Int. J. Powertrains, Vol. 5, No.

1, 2016 1

State-of-the-art electrified powertrains –

hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles

Yinye Yang*, Kamran Arshad-Ali,

Joel Roeleveld and Ali Emadi
McMaster Institute for Automotive Research and
Technology (MacAUTO),
McMaster University,
200 Longwood Road South,
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Email: yangy9@mcmaster.ca
Email: arshadk@mcmaster.ca
Email: roelej@mcmaster.ca
Email: emadi@mcmaster.ca
*Corresponding author

Abstract: Automotive electrification has become the centre of current

transportation technology especially in the age of surging petroleum fuel
prices and rising social awareness of vehicle emissions. A range of electrified
powertrains from micro hybrid to full electric have been implemented
in a wide variety of vehicle platforms from subcompacts to heavy-duty trucks
and buses. The main focus of this paper is to comprehensively review
the state-of-the-art electrified powertrains that have been developed and
commercialised in the North American automotive industry. Vehicles are
categorised based on different powertrain configurations and electrification
levels. The powertrain structure and operating modes are also analysed in
detail. In addition, a comprehensive database of electrified powertrains and
their components is created. Electrified powertrains and the corresponding
conventional powertrains are compared in terms of vehicle efficiency,
powertrain complexity, and pump-to-wheel CO2 emissions.

Keywords: hybrid; plug-in hybrid; electric vehicle; electrified powertrain.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Yang, Y.,

Arshad-Ali, K., Roeleveld, J. and Emadi, A. (2016) ‘State-of-the-art electrified
powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles’, Int. J. Powertrains,
Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.1–29.

Biographical notes: Yinye Yang is a Principal Research Engineer in

McMaster Institute for Automotive Research and Technology, McMaster
University, Canada. He received his BE in Mechanical Engineering from
Tsinghua University, China, in 2010, and Masters in Mechanical Engineering
from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), USA, in 2010. Then
he received his PhD in Electrical Engineering from McMaster University,
Canada in 2014. He is the principal author/co-author of numerous patent
applications, book chapters, and journal and conference papers. He serves as a
reviewer and multiple session chairs for IEEE Transportation Electrification
Conference and Expo (ITEC).

Copyright © 2016 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2 Y. Yang et al.

Kamran Arshad-Ali received his BEng in Mechanical Engineering from

McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada in 2013. He is currently
working towards his Masters of Applied Science at McMaster Automotive
Resource Centre (MARC). He has been a member of the McMaster Formula
Hybrid team since 2011 and is currently the co-lead for the modelling and
simulation division. His research interests include hybrid powertrain design,
system simulation, computational fluid dynamics and vehicle light weighting.

Joel Roeleveld received his Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical

Engineering from McMaster University in 2013. He joined the McMaster
Automotive Resource Center as a Masters of Applied Science student at
McMaster University in September 2013. He is a system modelling and
simulation lead for McMaster Formula Hybrid and McMaster Engineering
EcoCAR 3 teams in which students compete internationally in design,
manufacturing and dynamic competitions. The involvement in these teams
along with a design focused undergraduate studies has provoked his to interests
in vehicle electrification, focusing on system level simulation, power
combination, architecture analysis, and hybrid supervisory control.

Ali Emadi is the Canada Excellence Research Chair in Hybrid Powertrain and
Director of McMaster Institute for Automotive Research and Technology
(MacAUTO) at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Before
joining McMaster University, he was the Harris Perlstein Endowed Chair
Professor of Engineering and Director of the Electric Power and Power
Electronics Center and Grainger Laboratories at Illinois Institute of Technology
(IIT) in Chicago, Illinois, USA. In addition, he was the Founder, Chairman, and
President of Hybrid Electric Vehicle Technologies, Inc. (HEVT) – a university
spin-off company of IIT. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE Transactions on
Transportation Electrification.

1 Introduction

The modern automotive industry has been evolving ever since it started more than a
hundred years ago when Karl Benz built the first Patent-Motorwagen automobile in 1886
(Eckermann, 2001). From the less than one horsepower low-speed wagon to the
hundred-horsepower or even thousand-horsepower supercars of today, the automotive
industry continues the trend of manufacturing cars with increased performance and
improved efficiency. Among the numerous technology advancements, the majority of
these improvements were made by enhancing the performance of the internal
combustion engine (ICE). However, conventional ICE technology predominantly relies
on carbon-based products as its energy source. Petroleum-based fuels such as gasoline
and diesel extracted from crude oil provide exceptional energy density allowing long
driving range and short refuelling times. Combined with their accessibility and relatively
low price they have dominated the vehicle fuel market for the past one hundred years.
Over the past few decades mainly due to the rising consumption demands and supply
disruptions, oil prices have risen more than 400% to 80 USD per barrel in 2014
(International Energy Outlook, 2014). Concerns about the surpassed peak oil, declining
known oil reserves, district disturbance, national policies, etc., all result in instability and
unpredictability of the global oil market (International Energy Outlook, 2014).
Additionally, many nations have emphasised energy security as a major priority. Seeking
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 3

alternative fuels other than relying exclusively on petroleum products has become the
strategic focus (Slack, 2012; German, 2011). Furthermore, the current transportation
sector significantly impacts the environment in terms of pollutants and greenhouse gas
emissions. Emissions such as nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and particulate
matters (PM) are generated as a form of vehicle exhaust in conventional vehicles using
ICEs. They are also produced by fuel evaporation during uncompleted fuel burning or
simply during the fuelling process. Poorly treated emissions can cause severe
environmental problems and health problems such as cancers resulting from significant,
chronic exposures (Yang and Emadi, 2013). The transportation sector also accounts for
nearly a third of the total greenhouse gas emissions in the USA (Yang et al., 2014). Thus,
government regulatory pressure and customer demand for cleaner transportation prevail
in major automotive markets including Europe, USA and China (German, 2011;
McCarthy and Yacobucci, 2014; Heymann, 2014). It is necessary and inevitable for the
transportation sector to diversify its fuel sources to avoid sole dependency on petroleum
fuel, improve vehicle efficiency, and reduce emissions.
Hence, electrified powertrains have emerged as one of the most promising solutions
to achieve the targets of reducing emissions and reliance on fossil fuels (Ehsani et al.,
2009; Emadi et al., 2005). In conventional vehicles ICEs are highly inefficient, with an
average efficiency of less than 30% due to the maximum heat-work conversion constraint
while generating a wide range of emissions even with the assistance of after treatment
systems (Ehsani et al., 2009). On the other hand, machines that use electricity as their
energy source have much higher efficiency of up to 95% with zero emissions. In addition,
electrified powertrains further improve vehicle efficiency and performance by shifting the
ICE operation into a more fuel efficient zone. Thus, by taking advantage of electrified
powertrains a considerable reduction of fuel consumption and emission can be achieved.
Several review papers have previously discussed electrified powertrains. Emadi et al.
(2005) presented the topological overview of hybrid electric architectures and systems.
Chan (2007) discussed the state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles. Tate
et al. (2009) presented the electrification of the automobile from conventional hybrid, to
plug-in hybrids, to extended-range electric vehicles. However, these review papers
presented the electrified powertrain technologies only up to 2008 and did not cover more
advanced electrified powertrains that have been developed recently. Additionally, Tuttle
and Kockelman (2012) discussed the electrified vehicle technology trends, infrastructure
implications and cost comparisons, but the focus is on the market and financial
analysis as well as key trends associated. Zhang et al. (2012) compared and analysed
powertrain configurations of the Prius and Volt, but only focused on power-split hybrid
architectures. More recently, Wu et al. (2014) discussed the classification of electrified
powertrains. However, that paper focused on the architecture classification and potential
variations whereas the vehicle level performance and efficiency were not compared. In
contrast, this paper comprehensively reviews the state-of-the-art electrified powertrains
and aims to provide a database and comparisons between different electrified powertrain
architectures that has been developed and commercialised in automotive industry to date.
Seven sections are divided in the following context in which each section focuses on a
type of electrified powertrain. Powertrain structures and operation modes will be
analysed in detail including a comprehensive database of electrified powertrains and
components for each category. Component size and power, vehicle fuel economy, and
4 Y. Yang et al.

