and
State of charge is greater than
or equal to the allowable
minimum state of charge.

Present Control Syntax Transition rules Future
mode mode
Motor only Pdemand>Pmotor Vehicle power demand is greater Assist mode
mode && than motor traction power and
SOC>=min_SOC State of charge is greater than or
equal to the allowable minimum
state of charge.
Motor only Pdemand>Pmotor Vehicle power demand is greater Engine only
mode && than motor traction power and mode
SOC<=min_SOC State of charge is less than or equal
to the allowable minimum state of
charge.
Assist Pdemand<Pmotor Vehicle power demand is less than Motor only
mode && motor traction power and mode
SOC>=min_SOC State of charge is greater than or
equal to the allowable minimum
state of charge.
Motor only Pdemand>Pengine_min Vehicle power demand is greater Engine only
mode && than engine minimum permissible mode
SOC<=min_SOC power and
State of charge is less than or equal
to the allowable minimum state of
charge.

Depending on the HEV traction mode employed the following traction power allocation is
applicable:-
Traction mode type Traction power allocation
Engine only mode The Internal combustion engine handles all of the HEVs tractive
power request
Motor only mode The electric motor handles all of the HEVs tractive power
request
Assist mode The electric motor depending on the state of charge is allocated
the following power:
Pmotor = (SOC) x Pmotor_max where state of charge ranges
from (0.1 to 1) and Pmotor_max is the maximum motor power
permissible depending on the motor speed.
The internal combustion engine is allocated the difference
between the vehicle traction power demand and the electric
motor power:
The split is performed this way to prevent over depletion of the
battery.

HEV braking control
When the HEV is operating in the braking mode, another mode selector detailed below as
brake selector in Figure 31 determines how the split in the braking torque among the
braking devices is carried out.
Figure 31: HEV braking mode control algorithm

When the HEV is in a Braking mode the mode selector uses the following control rules to
determine which brake handles the braking power request: - Note for braking, negative
power applies.
Control Syntax Control rules Brake type
Pdemand>Pregen_max Vehicle braking power demand is less than Regenerative brake
&& maximum available regenerative motor only
SOC<=max_SOC power and
Battery state of charge is less than or
equal to the maximum state of charge.
Pdemand<Pregen_max Vehicle braking power demand is greater Regenerative and
&& than maximum available regenerative mechanical brake
SOC<=max_SOC motor power and
Battery state of charge is less than or
SOC>=max_SOC Battery state of charge is greater than or Mechanical brake

Once appropriate brake has been selected by the brake mode selector, the following
transition rules determine what other brakes could be used during the rest of the braking
event.
Present brake Control Syntax Transition rules Future
brake(s)
Regenerative Pdemand<Pregen_max Vehicle braking power demand Regenerative
brake && is greater than maximum and
SOC<=max_SOC available regenerative motor mechanical
power and brake
Battery state of charge is less
than or equal to the maximum
state of charge.
Regenerative SOC>=max_SOC Battery state of charge is Mechanical
brake greater than or equal to the Brake
maximum state of charge.
Regenerative SOC>=max_SOC Battery state of charge is Mechanical
and greater than or equal to the Brake
Mechanical maximum state of charge.
Brake

Depending on the combination of brakes employed on the HEV the following braking power
allocation applies:
Brake type Braking power allocation
Regenerative brake Motor regenerative power is used to fully meet the braking
power request of the vehicle.
Regenerative and The maximum regenerative power of the electric motor is
mechanical brake applied (depending on its speed) and the remaining braking
power request is met by the mechanical brake
Mechanical Brake The mechanical brake meets the full braking power request of
the vehicle.

