Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Rule based energy management strategy for a series–parallel plug-in

hybrid electric bus optimized by dynamic programming
Jiankun Peng, Hongwen He ⇑, Rui Xiong
National Engineering Laboratory for Electric Vehicles, School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
Collaborative Innovation Center of Electric Vehicles in Beijing, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China

h i g h l i g h t s

A rule-based energy management strategy is calibrated by dynamic programming.

Hardware-in-loop experiment bench for energy management system is designed.

Comparisons among typical energy management strategies are performed.

The fuel consumption is decreased by 10.45% with the improved strategy.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An appropriate energy management strategy is able to further improve the fuel economy of PHEVs. The
Received 8 August 2015 rule-based energy management algorithms are dominated in industry due to their fast computation and
Received in revised form 5 December 2015 ease of establishment potentials, however, their performance differ a lot from improper setting of param-
Accepted 8 December 2015
eters and control actions. This paper employs the dynamic programming (DP) to locate the optimal
Available online 12 January 2016
actions for the engine in PHEVs, and more importantly, proposes a recalibration method to improve
the performance of the rule-based energy management through the results calculated by DP algorithm.
Keywords:
Eventually, an optimization-based rule development procedure is presented and further validated by
Energy management strategy
Dynamic programming
hardware-in-loop (HIL) simulation experiments. The HIL simulation results show that, the improved
Rule-based rule-based energy management strategy reduces fuel consumption per 100 km from 25.46 L diesel to
Plug-in hybrid electric bus 22.80 L diesel. The main contribution of this study is to explore a novel way to calibrate the existed
Hardware-in-loop heuristic control strategy with the global optimization result through advanced intelligent algorithms.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction electric driving mileage [1–3]. The power distribution flexibility

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) takes the advantages of
low emission and low fuel consumption by combing the typical
driving modes of pure electric vehicle and conventional hybrid
electric vehicle. PHEV integrates a large-capacity battery pack,
which can be charged from power grid, and covers a certain pure
Abbreviations: PHEV, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles; PHEB, plug-in hybrid
electric bus; DP, dynamic programming; HIL, hardware-in-loop; CTUDC, Chinese
typical urban driving cycle; ECMS, equivalent consumption minimization strategy;
MPC, model predictive control; EV, electric vehicle; CD, charge-depletion; CS,
charge-sustaining; ISG, integrated starter generator; PSR, power split ratio; BSFC,
brake specific fuel consumption.
⇑ Corresponding author at: National Engineering Laboratory for Electric Vehicles,
School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081,
China. Tel./fax: +86 (10) 6891 4842.
E-mail address: hwhebit@bit.edu.cn (H. He).
of PHEV brings a more complex energy management problem,
and more studies have been concentrated on it in the literature
[4–7]. The energy management strategy of hybrid electric vehicle
can be divided into two categories, namely rule-based and
optimization-based [8,9]. The optimization-based energy manage-
ment strategy regulates the control variables based on numerical
computation results, by minimizing a predefined cost function
within feasible constraints. Optimization-based approaches can
be further divided into the global optimization control and real-
time optimization control [10,11].
Nonlinear programming, genetic algorithm and dynamic pro-
gramming (DP) are frequently used in global optimization control
[12]. Especially, DP is based on the optimal control theory, and can
always generate the most fuel efficient results while dealing with
the PHEV energy management problem. DP is able to solve the
powertrain control problem for most of the HEV/PHEV structures