pump-to-wheel CO2 emissions have been provided for each category. Section 9 then
compares different powertrains and Section 10 concludes the findings of this paper.

2 Parallel hybrid powertrains

For many manufacturers the parallel hybrid architecture has been the powertrain of
choice for their first step into vehicle electrification. The parallel architecture consists of
an electric machine placed in line with the ICE. It is referred to as a parallel configuration
because the power is added up from both the ICE and the electric machine to the
transmission independent of each other. Depending on the relative position of the electric
machine and the engine, parallel hybrid powertrains can be categorised into four
configurations, which are typically referred as P1 to P4, shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Parallel architecture block diagrams, (a) ISG/BSG parallel configuration (P1)
(b) pre-transmission parallel configuration (P2) (c) post-transmission parallel
configuration (P3) (d) parallel-through-the road configuration (P4) (see online
version for colours)

Electric Differential Electric Differential

MG2
ICE Transmission MG2
ICE Transmission
machine gear machine gear

(a) (b)

Electric Electric
MG2
ICE Transmission Differential Differential MG2
ICE Transmission
machine machine
gear gear

(c) (d)

The electric machine is located before the engine in P1 configuration. The integrated
starter generator (ISG) or belt starter generator (BSG) replaces the alternator and starter
motors connected to the ICE with a single electric machine. This machine performs the
task of both of these devices, acting as a starter motor for the engine and generator for
powering vehicle accessories. It also allows engine to shut off when the vehicle is
stopped, preventing idling and saving fuel. In addition, it can be used for limited
regenerative braking during vehicle deceleration and power assistance during
acceleration. This architecture is extensively used in hybrid vehicles that have relatively
lower level of electrification and can be found across a broad range of vehicle classes
from compact vehicles to large trucks.
 Engine Engine Engine Electric Battery pack US production CO2
Vehicle
Model size power torque machine power capacity model emissions Table 1
class
(L) (kW) (Nm) (kW) (kWh) years (g/mile)
Compact Acura ILX Hybrid 1.5 67 132 17 NA 2013–2014 228
BMW Active Hybrid 3 3.0 224 407 41 1.35 2012– 314
Honda Civic Hybrid 1.5 67 131 17 0.6 2012– 196
Honda CR-Z 1.5 83 144 10 0.6 2011– 238
Honda Insight 1.3 73 167 10 0.34 2000–2006 209
2010–2014
Infiniti Q50/M35h Hybrid 3.6 269 290 50 0.6 2012– 286
Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid 1.4 106 100 20 1.1 2013– 200
Mid-size Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid 2.4 136 233 15 0.5 2008–2010, 307
2013–
BMW Active Hybrid 5 3.0 223 406 41 1.35 2012– 246
Infiniti M / Q70 Hybrid 3.5 226 358 43 0.6 2012– 285
Buick LaCrosse Hybrid 2.4 136 233 15 0.5 2012– 310
Buick Regal Hybrid 2.4 136 233 15 0.5 2012– 310
Mercedes E400H 3.5 225 370 20 0.8 2013– 347
Nissan Altima Hybrid 2.5 118 220 30 1.46 2007–2011 269
Parallel hybrid powertrain models and specifications

Large BMW Active Hybrid 7 3.0 235 450 15 1.35 2010– 350
Chevrolet Impala Hybrid 2.5 146 252 15 0.5 2014– 355
Mercedes S400HV 3.5 205 225 20 NA 2012–2013 414
Porsche Panamera S Hybrid 3 245 440 35 1.7 2012– 229
SUV/truck Audi Q5 Hybrid 2 155 350 40 0.816 2011– 337
Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid 5.3 220 454 NA 0.84 2005–2007 523
Infiniti QX60 Hybrid 2.5 186 329 15 0.6 2014– 342
Nissan Pathfinder Hybrid 2.5 171 330 15 0.6 2014– 342
Porsche Cayenne S Hybrid 3 245 440 35 1.7 2011– 260
State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles

Volkswagen Touareg Hybrid 3 245 440 35 1.7 2011– 413

5
6 Y. Yang et al.

An electric machine is located before the transmission in the P2 configuration. Here the
electric machine can provide assistance to the engine for greater acceleration and
performance, or depending on the size and power of the battery pack, drive the vehicle in
electric-only operation. Effective regenerative braking is also available during
vehicle deceleration. If energy is required to charge the battery, the machine can operate
as a generator while the engine provides power for both vehicle traction and battery
charging.
P3 configuration is similar to P2 configuration in many ways except that the electric
machine is placed after the transmission and thus it connects to the output shaft
through the differential gear ratio. P4 configuration places the electric machine either
directly at the wheels or on a different axle. It combines power from the engine
and the electric motor to drive the vehicle directly. Within the P4 configuration, when the
electric machine is on a different axle, it is commonly referred to as parallel
through-the-road architecture. The main advantages of this architecture are the
performance benefits of an all-wheel drive (AWD) powertrain and isolation from the
ICE. This architecture is capable of the same operating modes as the conventional
parallel powertrain. It can also charge the battery by applying a braking torque on the
electrically powered axle.
Table 1 and Figure 2 summarise the current commercial hybrid electric vehicles
utilising a parallel architecture. The vehicles are grouped by their size class and the value
graphed is the EPA provided combined MPG number (US Department of Energy,
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/).