Electric assist control strategy results
The electric assist control strategy detailed in chapter 3.10 was applied to the aftermarket
parallel HEV operating on the NEDC drive cycle, in order to assess its improvement to fuel
economy. The speed time profile of the NEDC drive cycle is shown in Figure 32. The power
split implemented by the electric assist rule based control strategy is shown in Figure 33.
Figure 32: NEDC drive cycle speed profile
Figure 33: NEDC vehicle power split

As shown in Figure 33 most of the vehicle traction power demand is met by the engine and
the electric motor is used for assist only when the engine is not able to deliver power
efficiently.
The HEV sub operating modes responsible for the power split outlined in Figure 33 is shown
in Figure 34.
Figure 34: HEV operating modes for NEDC drive cycle
Mode 1 Engine only mode
Mode 2 Motor only mode
Mode 3 Assist mode (Engine and Electric motor)
Mode 4 Regenerative brake only
Mode 5 Regenerative and Mechanical brake
Mode 6 Mechanical brake only
As shown in Figure 34, most of the traction events are carried out by the engine and the
electric motor is used just for assist scenarios when the engine is less efficient to operate

alone. A combination of regenerative and mechanical brakes is used to meet the vehicle
braking power request throughout the drive cycle.
The instantaneous and cumulative fuel advantage of the implemented strategy is detailed in
Figure 35 and Figure 36. The highest instantaneous fuel saving is observed in the motor only
mode which occurs between 900 to 980 seconds of the NEDC drive cycle.
Figure 35: Instantaneous fuel consumption comparison
Figure 36: Cumulative fuel consumption comparison

The overall savings on the NEDC as shown in Figure 36 amounts to an overall of 12.58% fuel
savings for the overall drive cycle.
Figure 37 details the engine operating points of the HEV while the electric assist rule based
control strategy is implemented. From the plots detailed below, the engine speed was only
used up to 3000 RPM and torque up to 100Nm.
Figure 37: Engine operating points of HEV (Rule based controller)
The state of charge profiles of the HEV during the implementation of the electric assist
strategy is detailed in Figure 38. The power allocation profile is also included to help create
a better connection between the power split (between the energy devices) and the battery
state of charge.
The state of charge as shown in Figure 38 remains very much sustained up until 900s
of the drive cycle time where a motor only mode is activated by the HEV for an extensive
period of over 80 seconds. The motor only phase results in the state of charge depletion
from 50% to 27% which is the lowest state of charge the battery observed over the entire
cycle. The least observed state of charge is very close to the permitted lower boundary state

of charge limit of 20%. Towards the end of the drive cycle the final deceleration of the
vehicle helps the recuperation of braking energy via the electric motor which increases the
battery state of charge from 27% to 42% which is the final battery state of charge for the
NEDC cycle simulation.
Figure 38: HEV state of charge profile for electric assist control strategy

4 Conclusions and Further work
Accurate modelling and control of HEVs are vital in the exploitation of their high fuel
economy and low emissions advantages. Several HEV architectures and configurations have
been presented in chapter 1.1. Chapter 2.1 presents some modelling approaches currently
used in representing the dynamics of HEV for an accurate fuel consumption and emissions
prediction.
In chapter 3 detailed modelling of the aftermarket parallel HEV is presented in details and
then an electric assist rule based control strategy is implemented on it. Detailed description
of the modelling assumptions and techniques used to represent each power train
component mathematically is detailed in this chapter. The modelled vehicle model is
validated against experimental data and shown to exhibit a good agreement over the NEDC
drive cycle.
The control strategy implementation is viewed in 3 stages:-
1. Converting the accelerator and brake pedal position in to power demand
2. Determine the suitable vehicle operating mode
3. Compute a torque split in order to achieve the minimization of the control objectives
The results obtained during the control strategy implementation showed a 12.58% fuel
savings over the NEDC drive cycle.
A rule based control strategy is implemented in the aftermarket parallel HEV modelled for
this research study, however as discussed in chapter 2.2, there exist a lot more control
approaches which currently exist that could be applied to HEVs. Whilst the rule based
University of Bath | Conclusions and Further work 94

