Proceedings of the American Control Conference

Chicago, Illinois June 2000

Optimal Energy Management in Series Hybrid Electric Vehicles

A. Brahma, Y. Guezennec and G. Rizzoni

The Ohio State Liiiversity
DOE-CATE Center on Hybrid Drivetrains and Control Systems
Columbus, OH 432 I2. USA

Next, a powertrain model will be proposed and an

1. ABSTRACT optimal control problem will be formulated. Results
will be presented last with a discussion of
This paper deals with the optimization of the implications and conclusions.
instantaneous electrical generation1 electrical
storage power split in series hybrid electric 3.1 MODEL
vehicles. Optimal energy management is related to
the optimization of the instantaneous
generatiodstorage power split in series hybrid For the purposes of this paper, an abstracted form of
electric vehicles [l]. Previously, a power split type Rizzoni, Guzzella and Baumann's [2] model is
solution of the series hybrid energy management proposed. A generic representation of a series
hybrid powertrain in their language is shown in
problem has been attempted using a rule-based Figure 1.
approach. Our approach performs a dynamic
programming solution of the problem of determining
the optimal power split between both sources of storage
energy, with realistic cost calculation for all
considered power trajectories for the combined

El
APWGenerator, electric machines and battery
efficiencies, and a penalty function formulation for
the deviation of the ideal state-of-charge to be Generator
sustained over the length of time considered. The
discrete state formulation of this dynamic Power
E!acfonCr
programming approach makes the computation
very efficient. Results are obtained for series
hybrids for the FUDS drive cycle.
Figure 1 Representation of a series hybrid powertrain
in the language of Rizzoni et. al.. [2]
2. INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, the energy consumption optimization

problem has been handled by various control
strategies on the premise that global optimality
results from instantaneous optimality. However,
the optimization problem is in reality a global one
because the control choices at one instant
influence decisions at others. This is even more
true if the system is charge-sustaining. In this
paper, an optimal power split problem for series
hybrids will be proposed and a dynamic
programming formulation suggested for its solution.
This model is abstracted further in Figure 2 using the
following logic: for each power flow path in the above
system, the intermediate components in the path
can be replaced by their net effect on the path. The
net effect of each component is to affect the path
efficiency by introducing losses and/or to modulate
the power flow magnitude in the path. Therefore.
every power flow path can be simply characterized
by an efficiency and a power flow value associated
with it. Therefore, the above model reduces to the
model shown below.