Figure 2 Fuel efficiency comparisons in parallel hybrid powertrains (see online version
for colours)

Nissan Pathfinder Hybrid 26

Infinity QX60 Hybrid
SUV / Truck

26
Audi Q5 Hybrid 26
Volkswagen Toureg Hybrid 21
Porsche Cayenne S Hybrid 21
Chevy Silverado Hybrid 17
Porsche Panamera S Hybrid 25
Mercedes S400 Hybrid 21
Large

BMW ActiveHybrid 7L 25
Chevy Impala Hybrid 29
Nissan Altima Hybrid 34
Mercedes E400H 26
Buick Regal eAssist 29
Midsize

Buick LaCrosse eAssist 29

Kia Optima Hybrid 38
Infinity Q70 Hybrid 31
BMW ActiveHybrid 5 26
Chevy Malibu Hybrid 29
BMW ActiveHybrid 3 28
Honda Insight 42
Honda CR-Z Manual 34
Compact

Honda CR-Z Auto 37

Honda Civic Hybrid 44
Volkwagen Jetta Hybrid 45
Infinity Q50 Hybrid 31
Acura ILX Hybrid 38
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (miles/U.S. gallon)
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 7

3 Power-split powertrains

The power-split system is an input-split hybrid transmission which utilises power split
devices, i.e., planetary gear sets, at the input side of the transmission that connects to the
engines and electric machines (Staunton et al., 2006; Muta et al., 2004). The planetary
gear set splits the engine power into a mechanical path and an electric path. By adjusting
the portions of power transferred through these two paths, the system achieves variable
output speed and torque, thus improving vehicle fuel economy and reducing emissions
(Burress et al., 2010). Based on the planetary gear set architecture, various hybrid
synergy drive topologies have been developed. The first configuration is the Toyota
hybrid system (THS), which was used in the Toyota Prius prior to 2004. Figure 3
illustrates the THS system and its simplified block diagram.

Figure 3 Toyota hybrid system, (a) Toyota hybrid system (Staunton et al., 2006)
(b) block diagram representation (see online version for colours)

Planetary
gear set
Machine
R 2 N1 Output
shaft
Engine C N2

Machine
1 S

(a) (b)

The engine output shaft is connected to the planet carrier. Machine 1 is directly
connected to the sun gear, providing the speed coupling. The ring gear and Machine 2 are
coupled and together supply output torque and power to the vehicle wheels. Machine 2
functions to supplement the engine torque, thus allowing the engine to operate in greater
efficiency regions. When engine power is transferred to the transmission input shaft, the
planetary gear set functions to split this power into a mechanical path and an electric
path. Most of the power would directly transfer through the mechanical path to the final
drive, while the remaining power transfers to Machine 1 acting in generator mode.
The THS system has been updated and renamed to hybrid synergy drive (HSD) since
the second generation of Toyota Prius, and has been widely used in Toyota and Lexus
hybrid line-ups and licensed to Ford and Nissan. One major difference between the THS
and the HSD is the introduction of the second planetary gear set where the planetary
carrier is grounded to work as a fixed gear ratio. Also, the chain coupling used in the final
drive of the THS system is removed. The number of shafts is reduced from 4 to 3 and the
total gear ratio from the second ring gear to the differential in the HSD transaxles is
reduced to maximise vehicle speed (Burress et al., 2010). Figure 4 illustrates the 2010
Toyota Prius HSD system and its block diagram.
8 Y. Yang et al.

Figure 4 HSD system, (a) 2010 Toyota Prius Hybrid synergy drive (Burress et al., 2010)
(b) block diagram representation (see online version for colours)

Output
shaft
R R

Engine C C

Machine 1 S S Machine 2

(a) (b)

Additional power-split configurations have been developed, as illustrated in Figure 5.

One has been applied on SUVs such as Lexus RX450h and Toyota Highlander for
all-wheel drive (AWD) utilising a third electric machine (MGR) on the rear axle. The
other variation of the power-split system is to replace the second planetary gear set with a
Ravigneaux (Rav) gear and two clutches so that the total gear ratio can be switched
between low speed and high speed applications (Burress et al., 2009).

Figure 5 Variations of power-split systems, (a) block diagram representation of the AWD drive
system (b) block diagram representation of the HSD using Ravigneaux gear
(see online version for colours)
Rear wheels Front wheels

MGR R R
Differential gear
Gears
Engine C C

Machine 1 S Machine 2 S

(a)
Front wheels

R C C
Differential gear
Gears
Engine C Machine 2 S S

Machine 1 S

(b)
 Table 2

Engine Engine Main electric Main electric Battery US CO2

Vehicle
Type Model size power machine power machine torque capacity production emissions
class
(L) (kW) (kW) (Nm) (kWh) model years (g/mile)
Compact THS Toyota Prius 1.5 57 50 400 1.3 2000–2009 193
HSD Lexus CT200h 1.8 73 60 206 1.3 2011– 211
HSD Lexus HS250h 2.4 110 105 270 NA 2009–2012 254
Mid-size HSD Toyota Prius 1.8 73 60 207 1.3 2010– 178
HSD Toyota Camry Hybrid 2.5 118 105 270 1.6 2007– 215
HSD Toyota Avalon Hybrid 2.5 116 105 270 1.6 2013– 223
HSD Lexus ES 300h 2.5 116 105 270 1.6 2013– 223
HSD Ford Fusion Hybrid 2 105 88 159 1.4 2010– 209
HSD Lincoln MKZ Hybrid 2 105 88 159 1.4 2011– 222
Rav Lexus GS450h 3.5 213 149 275 1.87 2006– 283
Power-split powertrain models and specifications

Rav Lexus LS600h 5 290 165 300 1.87 2008– 432

Large HSD Ford C-Max Hybrid 2 105 88 159 1.4 2013– 225
HSD Ford Escape Hybrid 2.5 99 70 NA 1.8 2005–2012 278
AWD Lexus RX400h 3.3 155 123 333 1.87 2006–2008 355
AWD Lexus RX450h 3.5 183 116 333 1.87 2010– 297
AWD Toyota Highlander 3.5 172 123 333 1.87 2005– 319
Hybrid
State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles
9
10 Y. Yang et al.

Figure 6 Fuel efficiency comparisons in power-split powertrains (see online version for colours)

Lexus RX400h (2008)

Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Large

Lexus RX450h
Ford Escape Hybrid (2012)
Ford C-Max Hybrid
Lexus LS600h L
Lexus GS450h
Lincoln MKZ Hybrid FWD
Lexus ES 300h
Midsize

Toyota Avalon Hybrid

Toyota Camry Hybrid LE
Ford Fusion Hybrid FWD
Toyota Prius v
Toyota Prius
Lexus HS250h (2012)
Compact

Lexus CT200h
Toyota Prius c
0 10 20 30 40 50

By coordinating the motor and generator output, the power-split powertrains realise
electric-only mode, engine start mode, motor assist mode, battery charging mode, and
regenerative braking mode (Yang and Emadi, 2013). It can also employ other modes
matching driving conditions such as engine braking, uphill and downhill driving,
cruising, coasting, and neutral. The electric machines are fully integrated into each drive
mode to maximise the powertrain operation efficiency and performance. Both engine
speed and engine torque are decoupled from the output shaft enabling the engine to work
within its optimal operating regions, thus increasing fuel efficiency. Since both electric
machines can operate as either the motor or the generator, greater system flexibility and
performance are achieved.