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.12.031
0306-2619/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1634 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643
developed currently. However, for global optimization control
approaches, the overall driving power demand is required to be
known a prior, which is extremely difficult in real applications.
Global optimization algorithms, such as DP, are also trapped in
the ‘curse of dimension’ and cost too much computation effort
from the controller. Therefore, global optimal control is normally
implemented offline and serves as a benchmark to explore the fuel
economy potential [13,14].
For real-time optimization control manner, the equivalent con-
sumption minimization strategy (ECMS) and model predictive con-
trol (MPC) are two most representative methods, yet both have not
been massively used to practical application. The equivalence fac-
tor of ECMS influences its energy management performance
greatly, but the optimal value needs to be determined offline by
‘trial and trivial’ according to a specific driving cycle [15]. For
MPC, it is able to maintain the computational burden within an
acceptable range. However, the powertrain control effect depends
a lot on the future driving information prediction accuracy, which
remains an open question for now [16–18].
Rule-based energy management strategy is widely used in prac-
tice, because it can be easily developed and is able to operate quite
reliably [19]. Generally, the PHEV works in three modes under
rule-based control strategy, namely electric vehicle (EV) mode,
charge-depletion (CD) mode and charge-sustaining (CS) mode
[20]. The fuel consumption comparison of EV + CS, CD + CS, EV
+ CD + CS rule-based control and global optimization control is
shown in Fig. 1. It can be seen that, the EV + CD + CS control mode
with proper control parameters produces the lowest fuel consump-
tion among the rule-based ones [20], and is employed in this paper.
The rule-based control strategies include deterministic rule-
based methods and fuzzy logic rule-based methods [21]. A deter-
ministic rule-based controller operates on a set of rules that have
been defined prior to actual operation, and state machines are pro-
posed as a viable method to implement it. This control approach
has been successfully applied to Toyota Prius and Honda Insight
[21]. A rule-based control is implemented by finite-state machine,
which has eight states switches among the possible driving situa-
tions according to event-triggered rules that depend on the brake
and accelerator pedal angle, the state-of-charge (SOC) of the bat-
tery and the request of torque, this control approach has been val-
idated in simulation on FT-SIM, but difficult to evaluate the
potential improvement [22]. A novel rule-based control strategy
for the PHEVs that focuses on all electric range and charge deple-
tion range operations is presented in Ref. [23], and it has been val-
idated by simulation of passenger car driving in FTP75 driving
cycle. An engine on–off rule-based control strategy with consider-
ation on position of acceleration pedal is proposed in Ref. [24], but
the author still doesn’t discuss the fuel saving effort and potential.
Fuel consumption
EV+CS
CD+CS
Global optimiztion
control
EV+CD+CS
Driving distance
Fig. 1. The fuel consumption under typical rule-based energy management
strategy.
A heuristic solution is improved by that of ADVIOSOR software, the
results of this heuristic control were compared to the Prius control
strategy, and the comparative results shows that the gas mileage of
the PHEV increased by 16% over the Prius control strategy [25]. Jalil
et al. have proposed a rule-based strategy to determine the power
split between the battery and engine for a series hybrid electric
vehicle, this ‘Thermostat’ strategy bring the fuel economy with
an improvement of 11% in the urban cycle and of 6% in the highway
cycle [26]. However, all these traditional deterministic rule-based
controllers hardly can implement the optimization operation. In
a fuzzy logic rule-based controller, fuzzy rules are required to be
established based on some ‘expert’ knowledge of the powertrain,
which requires long development period [27]. An adaptive fuzzy
logic controller selects the operating points with the least impact
on fuel economy and the key parameters evolves according to
the driving cycles, as implemented by literature. However, it is
very difficult to develop appropriate adaptive fuzzy rules when
the power system has two or more control variables [28,29].
Practically, deterministic rule-based energy management strat-
egy is the mostly implemented approach in resolving the PHEV
powertrain control problems. The target of this study is to further
improve the effectiveness and performance of deterministic rule-
based energy management algorithms. The main contribution of
this paper is the development and validation of an optimization-
based rule energy management strategy. By constraining the
engine operating points to an optimized working area based on
the offline optimal results, the new control logic is able to better
adapt to the target driving cycle online. Typically, this
optimization-based rule development method is more suitable to
fixed-pattern driving circumstances. Hardware-in-loop (HIL) simu-
lation is one of the key steps of ‘‘V” cycle development process to
verify the effectiveness of the developed control system [30], and
is employed in this paper for verification.
The paper structure is arranged as following, the traditional EV
+ CS + CD rule-based energy management strategy is developed for
a plug-in series–parallel hybrid bus in Section 2. Dynamic pro-
gramming algorithm for PHEV energy management is presented
and analyzed in Section 3. Then, in Section 4, the rule-based energy
management strategy is calibrated and optimized according to the
optimal results calculated by the DP. In Section 5, the HIL simula-
tion experiment is carried out to verify the improved rule-based
management strategy over the Chinese typical urban driving cycle.
Several conclusions are drawn in Section 6.
2. Rule-based energy management strategy for a series–parallel
plug-in hybrid electric bus
2.1. Powertrain of a series–parallel plug-in hybrid electric bus
The PHEB powertrain is shown in Fig. 2, which is consisted of
diesel engine, integrated starter generator (ISG), traction motor
and power battery pack.
The peak power of the diesel engine is 147 kW, and the peak
torque is 730 N m. The peak power and the peak torque of the
ISG motor are 55 kW and 500 N m. The peak power and the peak
torque of the traction motor are 166 kW and 2080 N m. The battery
pack is 60 A h capacity with the nominal voltage of 580 V. The
main parameters of the PHEB are listed in Table 1.
2.2. Series–parallel PHEV model
2.2.1. Engine model
To analyze and evaluate the engine fuel economy, a static model
[31,32] is used based on the net efficiency data from the bench
experiment. The engine net efficiency is defined as
 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643 1635

Vehilce
controller

CAN bus Clutch Differential

Traction
ECU Engine ISG
motor
Main reducer

ISG Traction motor Electric cable

controller controller

Power High-voltage
BMS
Battery Pack distribution box

Fig. 2. Configration of the PHEB powertrain.

2.2.3. Power battery model

The lithium-ion battery is used in the researched PHEB for its
Table 1 superior high specific energy and specific power performance.
Main parameters of the PHEB specification.
The impact of temperature change and battery aging are not con-
Symbol Parameters Values sidered, and a simple but effective internal resistance battery
m Gross weight 18,000 kg model [33] is used to model the essential dynamics as:
A Windward area 6.6 m2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Rwh Tire rolling radius 0.474 m dSOC V oc  V oc  4Rint  Pbat
¼ ð4Þ
Cd Air drag coefficient 0.55 dt 2Rint  C
i0 Main reducer ratio 6.17
C Battery capacity 60 A h where Voc is the battery open-circuit voltage, Rint is the battery
resistance, and Pbat is the battery load power.
Transforming Eq. (4) to a discrete form:
T n qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ge ðT e ; ne Þ ¼ _ e e  100% ð1Þ V oc  V 2oc kþ1  4Rint kþ1  Pbat kþ1
mf Q lhv SOCkþ1 ¼ SOCk 
kþ1
ð5Þ
2Rint kþ1 C
where Qlhv represents the lower heating values of diesel (43 MJ/kg),
m_ f is fuel consumption rate, Te is the engine output torque, ne is the
2.2.4. Vehicle longitudinal dynamics model
engine speed.
The driving force of the PHEB powertrain is transmitted to the
The engine fuel consumption can be described by
tires, which are the end of the power transfer, so it needs to over-
( Rt come various resistances during driving. The PHSB driving force Fd
me ¼ 0
mf dt in the driving process with different clutch states can be expressed
ð2Þ
Le ¼ mq e as:
e
8
< ðT e þT m Þib Sclu ¼ 0
where me is the fuel consumption quality, Le is the fuel consump- Rwh
Fd ¼ ð6Þ
tion volume, qe is the diesel density. : T m i0 Sclu ¼ 1
Rwh