3. PROBLEM FORMULATION AND

SOL UTlON

0-7803-5519-9/00 $10.00 0 2000 AACC GO


A, e, B, e,
Generation
q 1, ?ll
(Motor)
C, e.
Figure 2 Abstracted representation of a parallel
hybrid powertrain
A detailed description of this model can be found in
[3].In this figure, q, and q, represent the combined
efficiency and instantaneous power flow of the
combined APWGeneration path,i.e., from the fuel
to the electrical bus. q1 and q2 represent the
efficiency and instantaneous power flows in the
storage path.The following convention is adopted: a
positive flow always signifies power flow away from
the storage element. The small circle in the middle
is a lossless summation element or power splitter. It
represents the electrical power split that occurs in
the power bus. In [4], a similar formulation is
applied towards a parallel hybrid, but the difference
is that the power split is mechanical. The split is
given by
430) = 410) +4#) I vt (11
From our definitions, the following relationships can
be discerned among the variables:
e,= -(4,/77*) (2)
(3)
Statement of the ODtimal Control Problem
The supervisory control problem involves the
determination of the time profiles of the power flows
9, and q. In a series hybrid, the power split is
between the electric generation and electric storage
paths, as opposed to a parallel hybrid where it is
between the mechanical and electrical paths. The
control problem also involves the determination of
the path efficiencies q, and qz as a function of time.
61
The determination of the power split is subject to
constraints. For proper operation, the power
supplied to the vehicle must be at least equal to the
power demand. If we represent the power demand
on the system by a function t(t), then this constraint
can be stated as
4 3 0 ) = z(t),Yf r (5)
The other constraint pertains to the quantity of
energy in the rechargeable storage; whether it is
charge sustaining or charge depleting. In our
context, charge sustaining will be implied to mean
the continuous modulation of the battery state of
charge within certain operational bounds. This can
be mathematicallystated as follows:
t,S t 4,
Additional constraints exist in the form of upper and
lower bounds of the power and efficiency ratings.
The system objective to be minimized is:
(7)
3.2 APPLICATION OF DYNAMIC
PROGRAMMING TO THE SOLUTION OF THE
PROBLEM
A method such as dynamic programming is
extremely appropriate for the solution of a problem
of this nature, It has been applied before to hybrid
vehicle vehicle control [5],[6],[7].
Staae Variable
In the current formulation, time is taken to be the
stage variable. Time is discretized into one second
intervals. The solutions consist of second by second
profiles of the power flows and path efficiencies.
State Variables
The control inputs q,,q, qz,qzare our state variables.
This leads to a four dimensional dynamic
programming formulation. However, for every power
and efficiency combination that yields a certain cost,
if a higher efficiency exists, a lower cost is obtained.
From the point of optimality, therefore, only the
highest efficiencies matter. This reduces the
dimesionality of the problem to just one, because the
power flows are also constrained through the load.
The net power flow in the electric generation path,
9,, is chosen to be the single independent state
variable in this formulation. The direct result of this
algorithm is the power flow profile in the generation
path. The power flow profile of the storage path is
the difference of the power demand profile and the
generation power flow profile. Dynamic
Programming is used to optimize this power profile
with respect to energy consumption.
The dependent variable is the net power flow in the
storage path, 9Jt). Given 9,(t) and z(t), it is
calculated according to
q 2 ( t )= z ( t ) -41 ( t ) , (8)
The formulation of the problem in terms of the
secondary power level leads to a classical dynamic
programming path problem in which the stage
variable is time and the state variable is the primary
power flow. The problem then is to determine the
primary (generation path) power profile that
minimizes the overall energy consumption.
Optimal Policv Function
The optimal policy function tells us the optimal
decision for each node. The optimal decision
represents a target power level in the next time
step, or the power level in the previous stage in the
case of a forward formulation.
Optimal Value Function
In a backward dynamic programming formulation,
we define the optimal value function S as
S(t, 9,) = the least energy consumption from the
current node to the end of the process.
The appropriate recursive relation is then
W q , )= *n[aj(t,q,)+S(t+l,ql j)l (9)
a .(t ) represents the arc cost associated with
thh IAqdecisionat node (t, ql). S(t+l,q .) is the
optimal value function at node &I, q,), which is the
consequence of the / decision at node (t, q,).
Calculation of arc costs
The objective function for the current problem is the
overall energy consumption. Therefore, the arc
costs should represent the energy consumed by
the system in making a state transition. For the
generation path, the energy consumed at each
state transition is defined as
62
The energy consumed by the storage path is
calculated as
Given a certain power demand 9/ and 9, are related.
Therefore, energy consumption in one path
determines energy consumption in the other.
The arc cost represents the energy consumed by the
system in going from one timestep to another. In this
paper, we modify the arc cost as follows:
where a is an tunable weighing parameter that is
used to penalize the amount of the stored electr cal
energy consumed/restored in a timestep. +he
electrical energy consumed is equivalent to the
deviation of the State of Charge from a nominal
setpoint. Therefore, by careful selection of a, the
system may be made to behave in a charge
sustaining manner.
The subscript j denotes the j arc cost. The j lh arc
fh
represents the trajectory of the system as a result of
the j decision at the node (t, 9,).
fh
3.3 RESULTS
Powertrain SDecifications
The combined APWGenerator path power rating
chosen for this paper was 25 kW. The storage path
power rating chosen was 60 kW both in traction and
regeneration. This was enough to cover the power
requirements imposed by the FUDS cycle on a
vehicle with parameters representative of a mid size
sedan.
For this exercise, the best efficiencies of the
combined APU-Generator path (as a function of
power level 9,) were assumed to be representative
of modern diesel engine/ electric generator
efficiencies. The storage path or battery efficiencies
(again, as a function of power level 9), were
assumed to represent modern sealed lead acid
battery behaviour[ll]. A nominal battery pack size of
.0083kwh was chosen to compute the SOC.For the
purpose of deriving road load profiles for the drive
cycles, the following vehicle parameters were
chosen:
 Table 1 Vehicle parameters for the calculation of
road loads

I Parameter 1 Value
I
I Mass I 1900 kg I
Drag Coefficient C,

Rolling
coefficient C, 0.0'
0
'
50
'
100
'
150
'
200 250
'
300
'
350
I
UM
'
450
tllm 8

Wheel Radius
Figure 4 SOC profile variation
I Frontal Area A, I 2.58m2 I Figure 4 shows SOC variation for the first 450
seconds of the FUDS cycle for different values of a.
These represent a standard mid-size sedan such The plot shows that it does indeed control the extent
as the Chevy Lumina.The road load (in terms of to which the deviation of the SOC.
power) at any instant of time is given by equation
13. power split befween generation and storage paths

dV 1
P,,=mV-+--puC,AfV3 +...
dt 2
.....+ VC,mg Con +mg VSim
The road load vs. time profile for a FUDS cycle
derived using 20 is shown in figure 3 below.