4 Two-mode hybrid powertrains

The two-mode hybrid incorporates the engine, electric machines, and mechanical gear
sets in a compound hybrid system. Figure 7 illustrates GM’s Allison two-mode hybrid
transmission (Yang and Emadi, 2011). By coordinating the two machines, clutches and
brakes, this hybrid transmission provides more operating modes when compared to the
power-split system. This enables the two-mode hybrid transmission to achieve improved
fuel economy and uncompromised performance at both low and high vehicle speed.
Table 3 lists the different operation modes.
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 11

Figure 7 Two-mode hybrid transmission and its block diagram, (a) GM two-mode Allison
hybrid transmission (US Department of Energy, http://www.fueleconomy.gov/)
(b) AHS block diagram (see online version for colours)
Electric Planetary
Clutch Electric B1
machine 1 machine 2 gear set
Input
Engine R1 R2 R3
C1 Output
C1 C2 C3

S1 S2 S3
C2
B2
Machine1 Machine 2

(a) (b)

Table 3 Two-mode hybrid transmission operation modes

Brake B1 Clutch C1 Brake B2 Clutch C2

Continuously Input-split ○
variable Compound-split ○
transmission modes
Fixed gear ratio 1st Fixed gear ○ ○
modes 2nd Fixed gear ○ ○
3rd Fixed gear ○ ○
4th Fixed gear ○ ○

4.1 Input-split mode

Input-split mode is achieved by engaging Brake B1 while disengaging other clutches.
The Machine 1 serves as the speed coupler to regulate engine speed while Machine 2
serves as the torque coupler to regulate engine torque, decoupling the engine from the
output shaft and thus improving engine efficiency. Input-split mode is more often used in
a relatively low-speed driving range. Higher vehicle speed increases the power on the
electric path, resulting in higher power losses because of energy conversions (Yang and
Emadi, 2013).

4.2 Compound-split mode

Compound-split mode is achieved by engaging Clutch C1 and disengaging other
clutches, used typically for high-speed driving range. In the compound-split mode, all the
planetary gear sets function as power split devices to split and adjust the power ratio
between the electric power path and the mechanical power path. However, differing from
the input-split mode, the engine speed and torque are regulated by both electric machines.
Compound-split mode has higher efficiency at higher vehicle speeds due to lower power
ratio on the electric path.
12 Y. Yang et al.

Table 4 Two-mode hybrid powertrain models and specifications

Electric Electric
Engine Engine Battery US CO2
Vehicle machines machines
Model size power capacity production emissions
class power torque
(L) (kW) (kWh) models (g/mile)
(kW) (Nm)
Large BWM 4.4 300 67/63 280/260 2.4 2010–2011 494
Active
Hybrid X6
Cadillac 6 248 60/60 320/320 2.4 2009–2013 418
Escalade
Hybrid
Chevrolet 6 248 60/60 320/320 1.8 2009–2013 418
Silverado
Hybrid
Chevrolet 6 248 60/60 320/320 1.8 2008–2013 418
Tahoe
Hybrid
Mercedes 3.5 205 62/60 260/234 2.4 2010–2011 404
ML450
Hybrid

4.3 Fixed gear ratios

By applying two clutches at the same time, GM’s two-mode transmission can switch
from the continuously variable modes to fixed gear ratios. The first fixed gear ratio takes
place when Brake B1 and Clutch C2 are engaged, which is used to increase the output
torque when high torque is required during vehicle acceleration. The second fixed gear
ratio is used as a transient mode, which switches between the input-split mode and the
compound-split mode by controlling Clutch C1 and Brake B1. The third fixed gear ratio
is realised by engaging both Clutch C1 and Clutch C2 to achieve a 1:1 input-output gear
ratio. The fourth fixed gear ratio is an overdrive gear. Brake B2 locks Machine 2 while
Clutch 1 engages. It can be used in vehicle high speed operations where the engine
operates in its efficient regions.

Figure 8 Fuel efficiency comparisons in two-mode powertrains (see online version for colours)

Mercedez ML450 Hybrid

GMC Yukon Hybrid
GMC Sierra Hybrid
Cheverolet Tahoe Hybrid
Cheverolet Silverado Hybrid
Cadillac Escalade Hybrid
BWM ActiveHybrid X6
0 5 10 15 20 25
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (miles/U.S. gallon)
 Table 5

Main electric Main electric

Vehicle Engine size Engine power Battery capacity Electric range US production CO2 emissions
Model machine power machine torque
class (L) (kW) (kWh) (km) models (g/mile)
(kW) (Nm)
Compact BMW i8 1.5 170 98 250 7.1 24 2014- 198
Mid-size Toyota Prius PHEV 1.5 57 50 400 4.4 23 2012- 133
Ford C-MAX Energi 2.0 63 111 370 6.1 16.5 2013- 129
Ford Fusion Energi 1.4 63 135/55 370/200 6.0 16.5 2013- 129
Honda Accord PHEV 2.0 102 124 306 2.0 6.7 2014 130
Large Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid 3.0 245 70 229 9.4 25.7 2014- 229
Series-parallel hybrid powertrain models and specifications
State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 13
14 Y. Yang et al.

5 Series-parallel hybrid powertrains

The series-parallel architecture is an alternative to power-split architectures that use

planetary gear sets to split the power flow of the ICE into different paths. It differs from
the conventional power split architecture since it lacks the electronically continuously
variable transmission (eCVT) functionality provided by planetary gear sets. Instead the
ICE has a direct mechanical connection to two electric machines. One of the machines,
usually referred to as the generator, is always connected to the ICE. Its function is to act
as both a starter motor and also as a generator during vehicle operation. The ICE and
generator are separated from a second electric machine by a clutch. This second machine
acts as the main traction motor and puts tractive power to the road. The powertrain modes
of operation are summarised below:

1 Electric-only operation: with the clutch open Machine 2 is the only torque source
connected to the driveline and the road, enabling electric-only mode.

2 Series operation: with the clutch open, the engine is disconnected from the road but
can drive Machine 1 to provide electrical energy to Machine 2. Since the engine is
decoupled from the road it can be run in its greatest efficiency operating range. This
mode is typically used when the vehicle is operating at low speeds with a low battery
state of charge.

3 Series-parallel operation: with the clutch engaged the engine provides power to the
road in parallel with Machine 2. In this mode Machine 1 can also be used as a
resistive torque source to force the engine to operate in its higher efficiency
operating range.

There are only three commercial vehicle models available on the market to date that use
the series-parallel hybrid architecture. The Hyundai Sonata Hybrid and Kia Optima
Hybrid use the architecture defined in Figure 9(a) (Kim et al., 2011). They use an electric
machine as an integrated starter generator (ISG) and a larger traction machine for
electric-only drive and hybrid operation. The other series-parallel configuration
outlined above in Figure 9(b) is the architecture used by the Honda Accord Hybrid 2014
(Gehm, 2013). In the Honda Accord Hybrid architecture two larger electric machines are
employed and the engine has two geared connections to each machine.

