Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Annual Reviews in Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/arcontrol

Automobiles of the future and the role of automatic control in those systems
Lino Guzzella *
ETH – The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: The level of individual mobility of any society is intimately related to its affluence. Obviously, well-
Received 2 November 2008 developed public and private transportation systems offer many benefits, but cause relevant problems as
Accepted 8 January 2009 well. This article focuses on automobiles and on two closely related problems, i.e., the emission of carbon
Available online 15 April 2009
dioxide and the consumption of primary energy resources. A comprehensive description of the current
situation is given and some of the most important options available for future improvements are
Keywords: described, highlighting the role that automatic control systems can play in this development.
Automotive control systems
ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Fuel economy
Pollutant emission control

1. Introduction greenhouse effects, and depletion of non-renewable primary

A modern society without a well-developed individual mobility
system is simply not conceivable. In parallel with the economic
development, an enormous growth of the number of cars has taken
place in many countries. As Fig. 1 shows, a similar trend can be
observed in all regions of the world: the wealthier a society is, the
larger the number of automobiles operated in that region becomes
and that correlation saturates only at about a level of 0.5 cars per
person.
This observation forms the basis for a rather alarming
projection:
 Most of the approximately 800 million cars operated worldwide
today are located in OECD countries, which have a population of
approximately 1.5 billion inhabitants.
 Countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China, and many
others have been experiencing and probably will continue to
have economic growth rates that will bring these nations in the
next one or two decades close to the same economic levels at
which the OECD countries are today.
 Extrapolating the saturation level of 0.5 cars per person to these
countries, which are the home to roughly 3 billion people, shows
that the number of automobiles operated worldwide will
increase substantially in the next years.
It is clear that such a development can cause dramatic economic
and ecologic problems that have the potential to destabilize global
equilibria. Keywords that come to mind are of course bad air-
quality, prohibitive land use, noise pollution, traffic fatalities,
energy resources.
2. A glimpse of the past
Some of these problems can be solved, at least partially, by a
combination of engineering efforts and regulatory measures.
Improving the air quality is the best example for that. ‘‘Zero-
emission’’ vehicles can be realized today, based on both electric
motors (EM) and internal-combustion engines (ICE). To illustrate
the role that automatic control systems can play in this context, the
purification of exhaust gases of spark-ignited engines using three-
way catalytic converters is discussed briefly below.
Internal combustion engines utilize the following strongly
exothermal hypothetical global reaction1 to produce mechanical
work
Ca Hb þ O2 þ N2 ! CO2 þ H2 O þ N2 (1)
where the fictitious hydrocarbon Ca Hb stands in for gasoline fuel
that in reality consists of many species. The reaction products
water and carbon dioxide are non-toxic substances, and molecular
nitrogen is inert at ambient conditions. Unfortunately, real
combustion processes follow a more complex global reaction,
namely
Ca Hb þ O2 þ N2 ! CO2 þ H2 O þ N2 þ Ca Hb þ CO þ NOx (2)
where hydrocarbons Ca Hb and carbon monoxide CO are product
species that missed complete oxidation, and NOx (mostly NO but
some NO2 as well) are product species that experienced an

1
Of course the actual reaction scheme is much more complex. Moreover, in
* Tel.: +41 44 632 5448;fax: +41 44 632 1139. Eqs. (1) and (2) the stoichiometric coefficients have been omitted to simplify the
E-mail address: guzzella@imrt.mavt.ethz.ch. argument.

1367-5788/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2009.01.001
2 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10

Fig. 2. Conversion efficiency (100% full conversion of harmful species to innocuous

Fig. 1. Correlation between annual GDP and car densities for selected countries. ones) of TWC as a function of AFR (TWC temperature above light-off threshold).
Source of data: IEA 2005.

unwanted oxidation. All of these species are toxic and create

problems such as acid rain and ground-level ozone pollution.
Three-way catalytic converters (TWC) ‘‘complete the job,’’ i.e.,
they transform the unwanted species in the exhaust gases to the
innocuous species on the right side of reaction (1) by reducing NOx
to N2 and using the oxygen obtained in this reaction step to oxidize
Ha Cb and CO. The efficiency of this conversion strongly depends on
the air/fuel ratio (AFR), which is defined as