control strategy is an online based (easily implementable in real time) control strategy,
however there is need to formulate and solve optimally the power split between the engine
and electric motor. Although the optimal power split algorithm cannot be implemented in
real time as it is a non-causal control algorithm, but it will serve as a yard stick for:
1. The formulation of algorithm based sub-optimal control strategies e.g. ECMS
(Equivalent consumption minimization strategy).
2. Deriving more robust control rules to further improve the rule based control
algorithm
3. Benchmarking different control strategies in terms of fuel economy and emissions.
Optimal control algorithms including dynamic programming and Pontryagins minimum
principle have been applied to many research studies in solving the HEV energy
management problem, however most of the optimal problem formulation focus mainly on
power split between the power devices. Further research will attempt to formulate and
solve an optimal control problem which combines the power split between the power
devices (internal combustion engine and electric motor) and the transmissions gear ratio.
Future research work will also attempt to employ the use of GPS devices to create
intelligent rule based controllers as well as real time optimal model predictive controllers.
GPS are able to communicate in real time the traffic information and road profile
information along a planned vehicle travel route. Future studies will attempt to model HEV
controllers which are able to use this prior driving condition information to decide what
control action needs to be implemented on the HEV.

Besides achieving an optimal power split between the power devices in an HEV, it is
believed that driver behaviour plays an important role in the vehicle fuel consumption,
therefore accurately modelling the human driver behaviour is a an important step towards
understanding and predicting its effect on vehicle fuel consumption and emissions. It is
intended that as part of the overall PhD research work a mathematical representation of the
human driver behaviour during most driving conditions will be modelled. The obtained
human driver behaviour model will be further used thus:-
1. For prediction of its effect on fuel consumption and emissions
2. To develop optimal HEV controllers which take in to account driving patterns
in order to decide a suitable control action to be implemented on the
controller.
One the overall it is expected that the chapter of the entire PhD thesis will be accounted for
thus:-
Chapter Research Topic and Sub contents
1 Introduction
Research motivation
HEV configurations
Recent development in the field of HEV
Research problem definition and organisation of dissertation
2 Literature review
HEV modelling approaches
HEV control strategies

3 HEV powertrain modelling
Modelling purpose and modelling assumptions
Driver modelling
Vehicle dynamics modelling
Electric machine modelling
Electric battery modelling
Engine modelling
Regenerative brake modelling
4 HEV power train model validation
Driver model validation using simulated vehicle speed and drive cycle
speed
Electric motor validation again experimental data
Battery model validation against experimental data.
Engine model validation against experimental data
5 Interactions between human driver behaviour and fuel consumption
Human driver behaviour modelling
Connection between human driver behaviour and fuel consumptions
6 Application of HEV control strategies to HEV models taking in to consideration
human driver behaviour
Energy management problem definition
Offline based HEV global optimal energy management using dynamic
programming
Offline based HEV local optimal energy management using Pontryagins

minimum principle.
Online based ECMS (Equivalent consumption minimization strategy)
control strategy derivation from the Offline Pontryagins minimum
principle.
Online based intelligent rule based control strategy using live GPS data
Online based intelligent model predictive controller using live GPS data
7 Experimental verification of online based control strategy
ECMS (Equivalent consumption minimization strategy) control strategy
derivation from the Offline Pontryagins minimum principle.
Intelligent rule based control strategy using live GPS data
Intelligent model predictive controller using live GPS data
8 Conclusions and further work
Summary of results
Future recommended works
Appendices
Bibliography
The anticipated work flow for the overall PhD program is outlined in the PhD research
project Gantt chart attached to this write up.