Figure 9 Series-parallel hybrid powertrain configurations, (a) Hyundai Sonata Hybrid

series-parallel configuration (b) Honda Accord Hybrid series-parallel configuration
(see online version for colours)

Differential
Machine Machine Gear Machine gear
MG2
ICE Transmission
1 2 Differential Ratio 2
gear MG2
ICE
Gear Machine
Ratio 1

(a) (b)
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 15

Figure 10 Fuel economy comparisons in series-parallel hybrid powertrains (see online version
for colours)

Hyundai Sonata Hybrid 38

Midsize
Honda Accord Hybrid 47

Kia Optima Hybrid 38

0 10 20 30 40 50
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (miles/U.S. gallon)

6 Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles

As the name suggests, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) are a special type of
hybrid electric vehicles (HEV). The differences between PHEVs and HEVs lie primarily
in battery capacity and recharging method. A PHEV can be charged directly from the
power grid whereas an HEV is dependent on engine energy. PHEVs are equipped with
larger battery capacities that are capable of operating on battery power alone for a
considerable range, called all-electric driving range. Typically, this all-electric range is
designed to meet the daily driving requirements of PHEV owners, especially city drivers
and suburban commuters.
Three major modes are available in PHEVs:
1 Charge-depleting mode: charge-depleting (CD) mode refers to the PHEV operation
mode in which the battery SOC on average decreases while it may fluctuate along
this trend.
2 Charge-sustaining mode: charge-sustaining (CS) mode refers to the PHEV operation
mode in which the battery SOC on average sustains a certain level while it may
frequently fluctuate above and below this level. CS mode utilises both the engine and
the electric machine to supply the vehicle power while keeping the SOC of the
battery pack at a constant level.
3 All-electric-range mode: the all-electric-range (AER) mode uses electricity
exclusively as its energy source to power the vehicles.
The primary purpose of pursing PHEVs is to increase the electrification of the vehicle
and reducing emissions and fuel cost by allowing short commutes using charge depleting
operation. In addition, PHEVs have included other benefits such as energy cost savings,
maintenance cost saving and vehicle to grid charging. PHEVs also have the benefit over
EVs in that they have a fully functional hybrid system that will operate in a charge
sustaining mode, which means the PHEV can travel the same distance as a conventional
vehicle and drive like an EV for short commutes. However, the larger battery does add
weight to the vehicle and increases the initial cost. If the owner of a PHEV only uses their
car for long distance travelling and the added battery capacity is not used as much, an
HEV would be the best vehicle to have; whereas if the owner uses the car for short
commutes an EV would be the best vehicle. PHEV works best for a driver that commutes
a short distance and uses the car for long distance occasionally (US Environmental
Protection Agency, 2015).
 16

Table 6
Y. Yang et al.

Main electric Main electric CO2

Vehicle Engine size Engine power Battery capacity Electric range US production
Model machine power machine torque emissions
class (L) (kW) (kWh) (km) models
(kW) (Nm) (g/mile)
Compact BMW i8 1.5 170 98 250 7.1 24 2014– 198
Mid-size Toyota Prius PHEV 1.5 57 50 400 4.4 23 2012– 133
Ford C-MAX Energi 2.0 63 111 370 6.1 16.5 2013– 129
Ford Fusion Energi 1.4 63 135/55 370/200 6.0 16.5 2013– 129
Honda Accord PHEV 2.0 102 124 306 2.0 6.7 2014 130
Large Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid 3.0 245 70 229 9.4 25.7 2014– 229
Plug-in hybrid powertrain models and specifications
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 17

Figure 11 Fuel economy comparisons in PHEV powertrains (see online version for colours)

Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid

BMW i8
Sustaining
Charge

Honda Accord PHEV

Ford Fusion Energi
Toyota Prius PHEV
Ford C-MAX Energi
Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid
BMW i8
Electric

Honda Accord PHEV

Ford Fusion Energi
Toyota Prius PHEV
Ford C-MAX Energi
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (EPA mpge)

7 EREV powertrains

Extended range electric vehicles (EREVs) differ from plug-in hybrid vehicles in that they
have full capabilities when in fully electric mode. A PHEV may still rely on the ICE to
reach its max vehicle power whereas an EREV will have full power capability in electric
only operation. The main purpose of an EREV is to have fully capable electric-vehicle
drive while keeping an ICE onboard to avoid the range limitation of electric vehicles.
General Motors developed the Voltec 4ET50 Multi-Mode Electric Transaxle which
has been used in the Chevrolet Volt and Cadillac ELR (Miller et al., 2011). The Voltec
4ET50 is a derivative of the GM 2-Mode Hybrid, with the specific goals of allowing fully
capable complete EV operation. The Voltec provides four driving modes including two
EV modes and two extended range (ER) modes. Figure 12 contains a block diagram of
Voltec 4ET50 multi-mode electric transaxle configuration.

Figure 12 Voltec 4ET50 multi-mode electric transaxle configuration (see online version
for colours)

C3 C2 C1
Engine Machine 1 R
Output
shaft
C

Machine 2 S

The first EV mode can be achieved by engaging Clutch 1 (C1) so that the speed and
torque from Machine 2 can be directly transferred to the output shaft via a reduction gear
ratio. The second EV mode allows the Voltec to utilise both electric machines in higher
speed EV operation. When running in two-motor EV mode where Clutch 2 (C2) engages,
the Voltec uses a power-split ratio between the motors, dividing the speed and power
between the two machines. This flexibility allows the control to move the operating
points of the machines closer to their peak efficiency regions.
 18

Table 7
Y. Yang et al.

Electric
Engine Engine Electric Electric Battery US CO2
Vehicle machine
Model size power machines range capacity production emissions
class power
(L) (kW) torque (Nm) (km) (kWh) model (g/mile)
(kW)
Subcompact/ BWM i3 0.65 26 125 250 115 18.8 2014– 40
compact

Chevrolet 1.4 63 111/55 370/200 61 16.5 2011– 81

Volt

Cadillac 1.4 63 135/55 370/200 60 16.5 2014– 91

ELR
Extended range electric vehicle powertrain models and specifications
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 19

In extended range the Voltec offers a series mode and a power-split mode. Series mode,
where clutches C1 and C3 are engaged, operates like most other series hybrid topologies
in that the ICE is not mechanically coupled to the wheels. The power flow goes from the
engine to the generator (Machine 1) then to the electric drive motor (Machine 2), through
a gear reduction and then the road. In some cases, the conversion from mechanical to
electrical back to mechanical energy has more losses than direct mechanical driving.
Since there is only one electric drive motor this has similar disadvantage to a single
motor EV drive. To avoid these disadvantages in some operating points the Voltec can
switch to an output-split power flow, where clutches C2 and C3 are engaged. The output-
split power flow allows the engine to directly apply power to the road which eliminates
most of the disadvantages of the series operation. The downside of output-split and two-
motor EV modes is that the output torque is limited to the weaker of the two electric
motors.
When the vehicle operates as an EV, the powertrain control switched from one-motor
EV mode to two-motor EV mode when high speed and low torque is required, and thus
the efficiency can be increased. When charge needs to be sustained and the vehicle is in
extended range (ER) mode, the Voltec switches between the two EV modes as well as the
series and output-split modes (Miller et al., 2011).
The BMW i3 is offered as another EREV. With a larger focus on operation only in
EV mode, the ICE and generator are sized relatively smaller. The BMW i3 operates using
a single motor and gear reduction in EV mode and when in ER operation the power flow
is the same as a series hybrid.

Figure 13 Fuel economy comparisons in EREV powertrains (see online version for colours)

Cadillac ELR
Extended
Range

Chevrolet Volt
BMW i3
Cadillac ELR
EV Mode

Chevrolet Volt
BMW i3
0 50 100 150
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (EPA mpge)

8 EV powertrains

Electric vehicles (EVs) typically utilise simple powertrain configurations, in that they
contain an electric machine, a fixed gear reduction and a mechanical differential to
deliver the power to the wheels (Shimizu et al., 2013).
 20

Table 8
Y. Yang et al.