mair 1
l¼  
mfuel s

where m... are mass flows and s  14:7 is the stoichiometric mass
ratio. As Fig. 2 shows, in ‘‘rich’’ conditions (l < 1, too little oxygen
available), TWC are not able to completely oxidize all of the Ha Cb
and CO, but they can reduce NOx very efficiently because the only
reaction yielding the much-needed oxygen is 2NOx ! N2 þ 2Ox . In
‘‘lean’’ conditions (l > 1, too much oxygen available), the oxidation
of Ha Cb and CO remains at very high levels, but the reduction of
NOx breaks down almost completely. Obviously, the ‘‘free’’ oxygen
in the exhaust gases is preferred by the TWC to oxidize Ha Cb and
CO because the extra energy needed to activate the reaction
2NOx ! N2 þ 2Ox is not required in this case (‘‘mother nature is
lazy . . .’’).
Obviously, TWC can reduce simultaneously all three harmful
species only if the AFR is slightly below its stoichiometric value, i.e.,
0:99 < l < 1:00. It is impossible for the air/fuel mixture burned in
the engine of a passenger car to satisfy this inequality in all driving
conditions. Harsh transients, such as fast accelerations and fuel cut
off in decelerations, which are unavoidable in automotive
applications, produce large deviations into the rich and lean
operating zones. Fortunately, TWC can store small amounts of
oxygen (1–2 g) and can thus cope with AFR deviations as long as
the limits of the oxygen storage capacity are not reached.
To avoid this situation, sophisticated feedforward and feedback
control loops are necessary, as illustrated in Fig. 3. Fortunately,
reliable sensors, such as solid-state air mass flow and pressure
sensors or Nernstian cells, actuators such as position-controlled
throttle valves or solenoid fuel injectors, and control hardware and
software are available. The feedforward part has to be very fast
(typical time constants of the transfer functions that must be
inverted are in the order of 0.1 s) and must avoid very large AFR
deviations during transients. The feedback part has to be very
precise, but the cross-over frequencies of the loop can be in the
order of 1 rad/s. Classical feedback AFR controllers were
essentially binary switching controllers, while modern versions
are based on models and are designed using H1 and/or IMC
(3)
Fig. 3. AFR control system. HFM ¼ hot  film anemometer (air mass flow
measurement), PFI ¼ port fuel injectors, ECU ¼ electronic control unit.
approaches. Next-generation controllers will include the capability
to adapt to changing plant and sensor characteristics, while
monitoring and on-board diagnosis features are already standard
today.
At very low costs, this technology proved to be very efficient
and reliable, such that controlled TWC are now included in almost
all new gasoline engine systems. As a consequence, air quality
has improved substantially in many cities all over the world. Figs. 4
and 5 illustrate that progress for the city of Zurich. This is a success
story in which control systems play a major role, a fact which the
control engineering community should use, together with similar
examples, to explain to a broader audience why our discipline is
so relevant to society, the environment, and the economy.
3. Comprehensive analysis of the present situation
The truly fundamental problems associated with individual
mobility are the consumption of non renewable (fossil) hydro-
carbon resources and the concomitant emission of green-house
gases, mainly CO2 . Severe economic and social problems are to be
expected if the global ‘‘hunger for energy’’ cannot be satisfied.
Indeed, projections by the IEA that the global primary energy
consumption will rise by approximately 100% over the next 50
years are to be taken very seriously. It is clear that individual
mobility is not the only driving force of that growth. However, its
share is substantial (on a global scale approximately 20%) and, for
 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 4. Air pollution levels (NOx ) in the city of Zurich, 1995. Source: Umwelt- und
Gesundheitsschutz Zürich.
reasons that will become clear below, individual mobility will be
one of the most difficult sectors to wean from oil (airplanes will use
the last drop of oil, automobiles the second last . . .).
The focus of this article is, therefore, on clarifying the most
important physical and engineering factors that determine the fuel
consumption of vehicles. Once these effects are explained, the
steps needed to design substantially more fuel-efficient cars
become clearer. Following the slogan that ‘‘fuel efficient cars are
Fig. 5. Air pollution levels (NOx ) in the city of Zurich, 2002. Source: Umwelt- und
Gesundheitsschutz Zürich.
3
Fig. 6. Most relevant energy conversion steps relevant during the operation of an
automobile.
our best oil wells,’’ this approach has the advantage of alleviating
the energy supply problems at a relatively low economic and
societal cost. An analysis of all aspects that affect the total energy
consumption of an automobile is quite complex. The ‘‘gray’’ or
embodied energy and the energy needed to recycle the vehicle
generally represent less than 20% of the total energy consumed.
Therefore, this article focuses on the energy conversion and
consumption steps illustrated in Fig. 6, which are relevant during
the vehicle’s operation. The corresponding analysis from the
bottom to the top is shown in the subsequent sections.
3.1. Driving profiles and driving losses
Obviously, any fuel consumption figures must be normalized by
the distance travelled when measuring the energy consumption.
However, this is not sufficient. To obtain ‘‘fair’’ indicators, the
velocity and elevation profiles must be known as well. Many
regulatory and proprietary test cycles exist. In this article, the
European test cycle MVEG-95 is used, which is illustrated in Fig. 7
(no elevation changes are considered in the MVEG-95). This cycle
was originally conceived to test the pollutant emissions of a car,
but it is now also used in Europe to measure its fuel consumption. It
is well known that the MVEG-95 does not represent well the
average driving style. However, as long as all manufacturers use
that cycle and no ‘‘cycle beating’’ is attempted, a comparison based
on the MVEG-95 yields meaningful information on the relative fuel
consumption of different vehicles.
The observation that the fuel consumption is indeed strongly
correlated to the driving profile is the starting point for many
approaches in which automatic control systems play an important