where Sclu = 0 represents the clutch is engaged, while Sclu = 1 means

2.2.2. Traction motor and ISG motor models the clutch is disengaged.
The traction motor and ISG motor are both permanent magnet The vehicle’s road resistance Ff and air resistance Fw in the driv-
synchronous motors. The motors dynamics are neglected due to ing process are shown as follows:
its fast transient response, and they are described by static models (
F f ¼ fmg cos a þ mg sin a
[32] as follows: ð7Þ
Cd A
F w ¼ 21:15 v 2f

minðT  req ; T  dis max ðn Þ; T  bat dis max ðn ; SOCÞÞ T req P0
T ¼ where f is the rolling resistance coefficient, a is the road slope, g is
maxðT  req ; T  chg max ðn Þ; T  bat chg max ðn ; SOCÞÞ T req <0 the gravity acceleration.
 
TM  ¼ m nM ¼m Thus, the acceleration a and the feedback actual velocity vf can
T ¼ n ¼
T ISG  ¼ ISG nISG  ¼ ISG be described as:
ð3Þ (
a ¼ F d Fdmf F w
R ð8Þ
where T⁄_req represents the motor required torque, n⁄ is the motor v f ¼ 3:6 0t adt
speed, SOC is the battery state of charge, T⁄_dis_max and T⁄_chg_max where d is the PHSB rotating quality conversion coefficient.
are the maximum motor torque when PHEB driving and generating, The power balance equation is shown as follows:
respectively, T⁄_bat_dis_max and T⁄_bat_chg_max are the maximum tor-
vf
que limited by SOC in the discharging and charging modes, which Pe þ Pm ¼ Pf þ Pw þ Pa ¼ ðF f þ F w þ dmaÞ ð9Þ
are functions of motor speed and torque. 3600gt
1636 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643

where Pe is the engine power, Pm is the traction motor power, Pf is

the road resistance consumption power, Pw is the air resistance con- SOC
sumption power, Pa is the acceleration power, gt is the mechanical
transmission efficiency of the main reducer.
Y
SOC >SOC CD EV Mode
2.3. Rule-based energy management strategy
N
In this study, the traction motor alone drives the vehicle during
Y
the EV mode, and all of the required energy supported the PHEB SOC >SOC CS CD Mode
comes provided by the battery packs. During the CD mode, both
the traction motor and the engine provide the power for the PHEB, N
and the SOC of the battery pack would be decreased gradually.
During the CS mode, the engine provides most of the required CS Mode
energy for the PHEB, and the SOC of the battery pack maintains
within an appropriate range until the PHEB stops. The energy con- Fig. 3. Energy consumption mode switching control strategy.
sumption modes switching control strategy is presented in Fig. 3,
where SOCCD denotes the switch threshold between the EV mode
and the CD mode, and SOCCS denotes the switch threshold between
the CD mode and the CS mode. Td SOC

2.3.1. EV mode
When SOC > 80%, the PHEB works in the EV mode, as shown in Te =0; TISG =0
Fig. 4, the energy is provided only by the power battery pack, and S e =0; S clu =1
the driving demand is satisfied by the traction motor. In this mode,
because of the higher SOC and the lower charge efficiency, the
N
regenerative braking is not permitted to avoid possible over Td ≥0
charging.
Here, Td is the demand torque on the drive shaft, Te is the engine Y
output torque, Se represents the engine work state, i.e. Se = 0 means Tm = Td Tm =0
engine is shutdown, while Se = 1 means engine is starting, Sclu rep-
resents the clutch work state.