Bibliography
Back M., Simons M and Kirschbaum F Predictive control of drivetrains; Proceedings of the IFAC 15th
Triennial World Congress. - 2002.
Brahma A, Guezennec Y. and Rizzoni G. Optimal energy management in series hybrid electric
vehicles, Proceedings of the 2000 American Contro vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 6064l. - 2000.
Ehsani M, Gao Y and Gay S Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,
Theory and Design, CRC Press. - 2004.
Geering H.P Optimal Control with Engineering Applications; Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. - 2007.
Genta G. Motor Vehicle Dynamics: Modelling and Simulation (ISBN; 9789810229115); World
Scientific Pub Co. Inc. Singapore. - 1997.
Guzzella G and Sciarretta A Vehicle Propulsion Systems: Introduction to Modelling and Optimization;
Springer: 9783642094156; Berlin. - 2007.
Ichikawa S., Yokoi Y. and Doki S. Novel energy management system for hybrid electric vehicles
utilizing car navigation over a commuting route; IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium; pp.161 - 166. -
2004.
Johannesson L., sbogrd M. and Egardt B Assessing the potential of predictive control for
hybrid vehicle powertrainsusing stochastic dynamic programming; pp. 366-371.
Laboratory National Renewable Energy Advanced vehicle simulator (ADVISOR) documentation;

http://www.ctts.nrel.gov..
Lewis F. and Syrmos V. Optimal Control; Wiley-Interscience. - 1995..
Lorenzo Serrao M.S A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR HYBRID
ELECTRIC VEHICLES (PhD. Dissertation); The Ohio State University. - 2009.
Namwook Kim, Sukwon Cha and Huei Peng Optimal Control of Hybrid Electric Vehicles Based on
Pontryagins Minimum Principle; Control Systems Technology, IEEE Transactions. - 2011.
Nuijten E., Koot M. and Kessels J Advanced energy management strategies for vehicle power nets;
Proceedings of EAEC 9th Int. Congress: European Automotive Industry. - 2003.
Paganelli G., Ercole G. and Brahma A. General supervisory control policy for the energy optimization
of charge-sustaining hybrid electric vehicles; JSAE Review; vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 511518. - 2001.
Paganelli G., Tateno M. and Brahma A. Control development for a hybrid-electric sport-utility
vehicle: Strategy, implementation and field test results; American Control Conference. pp. 5064-
5069. - 2001.
Perez L. V. and Pilotta E. A. Optimal power split in a hybrid electric vehicle using direct transcription
of an optimal control problem; Mathematics and Computers in Simulation; vol. 79, no. 6, pp. 1959-
1970. - 2009.
University of Bath | Bibliography 99

Pettiti M, Pilo L and Millo F Developement of a new mean value model for the analysis of turbolag
phenomena in automotive diesel engines; SAE Technical paper; 2007-01-1301. - 2007.
Poursamad A and Montazeri M Design of genetic-fuzzy control strategy for parallel hybrid electric
vehicles; Control Engineering Practice; vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 861-873. - 2008.
Rajagopalan A, Washington G and Rizzoni G. Development of fuzzy logic control and advanced
emissions modeling for parallel hybrid vehicles; NREL/SR-540-32919. - 2003.
Rajagopalan A., Washington G. and Rizzoni G. Development of fuzzy logic control and advanced
emissions modeling for parallel hybrid vehicles; NREL/SR-540-32919. - 2003.
Salman M., Chang M. F. and Chen J.S. Predictive energy management strategies for hybrid vehicles;
Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Seville, Spain. pp. 21-25.. - 2005.
Schouten N. J., Salman M. A. and Kheir N. A. Energy management strategies for parallel hybrid
vehicles using fuzzy logic; Control Engineering Practice; vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 171-177. - 2003.
Subbaram Naidu D Optimal Control Systems; Taylor & Francis; Electrical Engineering Textbook
Series. - 2002.
Tate E.D and P Boyd S. Finding ultimate limits of performance for hybrid electric vehicles, in Proc.
SAE Future Transportation Technology Conf., Paper No. 00FTT-50..
Vassallo A, Cipolla G and Mallamo F Transient Correction of Diesel Engine Steady-State Emissions
and Fuel Consumption Maps for Vehicle Performance Simulation; Aachener Kolloquim Fahrzeug und
Motorentechnik, Aachen, Germany.
Vito D. De, Miotti A. and Scattolini R. Power flow management with predictive capabilities for a
hybrid fuel cell vehicle; Proceedings of the 5th IFAC Symposium on Advances in Automotive
Control. - 2007.
University of Bath | Bibliography 100

