E Mobility Lohse Busch6 April2011
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

E Mobility Lohse Busch6 April2011






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 10

http://www.linkedin.com 10



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    E Mobility Lohse Busch6 April2011 E Mobility Lohse Busch6 April2011 Presentation Transcript

    • Testing and Evaluation Challenges of Electrified Vehicles Henning Lohse-Busch, Ph.D. APRF (Advanced Powertrain Research Facility) eMobility in the USA Hannover, Germany April 6th, 2011
    • Disclaimer This a research engineers perspective on the challenges with eMobility in the US No solutions will be provided, but hopefully some points will be clarified This presentation is based on work from the Argonne’s APRF team 2
    • US National Laboratories for DOE Research Pacific Northwest Idaho Nat’l Lab. Brookhaven Lawrence Berkeley Argonne Lawrence Nat’l Renewable Livermore Energy Lab. Los Alamos Oak Ridge Sandia 3
    • Argonne Is One of Department of Energy’sLargest Research Facilities  A national laboratory, chartered in 1946  Operated by the University of Chicago and others for the U.S. Department of Energy  Major research missions include basic science, transportation, and advanced energy technologies  About 2,901 employees, including about 1,001 scientists and engineers, of whom 751 hold doctorate degrees  Annual operating budget of about $470 million (~80% from DOE) 4
    • Unique Facilities Coupled with a Depth of Expertise inBasic Science and Applied Engineering pushes theFrontiers of Transportation Research at Argonne Transportation Hutch Materials Research • Battery electrodes • Fuel cell catalysts Basic and Applied APS – x-rays • Tribology Combustion Research Advanced Powertrain Research Facility Autonomie High Performance Fuel Cell and GREET Battery Testing Computing End of Life Vehicle Recycling Testing and Validation Modeling and Simulation 5
    • Outline US goals for electrified vehicles Fundamental differences between the US and the World Advanced technology vehicles Chassis dynamometer testing of vehicles Hybrid Electric Vehicles research Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle research Electric Vehicles research Factors impacting of fuel and energy consumption Well to Wheel analyses 6
    • Revolution in Transportation SectorConcerns are Coalescing: But, Headwinds remain: Energy Security  Fragile but recovering U.S. auto Foreign Oil Dependence industry Economic Security – Investment and ER&D requirements Trade Deficit  Volatility in Fuel Prices U.S. Jobs  Consumer Acceptance GHG  Affordability  Infrastructure readiness  Performance expectations  CAFE/CO2 regulations for light duty and heavy duty vehicles 7
    • Electrified Vehicle Goal:1,000,000 Plug-In Vehicles by 2015 This goal includes BEVs and PHEVs. Technologies enabled by Lithium Ion battery technology advances. Announced OEM production plans total 1.2 M Evs by 2s015 cumulatively (further OEMs are expected to market EVs) DOE’s actions: Investments (R&D and productions), Demonstrations and Incentives 3 and 2.4 billion dollars investment loans in Battery Facilities and support for EV component “With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015” - President Barack Obama, 2011 State of the Union 8
    • U.S.DOE Advanced Vehicle Technology R&D Has a Diverse PortfolioHybrid Electric Systems Technology Integration• Advanced Batteries • EPAct/EISA• Power Electronics • Rulemaking & Machines • SuperTruck• HEV & PHEV • Clean Cities• Systems Analysis • EcoCAR and Testing • GATE• Electrification/Smart Metering• Aerodynamics, Rolling Resistance & Accessory Materials Technology Loads Materials Technology • Lightweight StructuresAdvanced Combustion Engine R&D Fuels Technology • • Lightweight Structures Lightweight Materials• Low Temperature Combustion R&D Fuels Technology • Bio-Based Fuels • • Lightweight Materials Processing/Recycling/Advanced Combustion Engine R&D• Emission Controls • Processing/Recycling/ Manufacturing • • Clean/Efficient Combustion Bio-Based Fuels• Low Temperature Combustion R&D Light- & Heavy-Duty Engines Fuel Characteristics • Manufacturing Methods Design Data Test• Emission Controls Waste Heat Recovery • Clean/Efficient Combustion • • Design Data Test Methods HTML• Light- & Heavy-Duty Engines • Intermediate Blends Fuel Characteristics Health Impacts • • HTML Propulsion Materials• Waste Heat Recovery • • Advanced Lubricants Intermediate Blends • Propulsion Materials• Health Impacts • Advanced Lubricants 9