2.3.2. CD mode
End
When 30% < SOC < 80%, the PHEB works in the CD mode and the
Fig. 4. Energy management control strategy in EV mode.
corresponding control strategy is shown in Fig. 5. The ISG motor is
shutdown in this mode to avoid the efficiency loss caused by the
increasement of energy circulation. The PHEB is only driven by
the traction motor when the PHEB operated at low velocity. When
the PHEB operated at a high velocity, if Td is smaller than the lower
Td n m SOC
limit of the engine optimal work area, the PHEB is also only driven
by the traction motor; if Td is in the engine optimal work area, the N nm ≥ nclu_engage_CD
PHEB is only driven by the engine; if the drive demand torque is
greater than the upper limit of the engine optimal work area, the Y
engine and the traction motor work jointly to meet Td. The regen- N
Td >Te _opt_min
erative braking can be employed to recover the braking energy in
this mode. Y
Here, Te_opt_min and Te_opt_max denote the lower and upper limit S e =0; S clu =1 S e =1; S clu =0
of the engine optimal work area, respectively, nclu_engage_CD denotes
the speed threshold of clutch engagement in the CD mode. Y Y
N
Td >Te _opt_max
2.3.3. CS mode
The control strategy of CS mode is shown in Fig. 6. In this mode,
Y
the engine will provide the major part of demand torque, and ISG Te =0 Te =Te _opt_max Te =Td
motor adjusts the engine output torque to make it work in an opti- TISG =0 TISG =0 TISG =0
mal work area, and SOC is always stabilized around 30%. Tm =Td Tm =Td -Te Tm =0
The clutch is disengaged when PHEB drives at low velocity. If
the SOC is greater than the threshold value of engine starting
SOCe_on, the PHEB is driven by the traction motor; on the contrary, End
the PHEB works in a series mode.
Fig. 5. Energy management control strategy in CD mode.
Here, Te_opt is engine output torque, which make ISG motor to
generating with high efficiency, nclu_engage_CS is the speed threshold
of clutch engagement in the CS mode.
The clutch is engaged when PHEB drives at high velocity. If Td is work area, the PHEB is driven by the engine individually; if Td is
less than Te_opt_min, the engine works at the lower limit of engine greater than Te_opt_max, the engine works at the upper limit of
optimal work area to drive the PHSB, and the surplus torque is used engine optimal work area, the engine is assisted by the traction
to start the ISG motor for generating; if Td is in the engine optimal motor to meet the demand torque.
 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643 1637

3. Dynamic programming energy management strategy

Td n m SOC

Rule-based control strategy cannot take full use of the advan-

tage of the PHEB. DP can efficiently handle the constraints and nm ≥ nclu_engage_CS N
nonlinearity of a problem and find a global optimal solution [34].
Y
Herein, DP is employed to locate the optimized control actions at
each stage by minimizing the fuel consumption cost function over S clu =0 S clu =1
a certain driving cycles. Y Y
S e =1 S OC≤S OC e_on
N
3.1. Problem formulation
Y
N
In the discrete-time format, the state equation of the PHEB Td >Te_min S e =1 Se =0
model can be generally expressed by the following equation: Y
8 Y
< xkþ1 ¼ f ðxk ; uk Þ
> N Y
Td >Te_max
x ¼ SOC ð10Þ Y
>
:
u ¼ ½T e ne T m  Te =Te_opt_min Te =Te_opt_max Te =Td Te =Te_opt Te =0
Tm =0 Tm =Td -Te Tm =0 Tm =Td Tm =Td
where x denotes the state variable, k denotes the calculation step in TISG =Td -Te TISG =0 TISG =0 TISG =-Te TISG =0
discretization way and u denotes the control variable.
PHEBs are commonly loaded with a larger capacity battery.
Thus, the PHEBs have the potential to reduce a certain amount of End
diesel energy consumption by obtaining energy form the electricity
grid. The cost function for minimizing the fuel consumption is Fig. 6. Energy management control strategy in CD mode.
expressed as follows:
X
N1 X
N1
J¼ L½xk ; uk  ¼ fuelk ð11Þ
k¼0 k¼0 60
Velocity (km/h)

where N denotes the stage number of the driving cycle, L denotes

the instantaneous cost, fuelk denotes the instantaneous fuel con- 40
sumption of each stage.
To ensure a smooth operation of the engine, ISG, traction motor
20
and battery, constraints (12) are necessary during the
optimization.
8 0
> SOCmin 6 SOCk 6 SOCmax 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
>
>
>
>
>
> ne min 6 ne k 6 ne max Time (s)
>
>
>
>
>
> T e min ðne k Þ 6 T e k 6 T e max ðne k Þ
>
>
Fig. 7. The Chinese typical urban driving cycle.
>
>
>
> nISG min 6 nISG k 6 nISG max
>
>
>
>
>
> T ðn ; SOCk Þ 6 T ISG k 6 T ISG max ðnISG k ; SOCk Þ
< ISG min ISG k
nm min 6 nm k 6 nm max ð12Þ
>
>
>
> 0.6
>
> T m min ðnm k ; SOCk Þ 6 T m k 6 T m max ðnm k ; SOCk Þ
>
>
>
>
>
> T d k ¼ T e k þ T ISG k þ T m k þ T b k =i0 0.5
>
>
>
SOC

>
> n m k ¼ ne k ¼ nISG k if clutch ¼ 1
>
>
>
> 0.4
>
> ne k ¼ nISG k if clutch ¼ 0
>
>
:
T e k þ T ISG k ¼ 0 if clutch ¼ 0 0.3
where Tb_k denotes the hydraulic brake torque at the k-th step, and 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
the subscripts min and max denote the maximum and minimum of 4
Time (s) x 10
the corresponding variables, respectively.
Fig. 8. SOC variation of 15 consecutive driving cycles under DP control.
3.2. Implementing DP

To obtain the minimum cost function by backward solving, the

DP problem can be described by the recursive Eqs. (13) and (14).
The sub-problem for the (N  1)-th step is: Table 2
Simulation results under DP control.
J N1 ðxN1 Þ ¼ min½LðxN1 ; uN1 Þ ð13Þ
uN1 Control parameters DP optimal results
Number of driving cycles 15
For the k-th (0 6 k < N  1) step, the sub-problem can be
Initial SOC 0.6
described as: Terminal SOC 0.305
J k ðxk Þ ¼ min½Lðxk ; uk Þ þ J kþ1 ðxkþ1 Þ ð14Þ Electricity consumption (kW h/100 km) 9.18
uk Fuel consumption (L/100 km) 19.90
1638 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643