role. Route planning and congestion avoidance are perhaps the
4 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 7. European test cycle MVEG-95 (motor vehicle expert group); total cycle
length 11.4 km, average speed 35 km/h.
most obvious approaches, but many more ideas have been
proposed, which are based on additional inputs from on-board
radar or satellite navigation systems (Hellström, Fröberg, &
Nielsen, 2006).
The mechanical energy needed to drive any test cycle is used to
overcome the following three resistance forces:
 the aerodynamic friction, characterized by the vehicle’s frontal
area A f and the aerodynamic drag coefficient cd ;
 the rolling friction, characterized by the vehicle’s mass m and the
tire rolling friction coefficient cr ; and
 the acceleration resistance, characterized by the vehicle’s
mass m.
The energy utilized to accelerate the vehicle can be partially
recovered using regenerative braking systems (more on that later).
In standard vehicles with friction brakes, this energy is ‘‘lost,’’ i.e.,
converted to useless thermal energy during braking.
For most test cycles, it is possible to derive simple, yet
informative approximations for the mechanical energy needed to
drive a certain distance. For the MVEG-95, this approximation has
the form (Guzzella & Sciarretta, 2007)
E  A f  cd  19 þ m  cr  0:84 þ m  0:011 ðMJ=100 kmÞ
Table 1 shows a comparison of the mechanical energy (4) needed
to drive 100 km of the MVEG-95 cycle for four different vehicle
classes. The result is obvious, but nevertheless the pivot point for
all future attempts to save fuel: small and lightweight vehicles are
a must if substantial savings in fuel consumptions are to be
achieved.
The vehicle’s mass is the most important parameter when fuel
economy is the main concern. In fact, the sensitivity of the energy
consumption to this parameter is twice as large as to the other two
loss effects
dE=E dE=E dE=E
 0:74;  0:32;  0:35
dm=m dðA f  cd Þ=A f  cd dcr =cr
(numerical values valid for the parameters of a ‘‘full size’’ car as
shown in Table 1).
Of course, adding a recuperation device can partially improve
that situation. However, such a device will increase the vehicle’s
mass by mrec , and its efficiency hrec will be substantially below
1.2Fig. 8 shows the ratio between the mechanical energies required
to drive the MVEG-95 cycle with (Eðhrec ; mrec Þ) and without (Eno rec )
recuperation device as a function of the additional mass mrec (100
kg is a realistic value) and the recuperation efficiency hrec (0.6 is a
realistic value). Because of these two factors, the energy saving
potential is approximately 10% only, i.e., substantially less than the
maximum value of approximately 25% expected for the unrealistic
case mrec ¼ 0 and hrec ¼ 1.
2
Notice that the recuperation device transfers the vehicle’s kinetic energy to
some intermediate storage and then back to the vehicle, i.e., the total efficiency hrec
is the result of two energy conversions with concomitant losses.
Fig. 8. Recuperation of mechanical energy as a function of the mass and the
efficiency of the recuperation device. Valid for the MVEG-95 cycle and a full-size
vehicle as defined in Table 1.
Table 1
Comparison of mechanical energy consumption, MVEG-95 test cycle.
Vehicle class SUV Full size Compact Eco
m (kg) 2500 1500 1200 800
A f  cd (m2) 1.22 0.8 0.66 0.42
cr () 0.015 0.013 0.012 0.008
E (MJ/100 km) 80 48 37 22
The first important consequence of the analysis presented in
this section is obvious: if substantial reductions (factors two to
four) in fuel consumption are to be achieved, substantially
smaller and lighter vehicles must replace the standard vehicles of
today. Of course this has several drawbacks. The most important
is the reduced safety levels of such lightweight vehicles.
(4)
Buzeman, Viano, and Lovsund (1998) estimated that the risk
of injury of passengers is almost proportional to the vehicle’s
mass. Wenzel and Ross (2006) found a correlation of 0.15% injury
increase per kg of mass reduction for standard vehicle designs.
The same authors refined their analysis in a later publication
(Wenzel & Ross, 2008) showing that other factors have an
influence as well such that the correlation between mass and
safety is somewhat reduced. Nevertheless, it is clear that
lightweight vehicles have a reduced passive safety level. Such
a development cannot be accepted in future automobiles. On the
contrary, faced with the grim numbers of today’s road fatalities,
substantial progress is very much needed in this area. A possible
approach to designing vehicles that are both lightweight and safe
(5)
is briefly introduced in Section 4.3.
3.2. Internal combustion engines
Following the energy conversion chain illustrated in Fig. 6, the
next step is to analyze the conversion of the energy carried on
board (‘‘fuel’’) into the mechanical energy needed to drive the test
cycle. The energy content (more precisely, the lower heating
value) of Diesel fuel is approximately 42 MJ/kg. Accordingly, a
‘‘full-size’’ vehicle as defined in Table 1 should require 1.2 l of
Diesel fuel only to drive 100 km (almost 200 mpg). Of course, such
a mileage is impossible since it could be achieved only with an
engine with 100% efficiency. Modern Diesel ‘‘full-size’’ cars
consume approximately 6 l to drive 100 km of the MVEG-95
cycle. Accordingly, the true cycle-averaged efficiency of Diesel
engines is only approximately 20% (for gasoline engines it is only
17%). Obviously, these are serious losses, and any improvements
in engine efficiency would be very welcome. In this section the
 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 9. Engine efficiencies as a function of engine speed and torque for a modern
gasoline engine.
current engine designs are analyzed and their limitations are
described. Based on these observations, possible improvements
are discussed in Section 4.1.
Fig. 9 shows the efficiency map of a typical modern gasoline
engine. The independent variables are the engine speed n and the
engine torque T. The contour curves indicate all operating points at
which the engine operates with a constant efficiency. The engine
attains its best efficiency at medium speed and at very high
torques. Values between 0.37 for gasoline and 0.41 for Diesel
engines are realistic. The grey area shown in Fig. 9 indicates the
range of operating points in which the engine runs most of the
time. Unfortunately, in this operating area the efficiencies are
substantially lower. Not surprisingly, and as mentioned above, the
