Chiddarwar Darbha.final Project

7/28/2019 Chiddarwar Darbha.final Project

1/17


2/17

MEEM / ECE 5295Copyright 2013 Michigan Tech

Class Period 37Date: Apr 29, 2013

Page: 2Group Members

Last Name First Name Email

Darbha [email protected]

Chiddarwar [email protected]


3/17



Page: 3Goals and objectives

Design a working hybrid model from a baseline

Chevy Malibu

Objective of the project (or course) has beenreduced fuel consumption (FC) withoutdeteriorating performance

This is achieved by using enhanced technologybut, most importantly, HYBRIDISATION

a b


4/17



Page: 4Our Car

Vehicle Type: (PHEV)

$ 26,204

Fuel Economy

PHEV

City 39 (MPGe)

Highway 29 (MPGe)

Combined 35 (MPGe)

Fuel/Energy Consumption

Gasoline 2.76 (gal/100 miles)

Electric 5.64 (kW-hr/100 miles)

Blended 2.32 (gale/100 miles

Range

Electric/Blended (CD) 42 (miles)

Gasoline (CS) 480 (miles)

Total (CD+CS) 522 (miles)

CAFE Composite FE

Combined 39 (MGPe)

Annual Fuel Cost

Cost 1600 ($)


5/17



Page: 5Are we any good?

Chevy Malibu Our car

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

25

33

FE comparison

FEComparison


20000

21000

22000

23000

24000

25000

26000

27000

22520

26204

Cost comparison

C

ostofthevehicle


26

28

3032

34

29

33

0-100 mph

Time(s)


0

5

106.5

8

60-80 mph (passing)

Time(s)


6/17



Page: 6How did we get there? (Week 1)

Week 01 (Sensitivity Analysis)

Kp and Ki in driver subsystem have been adjusted to reducethe number of errors on drive cycle. At the end of first run, Kp= 1.0 & Ki = 0.1.

But, Kp,Ki also sensitive to FC

Different sets of transmission shift logic have been tested and

a new set of values determined. How?

Transmission and performance have strong correlation. Hence,performance compliance (through PCF) and 0-100 mph werecontinuously monitored

Aero drag and Rolling resistance have been changed slightly tomatch current values on a Malibu

Alternator Gain in IC subsystem reduced by 50%


7/17



Page: 7Week 1 Progress

FC is sensitive to BSFC but BSFC cannot bechanged unless engine technology changes

Transmission logic affects FC and alsoperformance

Kp Ki Cd Rolling resistance

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0.02 0.02

1 1

in FC with a 10% change in different

Parameter

%

FCChange

Non-optimized Optimized Malibu

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

20 2022

2729 30

Mpg comparison Week 1

City

Highway

Mpg


8/17




Model has been validated against advanced technologiesdiscussed in NAE report

CI engine has been modeled not provided in model presented(bsfc curves and calculation details included in the report)

Impact of mass reduction, different transmission technologies,engine technologies have been tested for FC reduction andcost and values compared against NAE report values

Engine Start-Stop technology has been implemented (drivecycle and engine level) and it has been realized that it has agreat potential to reduce FC in urban driving conditions

Regeneration potential has been calculated for different drive

cycles


9/17




SI 2.4l I4 GDI VVT CI 2.3l I4 TDI

UDDS HWFET


10/17


11/17




Motor and battery critically analyzed in this week

Three different batteries provided in the model have been

analyzed in terms ofcapacity, energy density and cost.

Battery is also tested by analyzing SOC values at the end ofdifferent drive cycles

Three different motors with different power rating have been

provided. Each motor is tested in different drive cycles. As improvement in FE is directly related to degree of

hybridization, high power motor (45 kW) is deemed best suitedfor this purpose

Also, performance deteriorates when a low power motor isused


12/17




Motor-0 Motor-1 Motor-2

32

34

36

38

40

42

44 43

38.5

36

0-100mph for motor TR = 0.2

Time(s)

Pb Acid NiMH Li-ion

0

0.2

0.4

0.60.8

1

1.2

0.21

0.5

1

0.33

0.75

1

ttery energy density and cost comparis

Energy density Cost

Scaledparame

ters

9 KW 30 KW 45 KW

0

0.20.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0.05

1

0.5

0.2

0.67

1

Motor comparison

Torque(Scaled) Cost(Scaled)

Scaled

parameters

l i d


13/17



Page: 13How did we get there? Week 4

Implementation of hybridization has been performed so thatmaximum FE can be achieved

Broadly, two different approaches have been used synergisticallyto achieve maximum efficiency

Torque Blend Approach:The motor provides maximum torqueat low rpms. This can be used for our benefit

IC Engine speed optimization: Once torque blend isemployed, engine is made to operate at the most efficient point

SOC controller: A control strategy is employed to controlbattery SOC so that it never falls beneath 0.3 (minimum batterySOC)

Regeneration: Limit has been set on regen, no regen below 5mph and no regen beyond SOC = 1 (overcharging!)

Cl P i d 37


14/17



Page: 14Torque Blend approachBlend Starts

Blend StopsEngine starts

As the engine is not efficient in processing torque request(TR) at lowRPM, Motor processes torque request in this region

Cl P i d 37


15/17



Page: 15IC Engine Speed Optimization

Vehicle speed is scattered on the

efficiency contour

Engine speed is not controlled inthis case

Engine speed is controlled.

When engine speed is between

0 & 2500rpm with positive TR,TR is processed at 1200 rpm

Cl P i d 37


16/17



Page: 16Need for IC optimization

Most engine speeds inUDDSare in 1000-1500 rpm rangeHence running at an optimal1200 rpm

Most of the engine TR isquite low and engineInefficient, hence

hybridization helps

Class Period 37


17/17



Page: 17

Thanks for Listening

Documents

Chiddarwar Darbha.final Project