PhD research project Gantt chart
University of Bath | PhD research project Gantt chart 101






Transfer Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transfer Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012

MPhil to PhD Transfer Report: Modelling and Simulation of

Wisdom Enang (073164034)

guarantying improved fuel economy and reduced emissions.

management control strategy.

minimize fuel consumption. The mathematical modelling of the HEV subsystems is

University of Bath | Summary 1

compositions are outlined towards the end of the research work.

University of Bath | Summary 2

HEV Configurations ................................................................................................... 12

Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle............................................................................. 12

Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle .......................................................................... 13

Recent Developments on HEV .................................................................................. 15

2 Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 17

HEV Modelling Approaches ....................................................................................... 17

Kinematic Approach ........................................................................................... 18

Dynamic Approach ............................................................................................. 21

HEV Control Strategies .............................................................................................. 22

Rule Based Control Strategy .............................................................................. 23

2.2.1.1 Electric Assist Rule Based Control Strategy .................................................... 24

2.2.1.2 Adaptive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy ........................................................... 25

2.2.1.3 Predictive Fuzzy Logic Control Strategy ......................................................... 26

Optimization Based Control Strategy ................................................................ 27

Global Optimization Based Control Strategy .................................................................... 28

2.2.2.1 Linear Programming Optimal Control Strategy.............................................. 28

2.2.2.2 Dynamic Programming Optimal Control Strategy ......................................... 28

University of Bath | Summary 3

2.2.2.3 Pontryagins Minimum Principle Control Strategy ........................................ 36

Real time Optimization Based Control Strategy ............................................................... 39

2.2.2.4 Model Predictive Control Strategy ................................................................. 39

3 HEV Modelling and Control .............................................................................................. 43

Modelling Purpose .................................................................................................... 43

Description of drive train architecture...................................................................... 43

Vehicle Dynamics Modelling ..................................................................................... 47

Vehicle Movement ............................................................................................. 49

3.4.1.1 Rolling Resistance() ..................................................................... 51

3.4.1.2 Aerodynamic Force () ........................................................................ 52

3.4.1.3 Grading Resistance () ...................................................................... 53

Aftermarket Parallel HEV operating modes....................................................... 54

Electric machine modelling ....................................................................................... 59

Battery Power load estimation .......................................................................... 64

Battery Current Esitmation ................................................................................ 65

Battery state of charge estimation .................................................................... 66

Engine optimal operating line ............................................................................ 72

University of Bath | Summary 4

Brake modelling in conventional HEVs .............................................................. 73

Vehicle model validation ........................................................................................... 76

Power split between power devices ......................................................................... 77

Application of electric assist control strategy to HEV ........................................ 77

HEV braking control ........................................................................................... 85

Electric assist control strategy results ............................................................... 89

4 Conclusions and Further work .......................................................................................... 94

PhD research project Gantt chart .......................................................................................... 101

University of Bath | Summary 5

Figure 1: Series Hybrid Electric Vehicle ................................................................................... 12

Figure 2: Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle ................................................................................. 14

Figure 3: All wheel drive parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle ........................................................ 15

Figure 4: Series/Parallel hybrid electric vehicle ....................................................................... 16

Figure 5: Information flow in a Kinematic or Backward HEV model, from

(Guzzella, et al., 2007).............................................................................................................. 19

Figure 7: HEV Control Strategy Classification .......................................................................... 23

Figure 8: Multi Decision Process .............................................................................................. 30

Figure 9: Sequence of feasible power splits in dynamic programming for HEVs:

Source (Lorenzo Serrao, 2009)................................................................................................. 35