Electric Electric
Electric range Battery capacity US production CO2 emissions
Vehicle class Model machine power machines torque
(km) (kWh) model years (g/mile)
(kW) (Nm)
Minicompact Smart for two Electric Drive 30 120 101 16.5 2013– 0
Scion iQ EV 47 163 80 12 2013 0
Fiat 500e 83 147 140 24 2013– 0
Subcompact/compact Mitsubishi i-MiEV 47 180 100 16 2012–2014 0
Chevrolet Spark EV 97 443 132 21.3 2013– 0
Ford Focus Electric 107 245 122` 23 2011– 0
Mid-size Nisan Leaf 80 280 121 24 2010– 0
Honda Fit EV 92 256 132 20 2013–2014 0
Electric vehicle powertrain models and specifications

Large Tesla Model S 310 600 335/426 60/85 2012– 0

Toyota Rav4 EV 115 296 166 41.8 2012–2014 0
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 21

Figure 14 EV powertrain configuration (see online version for colours)

Drive wheels

Electric
machine
Differential gear
Gear Reduction

The advantage of using a gear reduction in an electric-only powertrain changes the motor
requirements to lower torque and higher speed. A single gear reduction is also robust
because the rotating parts are minimal and the gears remain in constant mesh. The
maintenance on a single reduction is much less than a multi-gear transmission because
there are no slipping components such as clutches and synchronisers. In general, EVs
have prominent advantages:

1 higher efficiency compared to the ICE efficiency

2 zero tailpipe emissions
3 low noise and smooth operation
4 various energy sources for generating electricity

5 less mechanical maintenance.

Figure 15 Fuel economy comparisons in EV powertrains (see online version for colours)

Tesla Model S
t / Compact Midsize Large

Toyota Rav 4 EV
Nissan Leaf
Honda Fit
Minicompa Subcompac

Mitsubishi i-MiEV
Chevrolet Spark EV
Ford Focus Elecric
Smart fortwo Electric Drive
Scion iQ EV
ct

Fiat 500e
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Combined Fuel Economy Rating (EPA mpge)
22 Y. Yang et al.

9 Powertrain comparisons

Different types of electrified powertrains are compared in this section. In order to find the
comparable non-electrified powertrains to serve as the benchmark of comparisons, the
conventional gasoline powertrain models that use the same vehicle platforms as the
electrified models (if existed) are listed in Table 10 (US Department of Energy,
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/; Odyssey Battery, 2010; J.D. Power Cars Research,
http://autos.jdpower.com/new-cars/index.htm). The trims that have the most relevant
match in terms of the engine displacement and manufacture model year are selected.
Based on the data in Table 10 and the data presented in the previous sections,
Tables 11 to 13 summarise the engine power, battery capacity, electric machine power,
fuel economy, and CO2 emissions for different vehicle classes while Figure 16 plots these
comparisons. The numbers are derived from the average values of each configuration
under the same vehicle class. For PHEVs and EREVs, the fuel economy combines the
charge sustaining fuel economy and electric fuel economy. Here, the concept of utility
factor has been implemented, which represents the statistical probability of the portion
driven in EV mode by an average driver (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014).
The combined fuel economy is calculated as below:
FEcombined = μ FEEV + (1 − μ ) FECS (1)

where FEcombined is the calculated combined fuel economy, FEEV is the fuel economy in
EV driving mode, FECS is the fuel economy in charge sustaining mode, and μ is the utility
factor. Table 9 lists the utility factors and the combined efficiencies of PHEVs and
EREVs for model year 2014 (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014).
Table 9 Utility factors and the combined efficiencies of PHEVs and EREVs

FECS FEEV μ FEcombined

BMW i8 28.00 76.00 0.37 45.76
Toyota Prius PHEV 50.00 95.00 0.29 63.05
Ford C-MAX Energi 38.00 88.00 0.45 60.50
Ford Fusion Energi 38.00 88.00 0.45 60.50
Honda Accord PHEV 46.00 115.00 0.33 68.77
Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid 25.00 50.00 0.39 34.75
Chevrolet ELR 33.00 82.00 0.65 64.85
Chevrolet Volt 38.00 98.00 0.66 77.60
BMW i3 39.00 117.00 0.83 103.74

It can be observed that in general, as the vehicle battery capacity, or electrification degree
increases, the fuel economy increases with a corresponding reduction in CO2 emissions.
Also the engine power reduces as the electrical power replaces it. There are a few
exceptions: the PHEVs in the compact class comprising only BMW i8 and large-size
class comprising only Porsche Panamera S E-hybrid, both of which are high performance
luxury sports cars that require high engine power. Another exception is the two-mode
hybrid in the large-size class, which is exclusively composed of high power-demanding
SUVs and pickup trucks.
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 23

Table 10 Corresponding conventional vehicle powertrain models and specifications

Engine Engine Fuel Battery

Vehicle Model CO2
Model size power economy capacity
class year emissions
(L) (kW) (mpg) (kWh)
Compact Acura ILX 2 112 28 0.336 2015 316
BMW 335i 3 224 25 0.84 2015 358
Chevrolet Spark 1.2 63 34 0.504 2015 264
Ford Focus 2 119 30 0.504 2015 293
Honda Civic 1.8 107 33 0.54 2015 271
Honda Fit 1.5 97 35 0.336 2015 256
Lexus IS250 2.4 152 22 0.96 2012 361
Toyota Corolla 1.8 98 35 0.54 2015 278
Volkswagen Jetta 2 85 26 0.84 2015 337
Mid-size BMW 535i 3 224 24 0.84 2015 374
Ford Fusion 2.5 130 26 0.528 2015 338
Honda Accord 2 138 29 0.78 2015 302
Hyundai Sonata 2.4 183 29 0.504 2015 308
Infiniti M / Q70 3.7 246 21 0.66 2015 428
Infiniti Q50 3.7 245 23 0.66 2015 386
Kia Optima 2.4 143 27 0.504 2015 330
Lexus ES 350 3.5 200 24 0.66 2015 361
Lexus GS350 3.5 228 23 0.66 2015 392
Lincoln MKZ 2 172 25 0.504 2015 413
Mercedes E400 3 245 23 1.02 2015 378
Nissan Altima 2.5 136 31 0.528 2015 284
Toyota Camry 2.5 133 28 0.66 2015 317
Toyota Avalon 3.5 200 24 0.66 2015 362
Large Audi Q5 2 164 23 0.84 2015 393
BMW 740i 3 235 23 1.14 2015 394
BWM X6 xDrive50i 4.4 298 16 0.84 2011 494
Cadillac Escalade 6.2 300 16 0.84 2013 570
Chevrolet Silverado 6 300 14 0.84 2013 418
Chevrolet Tahoe 6 300 15 0.84 2013 521
Chevrolet Silverado 5.3 235 17 0.72 2007 523
Ford Escape 2.5 125 25 0.504 2015 357
Ford Taurus 2 172 26 0.888 2015 393
Infiniti QX60 3.5 197 22 0.78 2015 385
Mercedes ML450 3.5 200 17 1.14 2011 523
Nissan Pathfinder 3.5 194 23 0.756 2015 387
Porsche Cayenne S 3.6 313 20 1.02 2015 452
Porsche Panamera S 3 313 21 1.14 2015 429
Toyota Highlander 3.5 201 21 0.816 2015 398
Toyota Rav4 2.5 131 26 0.816 2015 342
Volkswagen Touareg 3.6 206 19 1.02 2015 462
24 Y. Yang et al.