    • Government-Industry Partnership: Advanced PropulsionPortfolio Vision Energy Hydrogen Fuel security Improve Displace Cell Vehicles Vehicle Petroleum Environmental Fuel Battery Electric Economy Vehicles stewardship and (incl. range extension) Emissions Economic Hybrid Electric Vehicles growth (incl. PHEV) IC Engine and Transmission Advances Petroleum (Conventional & Alternative Sources) Transportation Bio Fuels (E10, E85, Cellulosic Ethanol, Bio-diesel) Energy Electricity (Conventional & Renewable Sources) Infrastructure Hydrogen (Conventional & Non-Carbon) DOE and FreedomCar and Fuel Partnership 10
    • IEA Roadmap Targets for EV/PHEV*“ Roadmap Vision – industry and governments should attain a combined EV/PHEVsales share of at least 50% of LDV sales worldwide by 2050.” ……  “These EV and PHEV production and sales targets will be very challenging to achieve and will require strong policies in countries around the world to move rapidly toward this transition to new vehicles and fuels.”*Technology Roadmap, Electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EV/PHEV), International Energy Agency 2009 11
    • Cost Remain High – Research and Invention Still Needed 2012 Payback Still Too Long (1) System Cost from DOE PHEV Battery Cost per APEEM Cost per kW·h kW $1,000 - $1,200 2008 $22 $700 - $950 2010 $19 Goal = $500 2012 Goal = $17 Goal = $300 2014 2015 Goal = $12 (1) Source: Rousseau, A, Argonne, Cost of Fuel $4/gal, Electricity $0.10/kWh with 2012 DOE Cost Goals of 27$/kw power battery and $500/kwh for energy battery 12
    • Differences between US and Europe 13
    • Difference between Europe and USA:Distances and Transportation Infrastructures In the US – The average distances driven are longer – The public transportation system is not as elaborate *Satellite photos: www.sciencephoto.com 14
    • Difference between Europe and USAFuel Economy, Fuel consumption and ‘MGP illusion’ EPA began the label revision thinking it wasFuel Economy = Distance / Fuel about time to change to consumption, focus groups steered them back to MPG. Too bad! FE 25% Truck FC 20% ~84 gal saved over 10,000 mi 125 gal saved FE 50% over 10,000 mi Plug-in Hybrid FC 33% Electric Vehicle Compact HEV 15
    • Advanced Technology Vehicles 16
    • What are Advanced Technology Vehicles?  Hybrid vehicles  Plug-in hybrid vehicles BEV Tesla  Battery Electric vehicles  Alternative fuel vehicles – Hydrogen • Internal combustion engine • Fuel cell ANL PHEV prototype – Diesel Hydrogen  OEM proprietary prototypes Fuel cell  Plug-in hybrid conversion vehicles  Conventional vehicles: Hydrogen internal – down sized boosted engine combustion engine – 7 speed dual clutch transmissionsSupplier BEV prototype Ford TADA PHEV Jetta TDI (bio-fuels)
    • Categorizing Electrified Vehicles ANL proposed vehicle terminology map for SAE J1715 Road Vehicle Electrified Vehicle Increased electric power and energy Charge Sustaining Plug-in Vehicle (CS) Hybrid Conventional PHEV Electric Vehicle Vehicle (CV) (HEV) EREVIdle-Stop Fuel Cell Vehicle Battery ElectricVehicle Vehicle (BEV) Increased electric power and energy 18
    • How to test and evaluate vehicles, toobtain efficiency gains for affordabletransportation … 19
    • ARGONNE’S OBJECTIVE: Provide to DOE and Partners the Best Advanced Vehicle Test Data and Analysis Advanced Powertrain Research Facility (APRF) – Purpose built for DOE benchmarking – State-of-the-art 4WD chassis dynamometer – Custom multi-input data acquisition specific to hybrid vehicle instrumentation Staff at cutting edge of test procedures for new advanced vehicles Inventing new and novel instrumentation techniques“Be the eyes and ears of automotive technology development” APRF since 2002 20
    • What is a Chassis Dynamometer? Laymans version: – Treadmill for cars Engineering version: Chassis Vehicle dynamometer clamp down – Metal rollers connected to a roll device which emulates the vehicle inertia and the vehicle road load that the vehicle experiences on a real road 21
