Energy 209 (2020) 118286

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Comparison of four-wheel-drive hybrid powertrain configurations

Fei Ju a, Weichao Zhuang b, **, Liangmo Wang a, d, *, Zhe Zhang c
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, 200 Xiaolingwei Street, Nanjing, 210094, China
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 211189, China
c
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun, 130012, China
d
School of Mechanical Engineering, Wanjiang University of Technology, Ma’anshan, 243031, China

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

Article history: The stringent fuel economy and emission standards enforce sport sedan and sport utility vehicle employ
Received 9 March 2020 four-wheel-drive (4WD) hybrid powertrain to achieve better fuel economy and acceleration performance
Received in revised form simultaneously. This paper reviews and conducts a comparative study of four 4WD hybrid configuration
28 June 2020
types: series, series-parallel, power-split and compound-split configurations. To make a fair comparison
Accepted 30 June 2020
Available online 23 July 2020
of fuel economy and acceleration performance, an integrated hierarchical optimization framework is
presented, which solves the parameters sizing and energy management problem simultaneously. The
pareto-front optimal design of each configuration is derived. According to detailed energy analysis, a
Keywords:
Hybrid electric vehicle
novel multi-mode configuration is proposed by adding clutches between planetary gear nodes of
Four wheel drive compound-split configuration. By combining multiple modes, the proposed configuration achieves better
Evolutionary algorithms fuel-saving and acceleration performance than initial configuration. Moreover, this comparative study
Dynamic programming takes into consideration the cost, control complexity and off-road performance. The results show that the
Multi-mode hybrid powertrain power-split one adopting three motor/generators (MGs) shows superior fuel economy and acceleration
performance than others, while the proposed multi-mode configuration maintains a competing per-
formance with less MGs. In addition, the series-parallel configuration has great comprehensive potential.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction electricity generation. Since there is no mechanical coupling be-

1.1. Literature review
Hybrid powertrain technology which combines multiple power
sources is recognized as an effective way to reduce vehicle fuel
consumption and emissions [1,2]. The vehicle incorporating inter-
nal combustion engine and electric motors is defined as hybrid
electric vehicle (HEV) [3,4]. Compared to conventional vehicle, HEV
can improve fuel economy through engine downsizing, regenera-
tive braking and optimized engine operation [5].
In general, HEVs can be divided into three groups based on the
configurations: series, series-parallel and power-split [6,7]. The
series configuration adopts a motor for driving and a generator for
* Corresponding author. School of Mechanical Engineering, Nanjing University of
Science and Technology, 200 Xiaolingwei Street, Nanjing, 210094, China.
** Corresponding author. School of Mechanical Engineering, Southeast University,
Nanjing, 211189, China.
E-mail addresses: wezhuang@seu.edu.cn (W. Zhuang), liangmo@njust.edu.cn
(L. Wang).
tween the engine and the drive shaft, the engine can be operated at
its highest efficiency [8]. In series-parallel HEV, both engine and
motor/generator (MG) have mechanical connection with the output
shaft and they can simultaneously provide power to drive the
vehicle [9]. The power-split one utilizes a power-split device (PSD)
to achieve the electric-continuous variable transmission (ECVT)
function to decouple the engine from the vehicle speed, resulting in
best fuel economy performance among three configurations [10,11].
The above three configurations have been widely used in small-
sized two-wheel-drive (2WD) passenger vehicles successfully,
such as Nissan e-Power, Honda Accord Hybrid and Toyota Prius [7].
However, the hybrid powertrain for heavy-duty or off-road vehicle
with four-wheel-drive (4WD) has not been fully explored.
The main solution of 4WD hybrid (4WDH) configuration is
adding an additional motor to the rear axle of a conventional 2WD
HEV [12]. Similar to 2WD HEV, 4WDH configurations are mainly
categorized into four groups: series, series-parallel, power-split and
compound-split [13,14]. The series 4WDH configuration uses an
engine-generator unit to generate electricity and two motor/gen-
erators (MGs) at front and rear axles to drive the vehicle. The

