AD-EVS26 - Autonomie

GREAT MINDS THINK ELECTRIC / WWW.EVS26.ORG 1

Fuel Consumption Potential of Different Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Architectures in the

European and American Contexts

A. Da Costa, N. Kim, F. Le Berr, N. Marc, F. Badin, A. Rousseau IFP Energies nouvelles / Argonne National Laboratory

IA-HEV Task 15. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles


Introduction

Sizing Results

Simulation Results

Conclusion

Contents


Objectives The objective is to assesses the impact of driving behavior and standard test procedures on the true benefits of PHEVs for Europe and the US market.

Increasing pressure on GHG emissions

EEC / USA • different markets • different standards procedures • different tax systems

By 2020, which car for which country ?

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

280

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Years

CO

2 em

issi

on in

g/k

m

USAEECJapanChina

CO2 emission target for different countries


Approach

ICE EM

EMBatt.

Input-split

ICE EM

EMBatt.

ICE EM

EMBatt.

Input-split

ICE EM

Batt.

Parallel

ICE EM

Batt.

ICE EMICE EM

Batt.

Parallel

ICE EM

Batt.

EM

Output-split

ICE EM

Batt.

EM

ICE EM

Batt.

EM

Output-split

ICE EM EM

Batt.

Series

ICE EM EM

Batt.

ICE EM EMICE EM EM

Batt.

Series

Simulation of different HEV/PHEV architectures

Several AER considered Both EEC and USA contexts Identical program of demand for all the

vehicles • maximum speed • hill capability • acceleration


Methodology

Each Lab used its own simulation tools

• ANL : Autonomie • IFPEN : AMESim

We made sure results were consistent

Dedicated tools were shared • ANL : Battery sizing • IFPEN : Electric motor

sizing

Vehicle Conventional [L/100km]

Parallel HEV [L/100km]

NEDC Autonomie 5.75 3.52

AMESim 5.64 3.51

Artemis Urban Autonomie 8.42 3.97

AMESim 8.27 3.74

Artemis Road Autonomie 4.88 3.75

AMESim 4.78 3.67

Artemis Highway

Autonomie 6.44 5.93

AMESim 6.3 6.1

UDDS Autonomie 5.56 3.52

AMESim 5.51 3.6

HWFET Autonomie 4.2 4.13

AMESim 4.16 4.18

Comparison of fuel consumption between AMESim and Autonomie


Component Data Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)

- 1800cc spark ignition engine developed at IFPEN Electric Machine - IFPEN in-house software (EMTool) Battery - reference provided by Argonne, Idaho National

Laboratory, and major battery suppliers Simulated motor efficiency [%]

Rotation speed [RPM]

Torq

ue [N

.m]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

70

75

80

85

90

95

100Measured motor efficiency [%]


Torq

ue [N

.m]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Absolute error [%]


Torq

ue[N

.m]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Efficiency map of electric motor (experimental data from Oak Ridge laboratory)

Efficiency map of electric motor (simulation results coming from the EMTool) Absolute error map between experimental results

and simulation results


Introduction

Sizing Results

Simulation Results

Conclusion

Contents


Component Sizing All the vehicles have been sized to meet the same requirements:

• Initial vehicle movement (IVM) to 100kph in 9 sec +/−0.1 sec, • Maximum grade of 5% at 110kph at gross vehicle weight (GVW) • Maximum vehicle speed >150kph with ICE power only, and • All electric Range (AER) on UDDS (for US) or Artemis Urban (for Europe)

Body and chassis mass 800 kg Frontal area 2.18 m2

Drag coefficient 0.3 Wheel radius 0.317 m

Final drive ratio Conv. AU : 4.44, Conv. MT : 4.29

Parallel HEV&PHEV : 4.29, Split HEV&PHEV : 4.059 Series PHEV : 11.36, GM Voltec : 3.02, BEV : 4.44

Gear ratio

Conv. AU : 2.67, 1.53, 1.02, 0.72, 0.53 Conv. MT : 3.14, 1.87, 1.24, 0.95, 0.73

Parallel HEV&PHEV : 3.14, 1.87, 1.24, 0.95, 0.73 Split HEV&PHEV : 2.6 (Zr/Zs), Series PHEV: -

GM Voltec : 2.24 (Zr/Zs), BEV : 1.86, 1

Specification of the compact-size sedan


Sizing Results Power demands close for US and EEC vehicles Parallel hybrid leads to the lowest total

embedded power

1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Vehicle Mass [kg]

Max

. / M

in. P

ower

[kW

]

UDDS

NEDC

Art. Urb.