2000 86 800

21 5 230
86 83

6
21 5
Efficiency/%

83

19 9
20 2
20
19
20 6
1600 700

5
Tm-max /Nm

80
91 89

19 5
Engine torque (Nm)
Motor torque (Nm)

20 2
89

19 9
1200 600

80

25 0
250
86
91
92

91
800

92

83
93 19 9

83

23 0
80

6
500

93

230

2
20
9
86 8 9923 91

20

5
400 93 89 8683 80

21
20 61 5
20 2

0 01 09 0 27 0
83 89 92 989
1 86 8 400

2
0 883 86 9 86 3 20 6 215

27 0
80 89
6 8 91 89
9192
9 3 92 300 23 0

36 333 2 0
889 2

250
-400 9 1 03 5

25
9 89

91
88036 86 8 21 23 0
-800 92 200 23 0 25 0 27 0
25 02 27 0 BSFC(g/(kW.h))

93
329 27 0 2900

3336
-1200 91896 8830 100 1 00 3 1900 331
3
Te-max 0
92 33 0

00
8 36 0
0 300 600 900 12001500180021002400 1000 1500 2000 2500
Motor speed (r/min) Engine speed (r/min)
(a) Working points of traction motor (b) Working points of engine
under DP control under DP control

500
86

86 83
89 Efficiency(%)

86
400
ISG torque (Nm)

75
70

300 Tisg-max
80

89

89
89

92
200 92

9292
92
92
100
83

8986 89 89

89 86
86
0 86
83

83
75

86
70

80

-100 86
89

92 9
83

92

89
8
92
-200 89

89
89
-300
89

92
86 89
-400
80
75
70

-500
100 400 700 1000 1300 1600 1900 2200 2500 2800
ISG speed (r/min)
(c) Working points of ISG under DP control
Fig. 9. Working points of power components under DP control.

Velocity DP-based control strategy Engine working points

Rule-based control strategy Motor working points

Recalibration Comparing results

Rule extraction

Fig. 10. Optimization-based recalibration of the rule-based strategies.

1.5 2000
Motor
Engine
PSR (Peng/Preq)

1000
1
T/Nm

0.5
-1000

0 -2000
0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Torque demand at transmission input (Nm) n/(r/min)

Fig. 11. Power split ratio line of the PHEB. Fig. 12. Torque and speed of engine allocation under DP control.
 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643 1639

800 4. Calibrating the rule-based energy management strategy by

230

6
19 9

21 5
20 2
20
19
DP-based global optimized results

20 6

5
700

19 5
21 5
202
19 9
Engine torque (Nm)

600 4.1. Simulation results of DP-based energy management strategy

0 25 0
250

19 9

30
6
230

500

2
The simulated driving cycle is the Chinese typical urban driving

20
20

5
2
21
206

400 20 2 cycle (CTUDC) as shown in Fig. 7, with a driving distance of

0 3 01209 0 27
21 5

20 6
27 0

215 5.897 km and driving duration of 1314 s.

23 0

0
300
25 0

BSFC(g/(kW.h)) In order to show the energy distribution between the compo-

25
5
21 23 0 nents, the SOCmax and SOCmin were set at 0.65 and 0.25, the SOChigh
23 0 25 0 Te-max 70

36 3 3
200
25 0 2 02
3219 0 27 0 31900 2
70 1090
332 and SOClow were set at 0.60 and 0.30. The initial SOC and terminal
3336 0

100 0 33 0 3working area

0

36 0 SOC are also set at 0.60 and 0.30. Considering the capacity of the
1000 1500 2000 2500 power battery pack is large, 15 consecutive CTUDC driving cycles
Engine speed (r/min) is simulated. Fig. 8 demonstrates that the SOC decreases nearly
evenly under the DP control, and the energy consumption is listed
Fig. 13. Engine working area before optimization. in Table 2.
The working points of the engine, ISG and the traction motor are
shown in Fig. 9. It can be seen that the engine and traction motor
800 works in high-efficient areas while the ISG motor seldom works
230

6
19 9

21 5
20 2
20
19

under DP control. The DP control can obtain minimum fuel con-

20 6

700
19 5

sumption, but the driving cycle should be known in advance and

21 5
20 2
19 9
Engine torque (Nm)

600 the computation load is heavy. Therefore, the key parameters of

0 25 0
25 0

control results under DP control could be extracted to improve

19 9
30
6
230

500
2

the rule-based energy strategy.

20
20

5
2
21
20 6

400 20 2
0 3 01209 0 27
21 5

20 6
27 0

BSFC(g/(kW.h))
215
23 0
0

300
25 0

5 T e-max
25

21 23 0
23 0 25 0 27 0point
36 3 3

200 4.2. The Improved rule-based energy management strategy

25 0 29 27 0 engine21working
900
3336 0

3219 0 27 0 31000 3
33 0area
0 33 working
0

100
36 0
1000 1500
Engine speed (r/min)
Fig. 14. Engine working area after optimization.
where J k ðxk Þ is the optimal cost-to-go function at state xk form the
k-th step to the terminal of the driving cycle, and xk+1 is the state
in the (k + 1)-th step after the control variable uk is applied to state
xk at the k-th step according to Eq. (14).
According to Eq. (10), due to the interpolation problem of dis-
crete points, state variable in the xk+1 state may exceed the range
of SOC, to avoid this situation, the control variables should be lim-
ited, and the specific limitations can be found in Ref. [20].
The DP optimization results were used to recalibrate the former
2000 2500 rule-based energy control strategy, and then an optimization-
based rule control strategy could be acquired, which is shown in
Fig. 10.
As shown in Fig. 11, the working area of the engine under the
DP control is narrow, and the working points are scattered. So
it’s very hard to get the ideal power split ratio (PSR) line and use
it to improve the rule [35].
The working area of the engine and traction motor under DP
control were shown in Fig. 12. We can see that the working area
of the engine is centralized and the engine always work in high-
efficient areas. So we can optimize the engine working area of
the rule-based energy management strategy by using the working
area under the DP control.