cycle-averaged efficiency of modern Diesel engines is only around
0.2 and that of gasoline engines only around 0.17. As indicated in
Fig. 9, the efficiency increases with increasing torque, while the
speed has a much smaller influence.
It is not difficult to understand the main reason for this strong
dependency of the engine efficiency on torque. An engine converts
chemical into mechanical energy, a process whose characteristics
are schematically illustrated in Fig. 10. This conversion process has
an internal efficiency ei , which is determined by the laws of
thermodynamics. The total efficiency e is smaller because
additional losses, such as engine friction, gas-exchange work,
Fig. 10. Willans model for the energy conversion efficiencies; for more details see
(Guzzella & Onder, 2004).
5
etc. consume some of the useful energy produced by the
thermodynamic processes. In fact, even when the engine runs at
zero torque, these losses require a substantial amount of fuel just
to keep the engine idling. Consequently, when only a small amount
of torque is required, the ratio between mechanical energy
produced and fuel energy consumed, i.e., the total efficiency, is
rather small. Only when the engine runs at full torque does the
total efficiency e approach the internal efficiency ei and, thus, can it
reach its maximum value.
An obvious approach to improving the part-load efficiency of
any engine is to choose a smaller engine size, i.e., to reduce its
swept volume. If that smaller engine is used to propel the same
vehicle, it must be operated at higher torques and, hence, at better
efficiencies. Compared against the original engine, that smaller
engine will obviously produce a reduced maximum power.
Nevertheless, the vehicle will still be able to reach the top speed
limits of most regions of the world. The only difference will be the
acceleration performance, which today is the only critical driving-
performance parameter. The following approximation yields a
realistic estimation of the time interval t 0 ! 100 needed to accelerate
a vehicle of mass m with an engine of maximum power P max from 0
to 100 km/h (0–60 mph)
770  m
t 0 ! 100  (6)
P max
According to this approximation, a ‘‘full size’’ vehicle, as defined in
Table 1, requires a maximum engine power of approximately
115 kW to achieve a value of t 0 ! 100 of 10 s. To drive the European
MVEG-95 test cycle, however, an average power of 7 kW is
sufficient. Even the peak power requirement in that cycle is only
37 kW, which is in line with the fact that in most driving conditions
the driver never needs to command the full engine power. Clearly,
an engine that has been designed to deliver 115 kW of power will
perform rather poorly when operated at only 6% of that value.
There are several engineering ideas for alleviating this problem,
some of which will be discussed below. However, if substantial
improvements in fuel economy are targeted at very low cost, then a
simple approach is to reduce engine size and to accept the resulting
reduced acceleration performance. Of course, here marketing and
other ‘‘soft factors’’ come into play, showing that engineering and
human psychology are often intimately intertwined.
4. Some remarks on future vehicle systems
In this section some possible future developments are
mentioned, without any claim of completeness. Section 4.1 lists
improvements of the propulsion systems that are expected to
materialize in the next ten years. Section 4.2 looks into more
advanced options, whose economic and ecologic impact is not yet
fully understood. Section 4.3 outlines a rather radically new option
that will take more time to become a reality, if it ever does at all.
4.1. Future Engine Systems
4.1.1. Clean Diesel Engines
Compared to standard gasoline engines, passenger car Diesel
engines have an inherently better fuel economy (peak efficiency of
slightly more than 40%, cycle averaged efficiency of slightly more
than 20%). Unfortunately, their tail-pipe pollutant emissions,
especially particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen monoxide and
dioxide (NOx), are substantially higher than those of modern
gasoline engines. Since Diesel engines are operated almost always
in lean conditions, three-way catalytic converters cannot be used.
Fig. 11 shows the typical trade-off curve between the PM and the
NOx emissions. The limits imposed by legislation are also shown in
that figure (the absolute values have been constantly reduced over
6 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 11. Participate matter (PM) and nitrogen monoxide and dioxide (NOx) limits of
Diesel engines. Standard (asterisk) and emission-feedback control (circle) design
set points.
the last years). So far, these limits have been complied with by
improving the combustion process. Common-rail (‘‘electronic’’)
injection systems operating at injection pressures of up to 2000 bar
have been instrumental for that progress.
To meet the expected emission limits (EURO VI in Europe,
similar in the USA) additional exhaust gas purification systems will
be required. Their key components are PM filters and systems that
are able to reduce NOx in lean conditions. PM filters are state of the
art and will be a part of every modern Diesel engine soon. Lean de-
NOx systems have not yet reached the same maturity level. Lean
NOx traps and selective catalytic reactors (SCR) that require
ammonia as an additional reducing agent are the two most likely
approaches to be used in the future. Fig. 12 shows the structure of
such an advanced exhaust gas purification system. Also illustrated
in that figure is the key idea of measuring the pollutant emission in
the exhaust gases and using this information in a feedback control
loop to better control the engine (Schilling, Alfieri, Amstutz, &
Guzzella, 2007). In fact, with this approach the engine can be run in
the point indicated by a circle in Fig. 11 at higher combustion
temperature and, thus, at higher efficiency and lower PM emission
levels, without violating the NOx limitations.
Future Diesel engines will reach the same very low pollutant
emission limits that gasoline engines reach today. This develop-
ment will slightly reduce their fuel-economy benefits and, more
importantly, further increase the system costs. It is, therefore, to be
expected that the market share of Diesel engines in passenger cars
will not continue to grow at the same rate as it did over the last
years. For heavy-duty and light-duty commercial vehicles, how-