    • Why Bother with Dynamometer Testing?Dyno features Dyno Benefits:• Controlled test cell • Repeatable emissions and (temperature, humidity, solar energy consumption (fuel load, …) and/or electric energy• Standard drive cycles consumption)• Repeatability of results • Enables comparisons between• Laboratory emission equipment different vehicles and instrumentation stationary • Vehicle development and in test cell calibration • Component calibration • Control strategy • System behavior 22
    • 4 Wheel Drive Chassis Dynamometer Control Why 4WD dyno’s? room For through the road parallel hybrids DataHeated tailpipe acquisitionemissions pipe system Rear chassis dyno roll Air flow simulator fan Fuel flow meter Front chassis Vehicle front dyno roll restraining chains 23
    • Battery temp:Basic Instrumentation •Vent in •Vent out Hioki power analyzer Tested in 2WD (with dyno mode) Select CAN Engine speed 1.Accel pedal position 2.Engine speed 3.Motor torque Engine oil 4.Battery V & A temperature 5.Battery SOC 24
    • Dynamometer Vehicle Benchmark Testing Approach – Depth of Study Varies Level 1: Power sensors Other Sensors Level 2: Power sensors Other Sensors Battery Tank Battery TankCharging Electric Charging Electric Fuel Hybrid HybridEmissions Engine Emissions Engine system system Power Power Basics instrumentation: Complete and invasive instrumentation: • Engine speed, fuel flow (bench), oil temp • Incremental to level 1 • Battery, Charger V I (Hioki) • Engine, shaft torque & speed sensors • CAN (if possible) • All major power flows (mechanical, electric,…) • Further … if required (but still non invasive) • Component specific instrumentation Purpose: Purpose: • Vehicle operating parameter study • Energy analysis, efficiency analysis on vehicle • Vehicle characterization (energy and components consumption, emissions level, performance) • Component characterization in vehicle system 25
    • Drive Cycles A drive cycle is a vehicle speed profile as a function of time The driver follows the trace display on a screen A drive cycle can be characterized by different factors  avg speed, max acceleration, linear cycles, driven cycles, stop time… 26
    • EPA Certification City Test: UDDS UDDS: Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule 80 Phase x10 70 Trace 60 50 Speed [mph] 40 30 20 10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time [s] Phase 1 Phase 2 Known as: Known as: -Bag 1 -Bag 2 27
    • EPA Certification Highway Test: HWFET 80 Phase 70 Trace 60 50 Speed [mph] 40 30 20 10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Preparation Time [s] Phase 1 cycle Real cycle 28
    • EPA Certification Aggressive Driving Test:Emissions only until now 80 Phase 70 Trace 60 50 Speed [mph] 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time [s] 29
    • New European Drive Cycle (NEDC) 80 Phase 70 Trace 60 50 Speed [mph] 40 30 20 10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Time [s] 30
    • Hybrid Electric Vehicles 31
    • Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Fuel efficiency gains depend on degree of hybridization 2010 Honda Insight 2010 Toyota Prius Ford Fusion Hybrid Mercedes S400H Mini-E (BEV) EPA City Label Fuel Economy [mpg] NEDC [mpg] Energy consumption [Wh/mi] Fusion Mini Civic Corolla 2.5 liter S350 CopperReason to test: Reason to test: Reason to test: Reason to test: Reason to test:• Value hybrid •State of the art •High fuel economy in •First major OEM •Modern Electric• Technology evolution hybrid mid-size sedan Lithium Ion battery Vehicle benchmark •Thermal recovery •High speed EV pack hybrid •SAE J1634 system operation developmentPoint of interest: Point of interest : Point of interest : Point of interest : Point of interest :•Compromise of cost •PHEV ready HEV •Larger EV operation •Uses Air conditioning •Even aggressiveto hybrid system increase driver impact system to actively cool driving yields a rangeeffectiveness on fuel economy the battery pack over 100 miles 32
    • Idle stop vehicles: Fuel Consumption Gains Vary by Certification Cycles UDDS NEDC (City) 17.8% vehicle stop 30.6% vehicle stop 12 12 UDDS NEDC (Bag 1) 54.4% 10 10 40.3% 34.4% Fuel comsumption [l/100km] Fuel comsumption [l/100km] 8 27.8% 8 13.8% 5.7%Notes: 6 6- All tests hereare hot starttests Start stop is- UDDS withHonda shift 4 4 moreschedule popular in-NEDC ANLrepeatable shift 2 2 Europe, sinceschedule the gain is-AC eco modeenables engine 0 higheridle stop 0 Standard SS disabled AC normal AC ecomode Standard SS disabled AC normal AC ecomode 33
    • Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles 34
    • Plug-in hybrids: Consuming fuel as well as electrons Full charge test Start 100% SOC and repeat drive cycle test until a charge sustaining test is achieved 35
    • Plug-in hybrids: a 2 dimensional challenge PHEV energy consumption  Plug-in hybrids use energy from – Fuel (tank) – Electricity (battery pack)  First the vehicle will deplete the battery energy and thus displace fuel – Blended – EV capable  Once the battery is depleted the vehicle operates in a charge sustaining mode  Fuel economy will change based on how far you drive 36
    • How to deduce a meaningful fuel economy forPHEVs? SAE J1711 Recommended Practice for Measuring the Exhaust Emissions and Fuel Economy of Hybrid-Electric Vehicles, Including Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles The utility factor weighted fuel economy attempts to represent the fuel economy that the ‘average’ US driver would obtain based on US driving statistics 2001 NHTS Survey Data This process requires • 31,844 vehicles • 1,277,016 miles – Information from a full charge test • Charge depleting fuel economy • Charge depleting range • Charge sustaining fuel economy Area under line is – Utility factor equations UF fraction 40 miles
    • Standards Development: SAE J1711 HEV and PHEVTest Procedures 38
    • Other Codes and Standards work around PHEVsSAE J2841 Multi-Day Individual ISO 23274-2 SupportUtility Factor Harmonization of PHEV Procedures The MDIUF alternative may be  ISO Standards require many years to helpful in conveying average develop consumer experience with a  ISO committee looking to a very particular PHEV precise method, but perhaps not – Long distance drivers reduce the always practical for routine testing apparent utility of depleting  Settled on a method that is not in operation in the Fleet Utility Factor (FUF) conflict with J1711 39
    • Battery Electric Vehicles 40
    • Good EV TestingExperience • BEV testing and charging experience • Safe, accurate and smooth event • Experience with unusual cars 41
    • Charger efficiency is very important in the operating cost of EV!Level 1: 58% grid to battery charging efficiency Level 2: 88% grid to battery charging efficiency ~1 kW charge rate ~5-6 kW charge rate 42
    • 10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min Today’s Problem with Testing EVs: 10 min 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min “Death by Urban” 250mi = 17+ hours of testing, no interruptions allowed 10 min10 min 10 min 10 min 10 min
    • Proposed Shortcut Method for EV Testing  Test Product: Find Efficiency (AC Wh/mi) and Range (mi) for any given cycle  Constraint: Short-cut must provide repeatable results consistent with the long J1634 method  Short-Cut Method in General: 1. Find battery capacity (on-dyno) 2. Run test cycles (UDDS, HWY, US06) to find EfficiencyStart with a fully 3. Use consumption and capacity data to find Rangecharged battery Battery capacity Electric energy consumption for test cycle (DC kWh) determination( ) ( ) Steady state 90 80 80 Phase x10 + + Phase x10 Phase + 80 70 Trace 70 Trace Trace 70 60 60 X4 X2 60 Speed [mph] 50 speed untilSpeed [mph] 50 Speed [mph] 50 40 40 40 30 30 30 20 20 20 ‘empty’ 10 10 10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time [s] 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 UDDS HWFET US06 Time [s] Time [s] Fully recharge the battery and measure the AC kWh consumption from the grid 44
    • Connecting to the Grid 45
    • Smart Vehicle-Grid InterfaceRequires standard connectivity/communication protocols to minimize impact onautomotive industry and utilities/grid operators (cost, complexity, reliability) 46
    • Codes and Standards – Drive for Harmonization(Test Procedures, Hardware, Communication Protocol …) Global Differences in Connectivity US EU CHINA JAPAN AC Charging Single- Phase (1Ø) SAE J1772TM IEC 62196-2 Type 1 Type 2 SAE J1772TM * SAE and IEC AC standards China charge have common couplers (not Japan Single- control signals standard yet) CHADEMO or IEC 62196-2 Type 2 have unique standard Three-Phase control signals has unique (1Ø or 3Ø) and overall control signals physical and overall shape physical IEC 62196-2 Type 3 shapeDC Charging SAE and IEC working toward harmonization of DC ‘Hybrid’ charge couplers SAE J1772TM IEC 62196-2 Type 2 Mode 3 JEVS G105-1993 ‘Hybrid’ ‘Hybrid’ (CHADEMO) * SAE J1772TM AC connector has also been adopted by Korea and Australia 47