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118286
0360-5442/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286

parallel 4WDH configuration is the most popular 4WDH configu-
ration available in the market due to its excellent performance and
control simplicity [15,16]. It can be referred to as series-parallel
configuration because the hybrid system can be operated as a se-
ries mode if the engine and MG at front axle is decoupled from the
wheels [17]. For the 4WDH power-split configuration, the front axle
is driven by a conventional power-split hybrid powertrain, while
the rear axle is driven by a motor [18]. The power-split device at the
front axle enables ECVT function [19]. However, three MGs are
adopted, incurring more cost and increasing system complexity.
Another power-split configuration using only two MGs is proposed
by Yoshimura, and referred to as the compound-split 4WDH
configuration [20]. The two outputs of this configuration are con-
nected to the front and rear axles to realize the 4WD function. Qin
and Pan used a similar configuration to design a hybrid track-type
dozer and 4WD pick-up trucks respectively [21,22]. Recently, the
hybrid powertrain technology is moving forward to multi-mode
design, realized by adding clutches between nodes of planetary
gear sets. By switching the clutch states, multiple operating con-
figurations can be realized in the same powertrain, resulting in
better fuel economy and driving performance than single mode
HEV [23,24].
In the past decade, great progress has been made in EMS for
electrified vehicles with the application of optimization methods or
machine learning algorithms, such as dynamic programming (DP)
[25], Pontryagin’s minimum principle (PMP) [26e28], reinforce-
ment learning (RL) [29,30]. In addition, nonlinear model predictive
control and distributed optimal control are developed for online
implementable EMS [31,32]. For the HEV configuration sizing, the
EMS needs to maximize the fuel economy theoretically. Thus, the
optimal algorithm is suitable for the offline sizing problem.
cycle), 4.31 L/100 km (highway cycle) and 4.15 L/100 km (composite
cycle) respectively. Third, a comprehensive comparison study is
conducted to compare all configurations from the perspective of
cost, fuel economy, acceleration performance, off-road perfor-
mance and control complexity.
1.4. Organization of this paper
The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows. Section 2
presents the dynamics modeling of powertrain component for
different 4WDH configurations. In section 3, powertrain parame-
ters sizing based on a hierarchical optimization framework is
conducted. Section 4 introduces the multi-mode 4WDH configu-
ration with six operating modes. Section 5 conducts a compre-
hensive comparison of all presented 4WDH configurations,
including the cost, control complexity, fuel economy, off-road and
acceleration performance. Section 6 concludes the paper.
2. 4WDH configurations modeling
Different hybrid configurations have been studied over the past
few years. A comparative study between series, parallel and power-
split 2WD HEVs is conducted in Ref. [33]. The power-split config-
uration shows the superior fuel saving performance, while the
parallel one has the best driving performance. In this paper, we will
compare the fuel economy and driving performance of series,
series-parallel, power-split and compound-split 4WDH configura-
tions. For fair comparison, different configurations will use the
same engine and battery pack, MGs used in each configuration are
also introduced in this section.

2.1. Powertrain dynamics

1.2. Motivation of this work

2.1.1. Series 4WDH configuration

Even there are several 4WD hybrid configurations, the pro/cons
Fig. 1 (a) illustrates power flow of the series 4WDH configura-
of each configuration have not been investigated and a systematic
tions, where K1 represents the gear ratio of the MG1 reducer, K1F
comparison between various 4WDH configurations were missing.
and K1R represent the gear ratio of front axle and rear axle main
First, for 4WDH configuration, existing studies still rest on en-
reducer respectively, uð$Þ represents the angular acceleration of the
ergy optimization of a specified configuration, with a limited
corresponding component, Tð$Þ denotes the torque of the corre-
comparison between various configurations. When comparing
sponding component, Pfuel and Pbatt are the power of the engine
different configurations, components sizing and parameter opti-
mization should be carried out in priority to ensure the fairness of
the comparative study.
Second, different from 2WD HEV, the 4WDH configurations
unfold significant advantages in acceleration and off-road perfor-
mance while cannot avoid the weakness in cost and control
complexity. To the best of our knowledge, a comparison of existing
4WDH configurations, in terms of cost, fuel economy, acceleration
performance, off-road performance and control complexity, is still
lacked.

1.3. Contribution of this work

The main contributions of this paper are highlighted as follows.