Table 11 Performance comparisons for subcompact/compact vehicle class

Battery Electric Combined CO2

Subcompact/ Engine
capacity machine fuel economy emissions
compact (kW)
(kWh) (kW) (mpg) (g/mile)
Conventional 117.44 0.60 - 29.78 303.78
Parallel 137.00 0.77 23.57 37.38 238.71
Power-split 91.50 1.30 82.50 42.33 219.33
Two-mode - - - - -
Series-parallel - - - - -
PHEV 170.00 7.10 98.00 45.76 198.00
EREV 50.67 17.27 123.67 82.06 70.67
EV - 18.80 68.50 113.33 0

Table 12 Performance comparisons for mid-size vehicle class

Battery Electric Combined CO2

Engine
Mid-size capacity machine fuel economy emissions
(kW)
(kWh) (kW) (mpg) (g/mile)
Conventional 187.36 0.65 - 25.50 355.21
Parallel 171.43 0.82 25.57 30.25 296.29
Power-split 142.00 1.55 108.13 38.22 248.13
Two-mode - - - - -
Series-parallel 114.33 1.39 64.67 41.00 220.67
PHEV 71.25 4.63 95.00 63.21 130.25
EREV - - - - -
EV - 22.00 86.00 116.00 0

Table 13 Performance comparisons for large-size vehicle class

Battery Electric Combined CO2

Large/SUV/ Engine
capacity machine fuel economy emissions
truck (kW)
(kWh) (kW) (mpg) (g/mile)
Conventional 228.47 0.88 - 20.24 437.71
Parallel 208.80 1.09 25.00 23.70 356.50
Power-split 142.80 1.85 104.00 31.00 294.80
Two-mode 249.80 2.16 61.80 20.71 430.40
Series-parallel - - - - -
PHEV 245.00 9.40 70.00 34.75 229.00
EREV - - - - -
EV - 62.27 212.50 82.50 0

Furthermore, Table 14 compares the components in each configuration. The electric

machine category only considers the high voltage machines, thus excluding starter motor,
power steering motor, etc. Transmission gearbox counts the automatic transmission with
clutches that are used in conventional gasoline powertrains, while additional gear sets or
clutches are counted separately.
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 25

Table 14 Component counts in each vehicle powertrain

Transmission Additional
Components Electric Additional Fuel
Engine Battery gearbox gear Charger
count machine clutch tank
set
Conventional 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
Parallel 1 1 1 1 0 0/1 1 0
Power-split 1 1 2 0 1/2 0/2 1 0
Two-mode 1 1 2 0 3 4 1 0
Series-parallel 1 1 2 1 0/1 1 1 0
PHEV 1 1 2/1 0/1 2/1/0 0 1 1
EREV 1 1 2 0 0/1 1/3 1 1
EV 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

Figure 16 Comparison for various powertrain configurations based on vehicle classes

(see online version for colours)

Subcompact/compact Conventional
Parallel
Power-split
350.00
300.00 PHEV
250.00 EREV
200.00 EV
150.00 EREV EV
100.00 PHEV
Power-split
50.00 Parallel
0.00 Conventional
Engine Battery Electric Combined
CO2
(kW) Capacity Machine Fuel
emissions
(kWh) (kW) Economy (g/mile)
(mpg)

Mid-size Conventional
Parallel
Power-split
400.00
Series-parallel
300.00
PHEV
EV
200.00 PHEV EV
Series-parallel
100.00 Power-split
Parallel
0.00 Conventional
Engine Battery Electric Combined
CO2
(kW) (kWh) Machine Fuel
emissions
(kW) Economy (g/mile)
(mpg)

Conventional
Large/SUV/Truck Parallel
Power-split
Two-mode
500
PHEV
400
EV EV
300
PHEV
200 Two-mode
100 Power-split
Parallel
0 Conventional
Engine Battery Electric Combined
CO2
(kW) (kWh) Machine Fuel
emissions
(kW) Economy (g/mile)
(mpg)
26 Y. Yang et al.

Typically, hybrid, plug-in hybrid and range extended powertrains increase the vehicle
complexity by adding more electric components. Parallel hybrid has the smallest
modification from the conventional powertrains, whereas two-mode hybrid significantly
changes the powertrain configuration and adds considerable complexity. On the other
hand, EV has the simplest configuration with no engine or transmission gearbox except
for a speed-reduction gear.
To sum up, Figure 17 compares fuel economy, CO2 emissions, and powertrain
complexity of the presented electrified powertrains along with the conventional ICE
powertrain. The efficiency is compared by calculating the average efficiency in each
configuration using Tables 11 to 13, where the maximum efficiency, i.e., EV efficiency is
selected as the benchmark reference, assigning the value of 300 in Figure 17. The CO2
emissions are converted into the same scale by using the emissions of the conventional
vehicles as the reference benchmark, where the value of 300 is assigned. Finally, the
powertrain complexity is calculated based on Table 14 by adding the total component
number in each configuration. The average value is taken for the cells where multiple
configurations exist. The two-mode hybrid is selected as the benchmark reference
because it has the maximum value.

Figure 17 Powertrain comparisons in terms of fuel economy and complexity (see online version
for colours)

Parallel
High

Power-split Conventional
H
ig

H
ig
h

300
Low
Lo

200
Lo

Lo

100
w

High
gh Low
w 0
Two-mode Lo
ow
Low
EV
High
w
Lo

Lo
Low

w
h
ig

H
H

ig

Fuel economy
h

Series-
EREV
High

parallel CO2 emissions

Powertrain complexity
PHEV

Comparing the powertrain architectures, it can be observed that parallel hybrids achieve
fuel efficiency improvement and emissions reductions without substantially changing the
powertrain complexity. They offer the simplest and most cost-effective solution for
electrification based on existing conventional powertrains. Hence, parallel hybrids have
been widely applied by a large number of OEMs as seen in Table 1. On the other hand,
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 27

full hybrids including power-split, two-mode, and series-parallel powertrains require

significant powertrain modification and system integration, but they also achieve higher
fuel economy and lower emissions by utilising higher degrees of electric power.
Power-split hybrids are by far the most popular hybrid powertrains in terms of sales.
Toyota and Ford contributed to more than 70% of hybrid vehicle sales in the USA
in 2014 by using power-split powertrains (Cobb, 2015). Similarly, series-parallel
hybrids are successfully commercialised using full hybrid configurations, which realise
the balance between the system complexity and fuel improvement. As for two-mode
hybrids, they were designed to achieve both performance and efficiency, especially
at high speed range where the power-split powertrains typically has dropped
efficiency (Yang and Emadi, 2013). However, the powertrain cost and complexity are too
high to justify their fuel economy gains and thus this type of powertrain has been
discontinued since 2014.
In contrast, powertrains with higher degrees of electrification such as EREVs,
PHEVs, and EVs achieve substantially higher fuel economy gains. Typically, much
larger battery capacity is used and charging from external electrical ports enables the
displacement of conventional fuels. Both PHEVs and EREVs utilise double energy
sources to improve the fuel economy and reduce emissions, and the drive range is not
constrained by the battery capacity. The difference between the two lies in a typical
longer electric drive range in EREVs in which range extenders are used for backup and
extended ranges.
Finally, EVs have the highest fuel economy, zero emissions, and the lowest
powertrain complexity from Figure 17. However, the threshold of EVs lies in cost and
battery constraints. The added electric systems typically require new vehicle platforms or
major redesigns so that the research and manufacturing costs are high. Limited battery
energy density requires larger battery packs so that the weight and costs further increase.
Additionally, current drawbacks such as long recharging time and battery performance
degrade under extreme temperature all need to be improved before EVs can dominate the
markets.