    • Factors with major impact on fuel andenergy consumption 48
    • Air Conditioning Impact on Fuel and Energy Consumption +29%Energy consumption [Wh/mi] •The drive cycles are completed at 95 deg F (35 deg C) •The AC impact can increase energy consumption by over 70% +14% •Impact of air conditioning usage is +71% largest in city driving since extra energy is consumed during stops +41% •Electric vehicle energy consumption is most sensitive to air conditioning usage which has a +82% direct impact on range +38% NO AC WITH AC NO AC WITH AC UDDS HWY 49
    • Driver Intensity Impact on Fuel and Energy Consumption Increased Driving Intensity •Electric vehicle energyEnergy consumption [Wh/mi] +14% +18% consumption is most sensitive to driver aggressiveness which has -12% a direct impact on range •Impact of driver intensity on energy consumption varies with vehicle type and powertrain +41% +20% 80 80 -23% 0.8 x UDDS 1.0 x UDDS Speed [mph] 60 60 40 40 20 20 +16% +54% 0 0 +56% 0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500 80 80 Speed [mph] 1.2 x UDDS 1.4 x UDDS 60 60 40 40 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 US06 20 20 Scaled UDDS (equivalent distance) 0 0 0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500 Time [s] Time [s] 50
    • EPA’s new 5 Cycles Test for New Fuel Economy Label EPA is changing the tests Fuel Economy test to addresses the mentioned effects All 5 cycles existed before for emissions testing purposes but they were not all used to calculated Fuel Economy Classic cycles! Aggressive cycle! Extreme Temperatures! FTP UDDS @ 75 90 US06 @ 75 F SC03 @ 95 F #1 Cold start 60 F 80 Phase x10 Phase x10 80 Phase x10 Trace 70 Trace Trace 50 70 #2 Hot start 60 60 40 Speed [mph] Speed [mph] 50Speed [mph] 50 40 30 40 30 30 20 20 20 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Time [s] Time [s] Time [s] 80 HWFET @ 75 F UDDS @ 20 F Phase 80 70 Trace Phase x10 Piece of these cycles 70 Trace 60 60 50 compute into aSpeed [mph] 50 Speed [mph] 40 40 City and a Highway 30 30 20 20 Fuel Economy 10 10 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time [s] Time [s] 51
    • Final Question: Where does your Fueland/or Electricity Come From? 52
    • ANL’s GREET Model Is Considered the “Gold Standard” for Total Lifecycle Analysis in Transportation Vehicle Cycle Fuel Cycle Pump to Wheels Well to PumpResults of Argonne’s assessments of new fuels and advanced vehicles have been used by federal andstate governments, auto industry, and energy industry in their decisions.
    • US Electricity Mostly Comes From Burning FossilFuel(Impacts of margin electricity and time-of-day charging not included) Mostly extracting work from burning fuels in a thermodynamic cycle (like an engine) Source: EIA (www.eia.doe.gov) 54
    • And in the Future for the USA? The Same! Source: GREET from EIA (www.eia.doe.gov) 55
    • Almost there 56
    • Conclusions: www.transportation.anl.gov The US goals in eMobility is to put 1 Million EV on the roads by 2016 The transportation needs are different in the US (longer distances) Dynamometer testing offers repeatable fuel and energy consumption results which enables direct comparisons between different vehicle and powertrains HEVs, PHEVs, BEVs all have different testing challenges PHEVs results are particularly hard to explain to the consumer has the fuel and electric consumption vary based on the distance driven Air conditioning and driver intensity have very large impaction and fuel and energy consumption which is now included in EPA’s new 5 cycle Fuel Economy testing Upstream energy and emissions of fuel and/or electric are essential to determine the impact of an advanced technology vehicles in terms of energy efficiency and environmental impact The more advanced, diverse and efficient the automotive technologies get the more the benefits depends on the consumer usage (driving distance and driving intensity) 57