First, the optimal sizing of each 4WDH configuration (series, series-
parallel, power-split and compound-split) is obtained by a hierar-
chical optimization framework integrating evolutionary algorithms
and dynamic programming. In this way, fuel economy and accel-
eration performance are greatly improved. For the case study, ac-
celeration time is reduced by 17.28%, fuel consumption under city
and highway cycles are reduced by 11.27% and 5.49%. Second, a
novel multi-mode 4WDH configuration is proposed based on a
rigorous energy efficiency analysis. Combining the benefits of
compound-split and parallel configurations, the fuel economy of
the multi-mode configuration is increased to 4.01 L/100 km (city Fig. 1. Power flow of series and series-parallel 4WDH configurations.
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286
and battery pack.
According to Fig. 1 (a), powertrain dynamics for the series
4WDH configuration is given in Eq. (1).
8 h MG1 þ Is Þu_ MG1 ¼ TMG1 þiFS11
< TMG1 ¼ Te K1
 K1F þ TMG3 K1R  Tload ¼
TMG2
:_
uout Iv þ IMG2 K1F 2 þ IMG3 K1R 2
where Tload is the drag torque from the road, Iv is given in Eq. (2) and
other Ið$Þ is the inertia of each component.
Iv ¼ mRtire 2
where m, Rtire denote vehicle mass and wheel radius.
2.1.2. Series-parallel 4WDH configuration
As shown in Fig. 1 (b), the MG in front wheel is mounted on the
input of the automatic transmission (AT), which is referred as the
pre-transmission configuration. More specially, its power flow is
depicted in Fig. 1 (b), where GR is the gear ratio of the transmission,
K2 , K2F and K2R express the same implications as the series
configuration’s.
According to Fig. 1 (b), the powertrain dynamics for series-
parallel 4WDH configuration is given in Eq. (3).

Te þ TMG1 K2 K2F GR þ TMG2 K2R  Tload
h  i
¼ u_ out Iv þ Ie þ IMG1 R2 2 ðK2F GRÞ2 þ IMG2 K2R 2
2.1.3. Power-split 4WDH configuration
The power-split and compound-split 4WDH configurations both
use the PGs to couple the engine, MGs, and vehicle driveline. The
planetary gear is generally composed by sun gear, carrier gear and
ring gear, whose rotational speed relationship is shown in Eq. (4).
us S þ ur R ¼ uc ðR þ SÞ
where us , ur , and uc represents angular speeds of the sun gear, ring
gear, and carrier, respectively. R and S are the radii of the ring and
sun gear.
Fig. 2 shows the lever diagram of the power-split hybrid pow-
ertrain. The engine is connected to C1 (carrier gear of PG1) through
a one-way clutch, and MG1 located at S1 (sun gear of PG1) is
responsible for tuning the speed of the engine. MG2 is connected to
S2 (sun gear of PG2). The powertrain dynamics at the front axle is
modeled in Eq. (5), including torque equilibrium at three PG nodes
Fig. 2. PSD diagram in power-split 4WDH configuration.
3
and the speed constraint between PG nodes.
ðIe þ Ic Þu_ e ¼ Te  FðR11 þ S11 Þ
ðI
Ir þ IMG2 ðR12 =S12 Þ2 þ IF u_ o ¼ ½  TF =K3F þ TMG2 ðR12 =S12 Þ þ FR11 
(1) ðR11 þ S11 Þu_ e ¼ R11 u_ out þ S11 u_ MG1
(5)
where F denotes the internal gear force of PGs. The state space
representation of the dynamics for the front axle of the power-split
configuration is Eq. (6).
(2) In addition, the torque balance at the rear axle is shown in Eq.
(7).
TMG3  TR =K3R ¼ u_ out ðIR þ IMG3 Þ (6)
In Eqs. (6) and (7), IF and IR represent the equivalent vehicle
inertias of the front and rear axles. Since it is assumed that all
wheels do not slip in this paper, the equivalent vehicle inertia of
each wheel is determined by the drag torques available at front and
rear wheels, i.e., TF and TR . The sum of TF and TR is equal to Tload , i.e.,
TF þ TR ¼ Tload
(7)
IF þ IR ¼ IV
2.1.4. Compound-split 4WDH configuration
(3) The lever diagram of the compound-split 4WDH configuration is
depicted in Fig. 3. The C2 (carrier gear of PG2) is delivering the
power to the front wheels, while the rear wheels are connected to
S2 (sun gear of PG2) as well as MG2.
Similar to the state space representation of the power-split
4WDH configuration, the powertrain dynamics of the compound-
split 4WDH configuration is presented in Eq. (9).
2.2. Vehicle longitudinal dynamics
(4) Only the longitudinal vehicle dynamics is considered in this
paper. The resistance of the vehicle Tload consists of the rolling
resistance, gradient resistance, air drag and inertial resistance, as
shown in Eq. (10).
 
