4.5 Article

Modeling and Simulation of Extended-Range Electric Vehicle with Control Strategy to Assess Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emission for the Expected Driving Range

Journal

ENERGIES
Volume 15, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en15124187

Keywords

Extended-Range Electric Vehicle; drive cycle; battery electric vehicle; WLTC 3b; FTP-75; CLTC-P; CO2 emission

Categories

Funding

  1. Warsaw University of Technology, Board of Mechanical Engineering

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper provides insights into the performance of Extended-Range Electric Vehicles (EREVs) and the proposed control strategy across different driving cycles. Simulations were conducted to analyze battery state, fuel consumption, CO2 emissions, and other indicators under various conditions.
Extended-Range Electric Vehicles (EREVs) are intended to improve the range of battery electric vehicles and thus eliminate drivers' concerns about running out of energy before reaching the desired destination. This paper gives an insight into EREV's performance operating according to the proposed control strategy over various driving cycles, including the Worldwide Harmonized Light-duty Test Cycle Class 3b (WLTC 3b), Federal Test Procedure (FTP-75), and China Light-Duty Vehicle Test Cycle (CLTC-P). Simulation runs were performed in Matlab-Simulink (R) for different cases of drive range, electricity mix, and vehicle mass. The control strategy goal was to aim at a specified value of battery state of charge at the targeted range value. The obtained test results included: pure electric drive range, acceleration times, EREV range tests, control strategy range errors, Range Extender (REX) utilization metric and distribution of its engagement instances, fuel consumption, total equivalent CO2 emission, powertrain efficiency, and specific energy consumption. The control strategy operated on average with a range error of -1.04% and a range mean square error of 2.13%. Fuel consumption (in range extension mode) varied between 1.37 dm(3)/100 km (FTP-75) and 6.85 dm(3)/100 km (WLTC 3b Extra-High 3). CO(2)eq emission was 95.3-244.2 g/km for Poland, 31.0-160.5 g/km for EU-27, and 1.2-147.6 g/km for Sweden. This paper is a valuable source of information for scientists and engineers seeking to learn the advantages and shortcomings of EREV drives with a proposed control strategy, based on various sets of results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available