Moto Hawk Moto Tune Control system

software software hardware

The control strategy

Simulink model Communication
port and baud
CAN card
rate setting
MotoHawk bottom connect to PC
modle configuration
Control program
download
MotoHawk interface
settings
Control system
power up
Online calibration
Automatic code and monitoring
generation

Fig. 15. PHEB control system development diagram.

1640 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643

The engine working area before optimization is shown in
Fig. 13, and Fig. 14 shows the working area of the engine after opti-
mization which is improved by the DP control results.
5. Hardware-in-loop experiments
5.1. Hardware-in-loop experiment bench
A HIL experiment is performed to evaluate the performance of
the improved rule-based energy management strategy, and this
experiment bench mainly consists of control system development
platform and real-time model system development platform, both
of them are software–hardware development platform based on
the MATLAB/Simulink, offering C language rapid generating and
online calibration functions.
The PHEB control system development process was shown in
Fig. 15. Firstly, the input/output interface of control strategy model
was setting by MotoHawk toolkit integrated in the Simulink envi-
ronment, and the real-time control kernel of PHEB simulation
model was generated by MATLAB/Simulink automatic code gener-
ation technology. Then, MotoTune software downloads the real-
time control kernel into the controller hardware, which can be cal-
ibrated and monitored the control parameters of PHEB control sys-
tem real-timely.
The PHEB real-time model system development process is
shown in Fig. 16. Firstly, the PHEB simulation model is built with
MATLAB/Simulink software, and the PHEB real-time model kernel
was generated by Simulink automatic code generation technology.
Then, the bus node protocol definition of hardware-in-loop
simulation platform was defined by CANoe software. Finally,
CANoe software downloads the PHEB real-time model kernel into
VTSystem platform, so as to complete the real-time model system
development.
The input and output signals of PHEB HIL experiment bench are
shown in Fig. 17. PHEB control system is communicated with the
upper monitor MotoTune software through CAN 1 channel, i.e.
CAN 1 channel is responsible for the program download and the
online calibration of control parameters; the PHEB real-time model
system, which is constructed on VTSytem, is communicated with

Real-time model development

CANoe signal input

Simulink modle Embed

CANoe signal output

MATLAB/Simulink CANoe
Ethernet cable

Real-time simulation board

CAN CAN bus board
Control system Power signal
Signal output board
Analog signal Signal acquisition board
VTSystem

Fig. 16. PHEB real-time model system development diagram.

MotoTune CANoe
Ethernet

Control system Real-time simulation system

USB

development platform development platform

CAN card VTSystem PHEB real-time model kenel

CAN1H CAN2H
CAN1L CAN2L

ne
ACC Brake nm
control kenel

Te
Real-time

signal signal SoC

CTUDC cycle Tm v
Tb
Key
Se
switch
Sclu

PHEB control sysytem

Controller hardware

Fig. 17. Schematic diagram of HIL experiment bench.

 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643 1641

PHEB control system through CAN 2 channel, and CANoe software 5.2. Experiment results and discussion
is responsible for monitoring all of messages on the CAN 2 channel.
A Photo of the HIL experiment bench is shown in Fig. 18, the con- Fig. 19 compares the two velocities of the PHEB with the desired
troller hardware is tested in the real-time PHEB model environ- velocity of the CTUDC cycle. This simulation result shows that the
ment over the CTUDC driving cycle, which is voltage signal demand power can be supplied by the developed control system,
generated by VTSystem. no matter the rule-based energy management strategy is improved
or not. Thus, the velocities trajectory of the driving cycle can be
tracked.
Before the rule-based control strategy is improved, setting the
CANoe Moto Tune initial SOC at 0.6, and the fuel consumption and variation of SOC
for 15 consecutive driving cycles are shown in Fig. 20. The PHEB
consumed 22.52 L diesel after 15 driving cycles under the rule-
based control. The trip distance is 88.455 km, so the fuel consump-
tion per 100 km is 25.46 L/100 km. The PHEB turns to work in CS
CAN2 mode from CD mode at about 5000 s of the trip, and the SOC at
channel Key switch
the final trip is 0.313. Compared with the DP control, the fuel con-
sumption per 100 km is increased by 27.94%. So there is great opti-
mization space for the rule-based control strategy to improve the
Hub fuel economy further.

Controller
800

230

6
19 9

21 5
20 2
BSFC(g/(kW.h))

20
19
20 6
700

Engine torque (Nm)

5
19 5
Te-max

21 5
20 2
19 9
CAN Card 600

25 0
250
connect to
19 9

23 0
500

6
230

20
CAN1 channel

20

5
21
20 6

70
400 20 2

21 5

0 3301209 0 2
20 6
27 0
215 23 0
300

0
25 0

25
5
21 23 0
200 23 0
0 25 0 27 0
25

36 3
29 0 27 0 90
3120
3336 0

3129 0 27 0 3 33 0
VTSystem 100 33100
0

0 36 0
1000 1500 2000 2500
Engine speed (r/min)

Fig. 18. HIL experiment bench. Fig. 21. Working points of the engine in CD mode before being improved.