ever, Diesel engines will remain the dominant prime mover for
many years to come.
Fig. 12. PM filter and SCR system. The pollutant emission sensors are used to close an emission-control feedback loop.
Fig. 13. Illustration of the engine down-sizing and supercharging concept.
4.1.2. Advanced gasoline engines
Several approaches have been proposed for improving the fuel
economy of standard gasoline engines. Replacing mechanical
camshafts and using fully flexible electro-hydraulic or electro-
mechanic valves to reduce throttling losses (Hoffmann &
Stefanopoulou, 2003), switching from spark-ignited to compres-
sion-ignited combustion systems (Shaver et al., 2005), or varying
the compression ratio during the operation of the engine (Nilsson,
Eriksson, & Gunnarsson, 2008) are three examples.
Probably the most promising approach is to reduce the
number of cylinders, and thus the swept volume, such that
friction losses are minimized and average engine loads are
increased. As shown in Fig. 13, with this approach the same
torque/speed point can be run at a substantially better efficiency
(from 0:2 ! 0:25, i.e., an improvement of 25%). Unfortunately,
for naturally aspirated engines the rated power scales (almost)
linearly with the swept volume. Therefore, smaller engines will
not satisfy customer demands on drivability, in particular
acceleration times, as Eq. (6) illustrates. One approach to
recover the lost power is to supercharge the engine with a
turbocharger or other devices (Guzzella, Wenger, & Martin,
2000). Such systems are often referred to as ‘‘downsized and
supercharged’’ (DSC) engines.
The main problem associated with gasoline DSC engines is their
very sluggish torque dynamics, i.e., the drivability can be
substantially impaired by the infamous ‘‘turbo lag.’’ To reduce
these lags, engine manufacturers employ smaller turbines or dual-
supercharger systems (a mechanical compressor and a turbochar-
 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 14. Illustration of the pneumatic-hybrid concept.
ger, or two turbochargers). Unfortunately, both approaches reduce
the fuel economy benefits and add substantial cost.
An alternative approach has been proposed recently that
completely eliminates turbo lags by adding one fully controllable
valve to the cylinder head and connecting this valve with an air
tank. A schematic illustration of such an engine system is shown in
Fig. 14. During the acceleration phases, the engine is boosted by the
air stored in the tank until the turbocharger reaches its optimal
operating speeds. This concept also permits the recuperation of
braking energy (this is the main mechanism to charge the air tank),
a very fast engine start/stop and the option for driving short
distances at low speed purely in pneumatic mode. The expectation
for this system is to achieve most of the benefits offered by hybrid-
electric vehicles at a fraction of the cost of those powertrains.
4.1.3. Hybrid-electric vehicles
Hybrid-electric vehicles (HEV) can reduce the fuel consumption
of gasoline engines, but only at substantially increased system
costs. The key ideas for improving the fuel economy are:
 Engine shut-down at low loads using the electric motor for low-
speed driving and auxiliaries;
 Regenerative braking that recuperates part of the vehicle’s
kinetic energy;
 Shifting of the operating points of the engine by duty cycling with
the electric part; and
 Engine downsizing.
Particularly the last point helps to improve the fuel economy.
Instead of a turbocharger, the torque recovery (referred to by ‘‘SC’’
in Fig. 13) is accomplished using the electric motor. Since
acceleration boosts are needed only for brief periods, HEV do
not need to carry any large battery packs. Particularly for driving at
low speeds most of the time and in stop-and-go traffic conditions,
HEV offer an interesting option to save fuel. It is, therefore, to be
expected that the market share of HEV will substantially increase
in affluent parts of the world.
HEV offer many interesting opportunities for the control
systems community. Classical problems, such as the design of
low-level control systems for electrical machines, and novel
challenges, such as the design of model-predictive optimal energy
7
management systems are abundant in HEV. One key idea is to use
all the information available about the future driving profile to
optimize the utilization of the available energy. With the wide-
spread use of GPS-based navigation systems and maps that include
topological and traffic information, it is possible to formulate easily
solvable optimization problems. The starting point is always the
drive cycle defined by the vehicle velocity vðtÞ and the elevation
profile hðtÞ (the independent variable t 2 1 . . . N is a discrete scalar).
Once this information is available, the power needed to drive that
cycle can be approximated as follows
"
vðtÞ  vðt  1Þ hðtÞ  hðt  1Þ
Pdem ðtÞ  m  þ k0 þ k1 
d d
  #
vðtÞ þ vðt  1Þ 2
þ k2   vðtÞ (7)
2
where m is the vehicle’s mass, d the time interval used for sampling
the speed signal, and ki the coefficients needed to describe the
resistance forces caused by rolling friction, uphill driving, and
aerodynamic friction.
For the case of a parallel HEV, the mechanical power P dem ðtÞ
required to drive a specific cycle is the sum of the power provided
by the combustion engine P e ðtÞ and the power provided by the
electric motor Pm ðtÞ. The control signal is the power-split factor
uðtÞ
Pe ðtÞ ¼ uðtÞ  Pdem ðtÞ; P m ðtÞ ¼ ð1  uðtÞÞ  P dem ðtÞ (8)
that has to be determined such that the fuel consumed is
minimized without violating the constraints imposed by the
limited battery size. The state of charge (SoC) of that battery is the
only state variable (often modeled using a simple current
integrator). To be more precise, for the optimization the
Langrangian function
LðuðtÞÞ ¼ P e ðuðtÞÞ þ sðtÞ  Pm ðuðtÞÞ (9)
is used where sðtÞ is the equivalence factor. This equivalence
factor represents the conversion losses one has to accept when
transforming fuel into electric energy. Of course this variable
depends on the vehicle’s trajectory and the battery’s state of
charge. In some situations it can be assumed to be constant
(Paganelli et al., 2000). In this case it is a straightforward
procedure to choose the power split factor such that in each
time instant the Lagrangian LðuÞ is minimized. This approach is
known as the equivalent consumption minimization strategy
(ECMS). As illustrated in Fig. 15, when the equivalence factor is
