Cost-Effective Hybrid-Electric Powertrains November 3, 2003 Dr. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Cost-Effective Hybrid-Electric Powertrains November 3, 2003 Dr. Alex Severinsky Ted Louckes Fred Frederiksen Troy, Michigan 1 Content Sources of improvements in fuel economy Basis for cost-effective design HEV powertrain
1
Ted Louckes Fred Frederiksen
2
3
Efficiency Map for 3 L Engine
250 200 150 100 50 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Torque (Nm)
ON/ OFF Engine Operation Min torque for efficient engine
Average engine torque for driving the car OFF ON
4
ON/OFF Control Efficiency Map for 2.0 L TC Engine Conventional Control Efficiency Map for 3.0 L Engine
250 200 150 100 50 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Torque (Nm)
Max torque curve Output shaft
1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
Average operating point
5
* Improvement depends on average road load and is independent of driving patterns Ref: Adamson, Louckes, Polletta, Severinsky, Templin, Hyperdrive as Powertrain Successor, Future Car Congress, June 2002, Arlington, Virginia, SAE paper 2002- 01-1909.
6
On U.S. Combined Cycle Midsize sedan Midsize SUV Total Brake Losses 37% at 50 hp peak 26% at 10 hp peak 32% at 60 hp peak 21% at 10 hp peak Total brake losses on driving axle brakes 17% at 10 hp peak 14% at 10 hp peak Recoverable energy with 42 V ISG 7% 6% Recoverable energy with 144 V ISG 10% 8% At steady speed Decreased fuel economy due to increased weight
7
Base profit / loss
Increase in customer value for better fuel economy: 30-40% Decrease in electrical system cost: 30-35% Additional Value
Ref: Frederiksen, Louckes, Polletta, Severinsky, Templin ., Effects of High Battery Voltage on Performance and Economics of the Hyperdrive Powertrain, Hybridfahrzeuge und Energiemanagement, Braunschweiger Symposium, February 21, 2002, Technische Universitat Braunschweig.
8
50% of rated discharge time 30% of rated discharge time * Repeat 84 times, fully recharge
Ref: Frederiksen, Louckes, Severinsky, Templin, Electronics as the Cornerstone of Future Fuel-efficient and Clean Vehicles; SAE-IEEE Convergence Conference, Detroit, MI, October 2002, SAE paper 2002-21-0033.
9
10
Planetary power split gear set Engine Traction motor Inverters Starter generator motor Battery Filed March 17, 1969, Granted March 2, 1971
11
Battery Transmission Motor Clutch Engine
12
Engine Starter generator motor Traction motor Clutch January 1990
13
14
15
Planetary gear power split Inverters Central Controller
Front wheels Batteries, Computer Controller 67 hp PM traction motor 30 hp PM Generator 1.5 L Atkinson VVT Gasoline 500/200 V converter 650 cc Turbocharged DOHC Engine 46 hp Ind. traction motor Clutch 9.4 hp Ind starter/ generator Optional planetary gear transmission (+) (-) 200 V 6 Ah NiMH Inverters Central Controller Front wheels Batteries, Computer Controller (+) (-) 500 V 2.4 Ah NiMH
16