Par In-spt Out-spt Ser 0

100

200

300 Component Sizing - PHEV 50 (US)

Pow

er, k

W

Engine Electric Motor(1) Electric Motor(2)


Sizing Results

Battery sizing results

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

All-Electric Range [km]

Bat

tery

ene

rgy

[kW

.h]

Par. - EUPar. - USSeries - EUSeries - US


Introduction

Sizing Results

Simulation Results

Conclusion

Contents


Fuel Consumption results Charge Sustaining Results are comparable for all architectures, except Series NEDC leads to high Fuel Savings


EEC procedure always tends to higher electric consumption Overall energy consumption is lower on the EEC test

procedure

EEC / US Standards results (hybrids only)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 50 100 150

Electricity Consumption [W.h/km]

Fuel

Con

sum

ptio

n [L

/100

km]

Par. HEV - EEC

Par. HEV - US

Par. PHEV - EEC

Par. PHEV - US

InSplit HEV - EEC

InSplit HEV - US

InSplit PHEV - EEC

InSplit PHEV - US

OutSplit PHEV - EEC

OutSplit PHEV - US

Series - EEC

Series - US

BEV - EEC

BEV - US

EEC vs US Unadjusted Standards (hybrids only)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

0 50 100 150

Elec. Consumption [W.h/km]

Fuel

Con

sum

ptio

n [L

/100

km]

Par. HEV - EEC

Par. HEV - US

Par. PHEV - EEC

Par. PHEV - US

InSplit HEV - EEC

InSplit HEV - US

InSplit PHEV - EEC

InSplit PHEV - US

OutSplit PHEV - EEC

OutSplit PHEV - US

Series - EEC

Series - US

BEV - EEC

BEV - US

Energy Consumption EEC/USA Standards


• 3 daily trips scenarii have been simulated – 40, 75, 100km

• 3 electricity mix have been considered – 100, 450, 650 g CO2/kW.hel

CO2 emissions


CO2 emissions

Total CO2 emissions on mission profile 1Conv. AU : 161, MT : 145

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

0 10 20 30

Total Battery energy [kW.h]

Tota

l CO

2 em

issi

ons

[g/k

m]

Par. - 650Par. - 450Par. - 100InSplit - 650InSplit - 450InSplit - 100OutSplit - 650OutSplit - 450OutSplit - 100Series - 650Series - 450Series - 100BEV - 650BEV - 450BEV - 100


0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30


CO

2 em

issi

ons

[g/k

m]



0.020.040.060.080.0

100.0120.0140.0160.0180.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30


CO

2 em

issi

ons

[g/k

m]



Introduction

Sizing Results

Simulation Results

Conclusion

Contents


Conclusions

Graph Fuel saving vs Batt energy EEC/USA easier to cut standards FC in EEC Fuel Consumption gain on standard procedure - EEC & US

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Battery energy [kW.h]

Fuel

Con

sum

ptio

n ga

in [%

]

// - US

// - EEC

P-S - US

P-S - EEC

O-S - US

O-S - EEC

Series - US

Series - EEC

BEV - US

BEV - EEC


• On an overall CO2 point of vue, PHEV and BEV make more sense in Europe or France

• On an economic point of vue : go see Dr Bernd Propfe (DLR) presentation! (dialogue session 2, board #11E)

Conclusions


Fuel Consumption Potential of Different Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Architectures in the European and American Contexts

Thank you!

Contact / Website

Namdoo Kim, [email protected] Aymeric Rousseau, [email protected] (http://www.autonomie.net/) Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass, Argonne IL 60439, USA

Anthony Da Costa, [email protected] , François Badin, [email protected] IFP Energies Nouvelles 1 à 4, Avenue de Bois-Préau 92500 Rueil-Malmaison, France

U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

IA-HEV Task 15. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.autonomie.net/


AD-EVS26 - Autonomie

Documents

Transcript of AD-EVS26 - Autonomie