not constant, it has to be estimated based on any information
available.
If the complete future driving profile is known at the outset, a
closed-form optimization is possible. This problem can be solved
using Bellman’s optimality principle. Since the numerical effort of
such dynamic programs scales only linearly with the problem
duration N, rather long drive cycles can be handled without any
problems. The solutions obtained in this way are very useful to
benchmark and to further improve any realizable (‘‘causal’’)
control strategies proposed so far. The survey paper (Sciarretta &
Guzzella, 2007) contains more detailed information.
Fig. 15. Block diagram of an adaptive ECMS algorithm.
8 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
Fig. 16. Optimal equivalence factor (normalized) for the CADC (common arthemis
driving cycle) driving cycle; target SoC ¼ 0:6.
As an example, Fig. 16 shows the result of such an optimization
for a typical city driving cycle. At the start, the equivalence factor s
is relatively small. This reflects the fact that deviations from the
target SoC of 0.6 are more acceptable because sufficient time is
available to charge or discharge the battery to that level. When
approaching the final time, the equivalence factor becomes larger
because the target SoC can only be reached by more aggressive
battery charging or discharging strategies.
4.2. Future propulsion systems
Looking further into the future, battery electric vehicles (BEV)
have often been proposed as an interesting option. So far, however,
numerous attempts to launch BEV have not yet produced any
commercial success. The first reason for that failure is the very low
energy density of the batteries available today. Fig. 17 shows the
net 3 energy density levels of three hydrocarbon fuels and three
battery types. Clearly, even the energy density of the best battery
technology available today is orders of magnitude smaller than
that of Diesel fuel. This situation will improve, but no radical
changes can be expected in the next decade.
The second reason for the limited success of BEV is the high cost
of high-performance batteries (precise data are very difficult to
obtain, a reasonable figure valid at the time of press of this article is
300 Euros per kWh for bulk orders). The third main problem of
batteries is their relatively long recharging time. If batteries are to
reach long life times and high recharging efficiencies, the specific
recharging powers must remain so small that several hours of
recharging time are required. Clearly, this compares poorly to
liquid hydrocarbon fuels, where ‘‘recharging’’ powers of several
MW are standard at any gas pump. Emergency charging is possible
for some battery types (‘‘fast’’ recharge of say 20–40% capacity).
However, in this case a high-power electric outlet is required,
which is usually not available at family homes, and the life time of
batteries is also reduced by such charging procedures.
For these reasons it is expected that in the next decades ‘‘plug-
in’’ HEV will play an important role. Compared to standard HEV,
these vehicles have larger battery packs and can be recharged
from the grid. Plug-in HEV are designed to be able to operate as
BEV having a range of approximately 20–40 km, such that the
majority of all trips can be made without utilizing any gasoline or
Diesel fuel. If longer trips become necessary, the combustion
3
The net energy density is defined as the amount of mechanical energy available
at the wheels divided by the energy carrier mass. Average losses from the energy
carrier to the wheels are considered in that approach.
Fig. 17. Net energy density levels for hydrocarbon fuels (H2 ¼ hydrogen) and
batteries (Ni=MH ¼ nickel metal hydrate, Pb ¼ lead acid).
engine acts as a (powerful) ‘‘range extender,’’ such that all
customer requirements are met.
Another option are hydrogen-based fuel cell electric vehicles
(FCEV). As Fig. 17 shows, the energy density level of high-pressure
(more than 400 bar) hydrogen tanks is similar to the one of liquid
hydrocarbons, such that for some years this approach has been
proposed as the best alternative to ICE. Unfortunately, high system
costs, reliability issues, and the open problems related to the
production of the hydrogen fuel have so far prevented a break-
through of that technology.
Fig. 18 shows a simplified analysis that corroborates the last
assertion, as long as hydrogen is generated using the ‘‘detour’’ of
electricity involving electrolysis of water.4 Starting at the available
primary energy sources (coal, natural gas, hydro and nuclear power
plants, etc.), all relevant energy conversion steps are shown in that
figure. The number below the primary energy source indicates the
CO2 factor, i.e., the emission of CO2 when compared to the standard
defined by petroleum oil (76 g/MJ).
The results for all three classes of primary energy sources are
shown at the bottom lines of Fig. 18:
 the amount of primary energy that can be converted to
mechanical energy at the wheel varies between 9% (for coal
and FCEV) and 68% (for wind, etc. and BEV); and
 to drive 1 km in the European test cycle, a full-size vehicle (as
defined in Table 1) emits between 570 g (coal and FCEV) and 0 g
of CO2 (wind, etc. and BEV).
A modern Diesel engine utilizes 18% of the primary energy
stored in the petroleum oil it burns, and it emits, when used to
drive a full-size vehicle, 190 g of CO2 per km distance driven. The
main conclusion that one can draw from this (admittedly very
simplified analysis) is that seemingly attractive approaches can
produce rather disappointing results when the entire energy
conversion chain is taken into account.
4.3. Future vehicle systems
The analysis presented in Section 3.1 clarified that only a
combination of improvements in the powertrain with substantial
changes in the vehicle design can reduce the fuel consumption by a
factor of three to four. Of course, one can argue whether this is
necessary, but faced with dwindling primary fossil energy
resources and rapidly increasing demand for energy supply, a
radical change might prove to be necessary within the next 20 to
30 years.
4
Unfortunately, this is the only convenient way of producing hydrogen in
decentralized units. If hydrogen is produced in large quantities using steam
reforming of natural gas, or, even better, using CO2 -neutral energy resources then
the situation changes.
 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10 9