Planetary coupling Clutch coupling Clutch + planetary Transmission N/A N/A 3 speed AT Engine power 77 hp 70 hp in Turbo 65 hp in Turbo Engine 1.5 L DOHC VVT 650 cc DOHC 630 cc DOHC Motor 1 (gen) 30 hp PM 10 hp Ind 9 hp Ind Motor 2 (trac) 67 hp PM 46 hp Ind 43 hp Ind Battery 200 V, 6 Ah NiMH 500 V, 2.4 Ah NiMH 500 V, 2.4 Ah NiMH Test Weight, lbs. 3,125 2,875 2,875 FUDS, mpg 65.4 74.1 73.4 HWFET, mpg 66.1 72.7 71.4 Combined (sticker), mpg 55.3 61.8 61.0 Accel 0-60 mph, sec 10.4 10.4 10.5 Top Spd, mi/h 108 108 106
17
18
1.2 L engine + turbocharger 20 hp peak Traction motor Clutch 17 hp starter/ generator 12 modules, 50V, 4 Ah 20 hp peak traction motor
Rear wheels (+) (-) Inverters Central Controller Batteries, Battery Computer Controller
19
MPG
Base Hyperdrive U/M % improvement Fuel Economy ETW 2,980 3,104 lbs FUDS 28.5 52.1 mpg 83 % HWFET 40.2 46.9 mpg 16 % Combined (CAFÉ) 32.8 49.6 mpg 53 % Performance PTW 2,980 3,104 lbs 0-60 mi/h 11.5 8.8 sec 23 % 40-60 mi/h 6.0 3.9 sec 35 % 0-85 mi/h 25.6 15.7 sec 39 % ¼ mile 18.4 16.7 sec 9 % Top Speed Continuous 106.5 106.5 Mi/h Gradeability Requirement @ 55 mi/h 6% 11.4% more @ 75 mi/h 4% 9.2% more
20
21
3.0 L engine + turbocharger
40 hp traction motor Clutch 27 hp starter/ generator 16 modules, 50 V, 6 Ah, (+) (-) 3 speed AT Inverters Central Controller 27 hp traction motor Front wheels Batteries, Battery Computer Controller
22
MPG
Base 4 L Hyperdrive 2.7 L TC U/M % Fuel Economy ETW 3,792 3,915 lbs FUDS 17.8 35.1 mpg 97 % HWFET 26.9 35.5 mpg 32 % Combined 21.0 35.3 mpg 68 % Performance PTW 3,792 3,915 lbs 0-60 mi/h 9.4 6.7 sec 29 % 40-60 mi/h 4.6 2.5 sec 46 % 0-85 mi/h 25 12.8 sec 49 % 1/4 mile 17.5 15.4 sec 12 % Top Speed Continuous 117 125 Mi/h Continuous Gradeability Gradeability @55 mi/h 23.8 25.2 % more Gradeability @ 75 mi/h 13.2 16.5 % more
23
24
3.0 L engine + turbocharger 80 hp traction motor Clutch 38 hp starter/ generator 16 modules, 50 V, 6 Ah (+) (-) 3 speed AT Inverters Central Controller 20 hp traction motor Front wheels Batteries, Battery Computer Controller
25
Base Hyperdrive Percent improvement Fuel Economy ETW 5,750 5,750 lbs FUDS 13.7 25.3 mpg 85 % HWFET 21.8 27.3 mpg 25 % CAFÉ component 17.4 26.2 mpg 50 % Performance PTW 6,200 6,200 lbs 0-60 mi/h 9.6 7.7 sec 20 % 40-60 mi/h 5.4 3.6 sec 33 % Gradeability @55 mi/h 18.7 18.8 % Top Speed Continuous 110 110 Mi/h Continuous Gradeability GCW (with trailer) 13,500 13,500 lbs Gradeability @ 80 mi/h 3.5 3.2 % Gradealility @ 65 mi/h 7.0 8.2 % Gradeability @ 55 mi/h 7.7 8.6 %
26
27
1.9 L TDI 40 hp traction motor Clutch 20 hp starter/ generator 16 modules, 50 V, 8 Ah (+) (-) 3 speed AT Inverters Drive Controller 27 hp traction motor
Front wheels Batteries, Battery Computer Controller
28
Base Hyperdrive % improvement Fuel Economy ETW 4,874 5,126 lbs ECE 10.6 5.6 L/100 km 47% ECE 22.2 42.0 Mi/g ECE 8.0 6.2 L/100 km 23% EUDC 29.4 37.9 Mi/g Combined (EPA) 25.4 40.2 Mi/g 37% Performance 0-60 mi/h 14 9 sec 36 % 40-60 mi/h 7 4 sec 43 % Gradeability Continuous Same as base Passing on grade Improved
29
30