60 40 60
CTUDT
CD CS
Fuel consumption (L)

50
Before improved Fuel consumption
Velocity (km/h)

40 After improved 30 50
for 15 CTUDC

SOC (%)
cycles
30
20 40
20
10
10 Final SOC value 30
0 for 15 CTUDC
cycles
-10 0 20
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1314 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
4
Time (s) Time (s) x 10

Fig. 19. Comparison of the actual velocities of the PHEB with the demand velocity. Fig. 22. Simulation result after being improved.

800
230

215
199

202

BSFC(g/(kW.h))
20
19

40 60
206

700
5
Engine torque (Nm)

195

Te-max
215
202
Fuel consumption (L)

CD CS
199

Fuel consumption 600

250
250

30 for 15 CTUDC 50
199
230

500
206
230
SOC (%)

cycles
20

5
21
206

70

20 40 400 202
215

0 33012090 2

206
27 0

215
300 230
250
250

215
10 30 230
Final SOC value 200 230 250 270
250
36 3

270 90
3120
33360

for 15 CTUDC
100 31290 270 312090 330
cycles 0 33
0

0
0 20 36 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1000 1500 2000 2500
4
Time (s) x 10 Engine speed (r/min)

Fig. 20. Simulation result before improved. Fig. 23. Working points of the engine in CD mode after being calibrated.
1642 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643
Table 3
Energy consumption under different control strategies.
Control strategy Rule-based
Fuel consumption per (L/100 km) 25.46
Electric consumption (kW h/100 km) 8.85
Initial SOC 0.6
Final SOC 0.313
The working points of the engine in the CD mode are shown in
Fig. 21. Most of the working speeds are higher than 1000r/min, it
indicates that the engine participate in driving less comparing with
the DP-based energy management strategy, and the traction motor
has to supply most of the desired torque, which results in the fast
droping of SOC and switching to CS mode earlier.
After the rule-based control strategy is improved, the fuel con-
sumption and variation of SOC for the same driving cycles are
shown in Fig. 22, the initial SOC was also set at 0.6. According to
the comparison of Figs. 20 and 22, the PHEB comes to work in CS
mode from CD mode at about 9000 s, the bus works longer time
in CD mode, and the SOC drops slower during the trip, which is
accorded with the variation of SOC under DP control.
By using the improved rule-based energy strategy after being
calibrated, the working points of the engine in the CD mode are
shown in Fig. 23. It indicates that after rule was improved, the
engine working area is larger than that before improved, and
mainly concentrate in the speed range higher than 800r/min, it
denotes that the engine participates in driving the bus early, and
the power supplied by the traction motor is reduced, so the SOC
decreases slower, which is in accordance with the DP control
result.
The comparison results of different control strategies are listed
in Table 3. After the rule being improved, the fuel consumption is
20.17 L for 15 consecutive driving cycles, the fuel consumption
per 100 km is 22.80 L/100 km, and the terminal SOC is 0.319. The
fuel consumption per 100 km decreased by 10.45%, meanwhile
the electricity consumption is decreased by 4.75%. However, the
fuel consumption per 100 km is still higher than that of DP control
by 14.57%, while the electricity consumption is decreased by 8.17%.
6. Conclusion
This paper proposes a novel way to calibrate the existed heuris-
tic control strategy with the global optimization result. The DP is
applied to locate the optimal powertrain actions of a series–paral-
lel PHEV over Chinese typical urban driving cycle. The engine oper-
ation area is recalibrated according to the DP results in a rule-
based energy management structure. Eventually, an
optimization-based recalibration procedure is presented to extract
more reasonable control actions for heuristic PHEV control. The HIL
experiments show that the engine working area is extended to a
more broad area and the PHEB operated in the CD mode lasting
for a longer duration, the diesel consumption per 100 km is
reduced by 10.45% from 25.46 L diesel to 22.80 L, and the electric-
ity consumption per 100 km is reduced by 4.75% from 8.85 kW h to
8.43 kW h. Intuitively, the proposed optimization-based rule
development procedure suits fixed-pattern driving situations,
and provides a low-cost way to improve the heuristic energy man-
agement strategies utilized currently by most PHEV
manufacturers.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National High Technology
Research and Development Program of China (2013BAG05B00)
Improved rule-based DP-based
22.80 19.90
8.43 9.18
0.6 0.6
0.319 0.305
and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
51507012). Any opinions expressed in this paper are solely those
of the authors and do not represent those of the sponsors.
References
[1] Bashash S, Moura SJ, Forman JC, Fathy HK. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
charge pattern optimization for energy cost and battery longevity. J Power
Sources 2011;196(1):541–9.
[2] Li G, Zhang XP. Modeling of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle charging demand in
probabilistic power flow calculations. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2012;3(1):492–9.
[3] Torres JL, Gonzalez R, Gimenez A, Lopez J. Energy management strategy for
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. A comparative study. Appl Energy
2014;113:816–24.
[4] Hou C, Ouyang MG, Xu LF, Wang HW. Approximate Pontryagin’s minimum
principle applied to the energy management of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. Appl Energy 2014;115:174–89.
[5] Sun C, Moura SJ, Hu XS, Hedrick JK. Sun FC dynamic traffic feedback data