10 Conclusions

This paper comprehensively reviews the state-of-the-art electrified powertrains that have
been developed and commercialised in North American automotive industry. Seven types
of electrified powertrain have been discussed while the powertrain structures and
operating modes have been analysed. In addition, a comprehensive database of electrified
powertrains and components has been created for each category. Furthermore, all the
electrified powertrains and the conventional engine-powered powertrain have been
compared in terms of fuel economy, powertrain complexity, and CO2 emissions using a
radar chart. Through increasing electrification, vehicle efficiency can be improved,
leading to reduced dependence on petroleum fuels and minimising vehicle emissions. It
can be seen through the examination of the current industry that vehicle electrification is
necessary and worthwhile and will continue to drive automotive technologies in the long
run.
28 Y. Yang et al.

References
Burress, T.A., Campbell, S.L., Coomer, C.L., Ayers, C.W., Wereszczak, A.A., Cunningham, J.P.,
Marlino, L.D., Seiber, L.E. and Lin, H.T. (2010) Evaluation of the 2010 Toyota Prius Hybrid
Synergy Drive System, ORNL/TM-2010/253, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
Tennessee.
Burress, T.A., Coomer, C.L., Campbell, S.L., Wereszczak, A.A., Cunningham, J.P., Marlino, L.D.,
Seiber, L.E. and Lin, H.T. (2009) Evaluation of the 2008 Lexus LS 600H Hybrid Synergy
Drive System, UT-Battelle, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Chan, C.C. (2007) ‘The state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles’, Proceedings of
the IEEE, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp.704–718.
Cobb, J. (2015) December 2014 Dashboard, 6 January [online]
http://www.hybridcars.com/december-2014-dashboard/ (accessed 1 March 2015).
Eckermann, E. (2001) World History of the Automobile, Society of Automotive Engineers Press,
Warrendale, PA, USA.
Ehsani, M., Gao, Y. and Emadi, A. (2009) Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell
Vehicles: Fundamentals, Theory, and Design, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Emadi, A., Rajashekara, K., Williamson, S.S. and Lukic, S.M. (2005) ‘Topological overview
of hybrid electric and fuel cell vehicular power system architecture and configuration’,
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., Vol. 54, No. 3, pp.763–770.
Gehm, R. (2013) ‘Inside Honda's new two-motor 50-mpg Accord Hybrid’, SAE International
Automotive Engineering Magazine, 18 December.
German, J. (2011) ‘Global vehicle fuel economy and GHG emissions regulations for light and
heavy duty vehicles’, MIIT Workshop, Beijing, China.
Heymann, E. (2014) CO2 Emissions from Cars: Regulation via EU Emissions Trading System
better than Stricter CO2 Limits, Deutsche Bank Research, Frankfurt, Germany, December 15.
International Energy Outlook (2014) US Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA,
September.
J.D. Power Cars Research, McGraw Hill Financial [online]
http://autos.jdpower.com/new-cars/index.htm (accessed 1 March 2015).
Kim, Y.S., Min, B.S., Sim, H.S. and Lee, K.S. (2011) ‘Sonata hybrid the first full hybrid electric
vehicle from Hyundai’, ATZ Autotechnology, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.10–17.
McCarthy, J.E. and Yacobucci, B.D. (2014) ‘Cars, trucks, and climate: EPA regulation of
greenhouse gases from mobile sources’, Congressional Research Service, March 13.
Miller, M.A., Holmes, A.G., Conlon, B.M. and Savagian, P.J. (2011) ‘The GM ‘Voltec’ 4ET50
multi-mode electric’, SAE International.
Muta, K., Yamazaki, M. and Tokieda, J. (2004) Development of New-Generation Hybrid System
THS II – Drastic Improvement of Power Performance and Fuel Economy, SAE Technical
Paper, 2004-01-0064, DOI: 10.4271/2004-01-0064.
Odyssey Battery (2010) 2010 Automotive/LTV Battery Selection Guide
[online] http://www.odysseybattery.com/documents/us-ody-sg-web_0612.pdf
(accessed 1 March 2015).
Shimizu, H., Okubo, T., Hirano, I. and Ishikawa, S. (2013) Development of an Integrated
Electrified Powertrain for a Newly Developed Electric Vehicle, SAE Technical Paper,
2013-01-1759, 2013, DOI:10.4271/2013-01-1759.
Slack, M. (2012) ‘Our dependence on foreign oil is declining’, The White House Blog, March.
Staunton, R.H., Ayers, C.W., Chiasson, J.N., Burress, T.A. and Marlino, L.D. (2006) Evaluation of
2004 Toyota Prius Hybrid Electric Drive System, ORNL/TM-2006/423, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
 State-of-the-art electrified powertrains – hybrid, plug-in, and electric vehicles 29

Tate, E.D., Harpster, M.O. and Savagian, P.J. (2009) ‘The electrification of the automobile: from
conventional hybrid, to plug-in hybrids, to extended-range electric vehicles’, SAE Int. J.
Passeng. Cars – Electron. Electr. Syst., Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.156–166, DOI: 10.4271/2008-01-
0458.
Tuttle, D.P. and Kockelman, K.M. (2012) ‘Electrified vehicle technology trends, infrastructure
implications and cost comparisons’, Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Vol. 51,
No. 1, pp.35–51.
US Department of Energy, ‘Fuel economy’ [online] http://www.fueleconomy.gov/
(accessed October 2014).
US Environmental Protection Agency (2014) Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide
Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 through 2014, October.
US Environmental Protection Agency (2015) Explaining Electric and Plug-In Hybrid Electric
Vehicles, 2 March.
Wu, G., Zhang, X. and Dong, Z. (2014) ‘Powertrain architectures of electrified vehicles: review,
classification and comparison’, Journal of the Franklin Institute, Vol. 352, No. 2, pp.425–448.
Yang, Y. and Emadi, A. (2011) ‘Integrated electro-mechanical transmission systems in hybrid
electric vehicles’, IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Chicago, IL, September.
Yang, Y. and Emadi, A. (2013) ‘Hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles’, Wiley Encyclopaedia of
Electrical and Electronics Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, pp.1–22.
Yang, Y., Suntharalingam, P. and Jiang, W. (2014) ‘Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles’, Advanced
Electric Drive Vehicles, Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press, pp.465–490.
Zhang, X., Li, C., Kum, D. and Peng, H. (2012) ‘Prius+ and volt−: configuration analysis of
power-split hybrid vehicles with a single planetary gear’, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology, Vol. 61, No. 8, pp.3544–3552.