EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS OF OPTIMIZED HEV AGAINST CONVENTIONAL VEHICLES, IN A SRI LANKAN DRIVE CYCLE A dissertation submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Moratuwa In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science By I. W. D. R. S. KARUNARATNE L I B R A R Y ITYC • • • •^hu las i ;* MORA . <'WA Supervised by Dr. Lanka Udawatta University of Moratuwa 92964 S 2 \ 3 * Tva - Department of Electrical Engineering University of Moratuwa * » v January 2009 DECLARATION The work submitted in this dissertation is the result of my own investigation, except where otherwise stated. It has not already been accepted for any degree, and is also not being concurrently submitted for any other degree. Date: 5 o / o i A © 0 3 We/I endorse the declaration by the candidate. 11 CONTENTS Declaration Abstract Dedication Acknowledgement List of Figures List of Tables 1. Introduction 1.1 Hybrid Electric Vehicles 1.1.1 Fuel Consumption 1.1.2 Noise 1.1.3 Pollution 1.2 Literature Review 1.3 Objective 2 HEV Classification 2.1 Parellel HEVs 2.2 Series HEVs 2.3 Parallel- Series (Duel)HEVs 3 Drive Cycles 3.1 Drive cycle classification 3.2 Standard drive cycles 3.3 Colombo Drive Cycle(CDC) 3.4 Development methodology 3.4.1 Route 3.4.2 Data Collection iii 3.4.3 GPS Performances 18 3.4.4 Data Collection Protocol 19 3.5 Vehicle Parameters 21. 3.6 Developed CDC 23 4 HEV Simulation 33 4.1 Factors of modeling tools 33 4.2 Tools for vehicle modeling 34 4.3 Modeling Types 35 4.4 Models used in the Study 35 4.5 ADVISOR simulation 39 4.5.1 Parallel HEV 40 4.5.2 TOYOTA Prius 41 4.5.3 Conventional vehicle 42 4.6 Vehicle specifications 43 5 HEV performances in CDC 5.1 Results and analysis 46 5.2 Results in detail 49 6 ADVISOR Results 6.1 ADVISOR results analysis 59 6.2 Results in parallel HEV 61 6.3 Results in TOYOTA Prius 68 6.4 Results in conventional vehicle 72 6.5 Conclusion 79 References 80 Appendix A : Published paper Appendix B : Colombo drive cycle data iv ABSTRACT Due to the constant increase of fuel prices and environmental concerns, researchers were pushed to thinking more about fuel-efficiency and reduction of emission on vehicles. As a result there was great enthusiasm for researchers to look into and introduce hybrid technology to the field of automobiles. For example in hybrid electric power trains, an internal combustion engine (ICE) together with an electric motor (EM) is used as two energy sources. The use of an electrical motor in place of the internal combustion engine during different stages of driving resulted in a definite saving in fuel consumption. In this study, a conventional vehicle and a HEV with varying traffic conditions & flow were compared in relation to fuel economy. The main aspect was to compare & evaluate HEV and conventional vehicles in the Sri Lankan environment. With that in mind, developing a drive cycle in the Sri Lankan environment was essential. The Colombo drive cycle (CDC) was developed to fulfill that aspect using GPS protocol. The HEV and conventional vehicles were simulated in following models using Colombo drive cycle. • Parallel HEV • Series HEV • Conventional vehicle with CVT • TOYOTA Prius Simulation Models developed in MATLAB was used and to verify that QSS TB simulation model and ADVISOR simulation software was adapted. Results showed that, with Colombo drive cycle, the two extremes come with maximum efficiency model and conventional vehicle. It proves that the optimized Parallel HEV with future data gives far better fuel economy in a real world drive cycle like CDC. Optimized HEV with prediction is so efficient in drive cycles which has so many sudden changes in acceleration, decelerating, cruse control and idle during the drive. Results were proven by comparison with simulating of above models and other available standard drive cycles. The optimized TOYOTA Prius performed far superior in the current HEV market. It 's performance was excellent especially in vulnerable drive conditions. v DEDICATION I dedicate this dissertation to my loving parents. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Firstly, I wish to thank Dr. Lanka Udawatta for guiding me in this research and helping me to complete it within the given time frame. As the Research Supervisor, he directed me in finding all the necessary literature and to research the work to a high standard. Secondly, a very big thank you to both Prof. Saman Halgamuge and Mr.Sunil Adikari, School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Australia for providing the necessary research materials and information of HEVs required for this study. Thirdly, I thank all the lectures of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Departments of University of Moratuwa, who participated in the progress review presentation. Due to their invaluable comments which helped me to achieve the goal of completing this research study. I would be failing in my duty if I do not convey my sincere thanks to my two colleagues Mr. Sudath Wimalendra and Mr. Chaminda Edirisinghe. These two batch mates encouraged me from the very beginning to successfully complete the work to the very end. My heartfelt thanks go to my Parents, Brother and Sister and my wife for their love, understanding and encouragement throughout this study. Last but not least, I wish to thank all those numerous persons who are too many to mention and in their small way gave me great support to complete this thesis. 