Fig. 18. ‘‘Well-to-wheel’’ energy conversion options for FCEV (left) and BEV (right), PV ¼ photo voltaic, NPP ¼ nuclear power plant, CC PP ¼ combined cycle power plant. See
text for more details.

Table 2 shows a projection of the key parameters of Table 2

Key vehicle parameters today and projections ten and 30 years in the future, fuel
substantially more fuel-efficient cars. Starting from actual figures,
consumption in the MVEG-95 test cycle.
a substantial reduction can be expected in the next ten years using
essentially incremental improvements. If much lower fuel con- Model year 2008 2018 2038
sumption figures are required, a radical change in vehicle design is m (kg) 1500 1300 800
necessary, resulting in much lighter and also smaller vehicles. A f  cd (m2) 0.8 0.7 0.4
Clearly, one key problem of such a 2038 model year vehicle is cr () 0.013 0.012 0.01
safety. It can be expected that progress in material science yields hc () 0.18 0.22 0.30
c (l/100 km) 8.0 5.6 2.4
tougher, lighter, and cheaper materials that can be used to make
lightweight vehicles safer. However, it is highly improbable that
such ambitious weight objectives can be achieved while simulta- accidents. As the sketch in Fig. 19 shows, the key idea is to
neously decreasing the numbers of road fatalities. combine passive (radar, video, etc.) sensors with communication
A radically different approach is to replace passive with active devices (car-to-car, people-to-car, etc.) and precise localization
safety systems, i.e., to build cars that simply cannot cause sytems (next-generaion GPS, roadside beacons, etc.) to generate a

Fig. 19. Visualization of a networked mobility system.