enabled energy management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans
Contr Syst Technol 2015;23(3):1075–86.
[6] Borhan HA, Vahidi A, Phillips AM, Kuang ML, Kolmanovsky IV, Di CS. MPC-
based energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans
Contr Syst Technol 2012;20(3):593–603.
[7] Zhang S, Xiong R, Zhang CN. Pontryagin’s minimum principle-based power
management of a dual-motor-driven electric bus. Appl Energy
2015;159:370–80.
[8] Montazeri-Gh M, Mahmoodi-k M. Development a new power management
strategy for power split hybrid electric vehicles. Transp Res Part D – Transp
Environ 2015;37:79–96.
[9] Zhang S, Xiong R. Adaptive energy management of a plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle based on driving pattern recognition and dynamic programming. Appl
Energy 2015;155:68–78.
[10] Antonio S, Lino G. Control of hybrid electric vehicle optimal energy
management strategies. IEEE Contr Syst Mag 2007;4:60–70.
[11] Gao JP, Zhu GMG, Strangas EG, Sun FC. Equivalent fuel consumption optimal
control of a series hybrid electric vehicle. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D – J
Automob Eng 2009;223(8):1003–18.
[12] Delprat S, Lauber J, Guerra TM, Rimaux J. Control of a parallel hybrid
powertrain: optimal control. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2004;53(3):872–81.
[13] Wang XM, He HW, Sun FC, Zhang JL. Application study on the dynamic
programming algorithm for energy management of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. Energies 2015;8(4):3225–44.
[14] Chen Z, Mi CC, Xiong R, Xu J, You CW. Energy management of a power-split
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle based on genetic algorithm and quadratic
programming. J Power Sources 2014;248:416–26.
[15] Zhang P, Yan F, Du C. A comprehensive analysis of energy management
strategies for hybrid electric vehicles based on bibliometrics. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;48:88–104.
[16] Kermani S, Delprat S, Guerra TM, Trigui R, Jeanneret B. Predictive energy
management for hybrid vehicle. Contr Eng Pract 2012;20(4):408–20.
[17] Sun C, Hu XS, Moura SJ, Sun FC. Velocity predictors for predictive energy
management in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol
2015;23(3):1197–204.
[18] Di Cairano S, Bernardini D, Bemporad A, Kolmanovsky IV. Stochastic MPC with
learning for driver-predictive vehicle control and its application to HEV energy
management. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol 2014;22(3):1018–31.
[19] Peng JK, Fan H, He HW, Pan D. A rule-based energy management strategy for a
plug-in hybrid school bus based on a controller area network bus. Energies
2015;8(6):5122–42.
[20] Wang XM, He HW, Sun FC, Sun XK. Comparative study on different energy
management strategies for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Energies 2013;6
(11):5656–75.
[21] Wirasingha SG, Emadi A. Classification and review of control strategies for
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2011;60(1):111–22.
[22] Pisu P, Rizzoni G. A comparative study of supervisory control strategies for
hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol 2007;15(3):506–18.
[23] Gao YM, Ehsani M. Design and control methodology of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2010;57(2):633–40.
[24] Xie H, Ding YB. The study of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle power
management strategy simulation. In: Proceedings of vehicle power and
propulsion conference; 2008.
 J. Peng et al. / Applied Energy 185 (2017) 1633–1643
[25] Banvait H, Anwar S, Chen Y. A rule-based energy management strategy for
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). In: Proceedings of American control
conference; 2009.
[26] Jalil N, Kheir NA, Salman M. A rule-based energy management strategy for a
series hybrid vehicle. In: Proceedings of the American control conference;
1997.
[27] Martínez JS, John RI, Hissel D, et al. A survey-based type-2 fuzzy logic system
for energy management in hybrid electrical vehicles. Inform Sci
2012;190:192–207.
[28] Li SG, Sharkh SM, Walsh FC, Zhang CN. Energy and battery management of a
plug-in series hybrid electric vehicle using fuzzy logic. IEEE Trans Veh Technol
2011;60(8):3571–85.
[29] Chen Z, Mi CC. An adaptive online energy management controller for power-
split HEV based on dynamic programming and fuzzy logic. In: Vehicle power
and propulsion conference, 2009. VPPC 09. IEEE; 2009. p. 335–9.
1643
[30] He HW, Xiong R, Zhao K, Liu ZT. Energy management strategy research on a
hybrid power system by hardware-in-loop experiments. Appl Energy
2013;112:1311–7.
[31] Geng B, Mills JK, Sun D. Energy management control of microturbine-powered
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles using the telemetry equivalent consumption
minimization strategy. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2011;60(9):4238–48.
[32] Khayyam H, Bab-Hadiashar A. Adaptive intelligent energy management
system of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Energy 2014;69:319–35.
[33] Sun F, Xiong R. A novel dual-scale cell state-of-charge estimation approach for
series-connected battery pack used in electric vehicles. J Power Sources
2015;274:582–94.
[34] Chen BC, Wu YY, Tsai HC. Design and analysis of power management strategy
for range extended electric vehicle using dynamic programming. Appl Energy
2014;113:1764–74.
[35] Borhan HA, Vahidi A, Phillips AM, Kuang ML, Kolmanovsky IV. Predictive
energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle. In: Proceedings of
American control conference; 2009.