11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Description Page Figure 1.1 Hybrid car sales 02 Figure 2.1: Block diagram of Pre- transmission parallel HEV 07 Figure 2. 2: Block diagram of Post-transmission parallel HEV 08 Figure 2. 3: Block diagram of all wheel drive parallel HEV 08 Figure 2.4: Block diagram of Series HEV 09 Figure 3 . 1 : Standard Model drive cycles 11 Figure 3.2: Standard Transient drive cycles 13 Figure 3.3: CDC Route 2 16 Figure 3.4: CDC Route 1 17 Figure 3.5: GPS Receiver used 18 Figure 3.6: Vehicle used for data collection 21 Figure 3.7: Route 1 Up drive Speed profile 23 Figure 3.8: Route 1 Up drive Acceleration profile 24 Figure 3.9: Route 1 Up drive in ADVISOR 24 Figure 3.10: Route 1 Down drive Speed profile 25 Figure 3.11: Route 1 Down drive Acceleration profile 26 Figure 3.12: Route 1 Down drive in ADVISOR 26 Figure 3.13: Route 2 Up drive Speed profile 27 Figure 3.14: Route 2 Up drive Acceleration profile 28 Figure 3.15: Route 2 Up drive in ADVISOR 28 Figure 3.16: Route 2 Down drive Speed profile 29 Figure 3.17: Route 2 Down drive Acceleration profile 30 Figure 3.18: Route 2 Down in ADVISOR 30 Figure 3.19: Route 1 Up drive Distance 31 Figure 3.20: Route 1 Down drive Distance 31 Figure 3.21: Route 1 Up drive Distance 32 Figure 3.22: Route 1 Down drive Distance 32 Figure 4. 1: QSS TB Block diagram for Series HEV 37 in Figure 4. 2: QSS_TB Block diagram for Conventional vehicle 38 Figure 4.3: Block diagram for parallel HEV in ADVISOR 40 Figure 4.4: Parameter setting for parallel HEV in ADVISOR 40 Figure 4.5: Block diagram for Toyota Prius in ADVISOR 41 Figure 4.6: Parameter setting for Toyota Prius in ADVISOR 41 Figure 4.7: Block diagram for conventional vehicle in A D V I S O R 42 Figure 4.8: Block diagram for conventional vehicle in ADVISOR 42 Figure 4.9: Fuel consumption map of the ICE 44 Figure 4.10: Engine fuel efficiency contour 45 Figure 5.1: Analysis of QSS_TB Model results 48 Figure 5.2: Results of Series HEV in CDC 1U 49 Figure 5.3: Results of Series HEV in CDC ID 50 Figure 5.4: Results of Series HEV in CDC 2U 51 Figure 5.5: Results of Series HEV in CDC 2D 52 Figure 5.6: Results of Series HEV in NEDC 53 Figure 5.7: Results of Series HEV in FTP Highway 54 Figure 5.8: Results of Series HEV in Japan 10-15 55 Figure 5.9: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 1U 56 Figure 5.10: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC ID 56 Figure 5.11: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2U 56 Figure 5.12: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2D 57 Figure 5.13: Results of Conventional vehicle in NEDC 57 Figure 5.14: Results of Conventional vehicle in FTP Highway 57 Figure 5.15: Results of Conventional vehicle in Japan 10-15 58 Figure 6.1: Graph for fuel economy comparison 60 Figure 6.2: Results of parallel HEV in CDC 1U 61 Figure 6.3: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in CDC 1U 61 Figure 6.4: Results of parallel HEV in CDC 1D 62 Figure 6.5: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in CDC ID 62 Figure 6.6: Results of parallel HEV in CDC 2U 63 Figure 6.7: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in CDC 2U 63 Figure 6.8: Results of parallel HEV in CDC 2D 64 Figure 6.9: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in CDC 2D 64 Figure 6.10: Results of parallel HEV in NEDC 65 IV Figure 6.11: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in NEDC 65 Figure 6.12: Results of parallel HEV in Japan 10-15 66 Figure 6.13: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in Japan 10-15 66 Figure 6.14: Results of parallel HEV in US 06 67 Figure 6.15: Motor efficiency of parallel HEV in US 06 67 Figure 6.16: Results of Toyota Prius in CDC 1U 68 Figure 6.17: Results of Toyota Prius in CDC ID 68 Figure 6.18: Results of Toyota Prius in CDC 2U 69 Figure 6.19: Results of Toyota Prius in CDC 2D 69 Figure 6.20: Results of Toyota Prius in NEDC 70 Figure 6.21: Results of Toyota Prius in Japan 10-15 70 Figure 6.22: Results of Toyota Prius in US 06 71 Figure 6.23: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 1U 72 Figure 6.24: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in CDC 1U 72 Figure 6.25: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC ID 73 Figure 6.26: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in CDC ID 73 Figure 6.27: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2U 74 Figure 6.28: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2U 74 Figure 6.29: Results of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2D 75 Figure 6.30: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in CDC 2D 75 Figure 6.31: Results of Conventional vehicle in NEDC 76 Figure 6.32: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in N E D C 76 Figure 6.33: Results of Conventional vehicle in Japan 10-15 77 Figure 6.34: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in Japan 10-15 77 Figure 6.35: Results of Conventional vehicle in US 06 78 Figure 6.36: Motor efficiency of Conventional vehicle in US 06 78 v LIST OF TABLES Table Description Page Table 3.1: Colombo drive cycle details 14 Table 3.2: Vehicle model specifications 19 Table 4.1: Available modeling tools 32 Table 4.2: Vehicle model specification 41 Table 5.1: QSS_TB Results 44 Table 5.2: Economy Analysis 45 Table 5.3: Analysis of CDC 46 Table 6.1:ADVISOR Results 57 vi