10 L. Guzzella / Annual Reviews in Control 33 (2009) 1–10
high-performance ad-hoc network that controls the traffic flow
such that only safe actions can be taken by all traffic participants.
Each driver can take any action, as long as that decision is not
leading to a potentially dangerous situation. All of the vehicles are
fully ‘‘drive-by-wire,’’ i.e., the drivers control the physical layers of
their vehicles only through an embedded system that receives
information from the traffic network controllers.
If such a system ever becomes reality, vehicles could be built
without heavy accident-mitigation features, simply because no
accidents can happen. Combined with advanced powertrains, such
very-light vehicles would achieve the very-low fuel consumption
figures indicated in Table 2. It goes without saying that such a
traffic system would heavily rely on sophisticated control
algorithms, both on the supervisory network level and on the
component level.
Many problems will have to be solved before such a traffic
system can become reality. Even if the enormous engineering
challenges can be met (security of the communication channels,
complexity of the networks, reliability and fault-tolerance of the
control systems, etc.) other ‘‘soft factors’’ (liability and other legal
issues) might render its realization very difficult. Moreover, it is
not clear at all yet how the transition from a standard to a
networked traffic system can be accomplished, i.e., how the
situation in which ‘‘dumb’’ heavy vehicles and ‘‘intelligent’’
lightweight vehicles have to coexist on the same roads.
5. Conclusion
I individual mobility is an indispensable component of any
modern society. Automobiles will remain the main means by
which this inexorably increasing demand will be satisfied in future.
Without appropriate countermeasures, this development will
exert an enormous stress on the energy system and cause
additional environmental and societal problems. Science and
engineering can help alleviate these problems, and particularly
automatic control systems will be very important in that quest.
However, it is the firm belief of the author of this article that
‘‘technology fixes’’ will go a long way, but they will not suffice to
resolve this problem completely. Two other developments must
complement that effort: (1) additional – preferably CO2 -neutral –
primary energy and fuel sources must be developed, and (2) the
intensity of the motorized individual mobility must be reduced,
replacing it by other transportation forms (public transportation,
low-speed and human-powered vehicles, etc.).
References
Buzeman, D. G., Viano, D. C., & Lovsund, P. (1998). Car occupant safety in frontal
crashes: A parameter study of vehicle mass, impact speed, and inherent vehicle
protection. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30, 713–722.
Guzzella, L., & Onder, C. (2004). Introduction to modeling and control of IC engine systems.
Springer Verlag.
Guzzella, L., & Sciarretta, A. (2007). Vehicle propulsion systems modeling and optimization
(2nd. Ed.). Springer Verlag.
Guzzella, L., Wenger, U., & Martin, R. (2000). IC-engine downsizing and pressure-wave
supercharging for fuel economy. SAE Paper 2000–01-1019.
Hellström, E., Fröberg, A., & Nielsen, L. (2006). Real-time fuel-optimal cruise controller for
heavy trucks using road topography information. SAE Technical Paper 2006–01-
0008.
Hoffmann, H., & Stefanopoulou, A. (2003). Iterative learning control of electromecha-
nical camless valve actuator. IEEE Transactions on Control System Technology, 11(2),
174–184.
Nilsson, Y., Eriksson, L., & Gunnarsson, M. (2008). Torque modeling for optimising fuel
economy in variable compression engines. International Journal of Modeling, Iden-
tification and Control (IJMIC) 3(3).
Paganelli, G., Guerra, T., Delprat, S., Santin, J., Combes, E., & Delhom, M. (2000).
Simulation and assessment of power control strategies for a parallel hybrid car.
Journal of Automobile Engineering, 214, 705–718.
Schilling, A., Alfieri, E., Amstutz, A., & Guzzella, L. (2007). Emission-controlled diesel
engines. MTZ - Motortechnische Zeitschrift, 68(11), 27–31.
Sciarretta, A., & Guzzella, L. (2007). Control of hybrid electric vehicles: A survey of optimal
energy-management strategies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 27(2), 60–70.
Shaver, G., Roelle, M., Caton, P., Kaahaaina, N., Ravi, N., Hathout, J.-P., Ahmed, J., Kojic, A.,
Park, S., Edwards, C., & Gerdes, C. (2005). A physics-based approach to the control of
homogeneous charge compression ignition engines with variable valve actuation.
International Journal of Engine Research, 6(4), 361–375.
Wenzel, T. & Ross, M. (2006). Increasing the fuel economy and safety of new light-duty
vehicles. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report, available at http://
eetd.lbl.gov/ea/teepa/pdf/LBNL-60449.pdf.
Wenzel, T., & Ross, M. (2008). Safer vehicles for people and the planet. American
Scientist 96(2).
Lino Guzzella has been a full professor at ETH Zurich, Switzerland, since 1999. After
receiving his mechanical engineering diploma in 1981 and his doctoral degree in 1986,
both from ETH, he has held several positions in industry and academia. With his
research group he focuses on novel approaches to control energy conversion systems,
particularly automotive propulsion systems.