Rcad PDVWLoad (or FUDS cycle

limes

Figure 5 Power split profile for os0

Figure 5 shows the power split profile for e o . This

represents a totally charge depleting strategy with no
penalty on the electrical energy consumed. As
expected, the algorithm chooses electric power over
the whole cycle. Therefore, the only profile that can
o 2w ux) ew BW iwo 12m tux)
be seen on the plot is the storage path power profile,
lime I which is equal to the load profile.
Figure 3 Road power load for FUDS cycle

Simulation runs

The discretization chosen for the state variable

(power level 4,) was 5kW. The computational
speed of the algorithm is exponentially dependent
on the state variable discretization, and it was
found that an excessively fine discretization does
not improve the solution beyond a certain level.
The time axis discretization was 1 second. With
these values, the entire 1374 x 6 network was
solved within ten minutes on a general purpose PC
using Matlab.
Figure 6 Power split profile for e3.5

63
Figure 6 shows the power split profile for G-3.5.
The SOC profiles plot indicates that this split is
nominally charge sustaining.
Figure 7 Close up of Power split profile for -3.5
Figure 7 shows a close up of the power split profile
for ~3.5. The region highlighted shows that
regeneration is commanded when possible and that
the APWGenerator path and the storage paths
share the load during positive loads.
4. CONCLUSIONS
A method to derive optimal power split profiles for a
series hybrid powertrain is given. The method uses
a power-efficiencyformulation of the optimal control
problem and implements a solution using dynamic
programming.
An interesting conclusion that can be drawn from
this exercise is the ability to impose the global
integral charge sustaining constraint through a local
penalty formulation. Moreover, this penalty does
not need an instantaneous state of charge
measurement because it only acts based on the
instantaneous flux of power to/from the electrical
storage.
Choosing the right level of state variable
discretization involves a trade-off between accuracy
and speed. However, a very fine level of
discretization does not improve the quality of the
solution at all.
Currently, this method uses deterministic road load
profiles from known drive cycles. However, a load
forecasting algorithm giving accurate prediction of
medium term loads will enable the application of
this method to online optimization.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
64
This research has been indirectly supported and
motivated by a DOE GATE award on control and
optimization of Hybrid Electric Vehicles.
6. CONTACT
Y. Guezennec, Ohio State University, Mechanical
Engineering Department, 206 W. 18Ih Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43210, E-mail:
guezennec.1 @osu.edu, Phone: (614) 292-1910,
Fax: (614) 292-3163
7. REFERENCES
1. N. Jalil, N.A.. Kher, Mutasim Salman, A rule based
energy management strategy for a series hybrid
vehicle, Proc. ACC 1997
2. Riuoni, G., Guzzella, L., Baumann, B., Unified
modeling of hybrid electric vehicles, , IEEE Trans.
MechatronicSystems, September 1999
3. Brahma, A., A unified approach to optimal energy
management in hybrid vehicles, MS Thesis, The Ohio
State University, 1999
4. Brahma, A, Guezennec, Y, Rizzoni, G. Dynamic
Optimization of Mechanical-Electrical power flows in
Parallel Hybrid vehicles, Submitted to AVEC200
5. Mosbech, H., Optimal control of hybrid vehicle,
ISATA 80 proceedings, pp. 303-20, vol. 2
6. Oprean, M., lonescu, V., Mocanu, N., Beloiu, S.,
Stanciu, C., Dynamic Programming applied to hybrid
vehicle control, Proc. International conference on
electrical drives ICED 88, pp. DUI011-20, vol. 4
7. Auiler, J.E., Zbrozek, J.D., Blumberg, P.N.,
Optimization of automotive engine calibration for
better fuel economy- methods and applications, SAE
paper # 770076
8. Mayer, T., Schroeder, D., Robust control of a parallel
hybrid drivetrain with a CW, SAE paper # 960233
9. Zoelch , U., Scroeder, D., Dynamic optimization
method for design and rating of the components of a
hybrid vehicle, International Journal of Vehicle
Design, vol. 19, no. 1, 1998
10. Dre$uss, S. E., Law, A.M., The aft and theory of
dynamic programming, Academic Press, 1977
11. Fleming, F.A., Shumard, P., Dickinson, B., Rapid
recharge capability of valve regulated lead acid
batteriesfor EV and HEV applications,