dv
Tload ¼ Rtire mgfcosa þ 0:5CD Af rv2 þ mgsina þ dm ; (8)
dt
where v is the vehicle speed, and d denotes the rotational mass
conversion factor. The acceleration of the vehicle a can be calcu-
lated by Eq. (11), where u_ out is the angular acceleration at the
Fig. 3. PSD diagram in compound-split 4WDH configuration.
4 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286

driving shaft. The energy efficiency of MG is also a function of the speed and
output torque as shown in Fig. 5.
dv The power of the MG PMG is calculated by Eq. (16), where TMG
a¼ ¼ u_ out Rtire ; (9)
dt and uMG are the torque and rotational speed, respectively. If the
signs of the electric machine torque and speed are the same, the
MG is acting as a motor, and k ¼  1; if the signs of the electric
2.3. Battery machine torque and speed are different, it means that the MG is
acting as a generator, and k ¼ 1.
The battery power Pbatt is related to MGs power by
  PMG ¼ TMG uMG heff k (16)
Pbatt ¼ TMG1 uMG1 hiMG1 þ TMG2 uMG2 hiMG2 hic
(10)
i2f1; 1g;

where hc is the cycle-average efficiency of the DC-AC converter, and

3. Integrated optimization approach
i depends on the direction of electric power, i.e., i ¼  1 when
Pbatt  0; i ¼ 1 when Pbatt < 0. In this paper, the battery is modeled
To make a fair comparison between different 4WDH configu-
by an equivalent circuit model [12]. The rate of the SOC change
rations, the component sizes of each configuration should be
_ is proportional to the current at the battery terminals can be
(SOC) decided systematically. Table .1 shows the main vehicle parameters
achieved by used in this paper, which are based on the Toyota hybrid RAV4 [35].
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi All configurations adopt the same engine and battery sizes for fair
Voc  Voc 2  4Pbatt Rint comparison. Since different configurations have different arrange-
_ ¼ 
SOC : (11)
2Qbatt Rint ment and numbers of MGs, the sizes of MGs are determined by
following the rules below. The MGs of power-split 4WDH HEV
where Pbatt is the power at the battery terminals, Ibatt is the current follows hybrid RAV4’s, while MG1 and MG2 of series-parallel and
(positive during discharge), Voc is the open-circuit voltage, and Rbatt compound-split hybrids are the same as power-split one. The
is the equivalent internal resistance that is related to SOC and the traction motors (MG2 and MG3) in series HEV are the same as the
direction of the current. traction motor at front axle of power-split configuration, and the
generator is selected based on reference [36].
2.4. Engine and electric machine In addition to the component sizes mentioned above, the gear
ratios of final drive, transmission and PGs also have a great impact
The quasi-static models are used to model the engine and MG in on the fuel economy and acceleration performance of hybrid
this paper, where the instantaneous. powertrains. To explore the fuel saving and acceleration potential,
Fuel rate m_ fuel is a function of the engine speed ue and output this section will present an integrated hierarchical optimization
torque Te as shown in Eq. (14) [34]. framework, which will optimize the gear ratios through fuel
economy and acceleration performance evaluation. The energy
m_ fuel ¼ ffuel ðue ; Te Þ (14) management system in lower-layer is optimized by the global
optimal algorithm, dynamic programming (DP), while the upper-
where the engine torque is limited by the maximum torque Te max , layer adopts different evolutionary algorithms to optimize the
i.e., the black line in Fig. 4. driveline parameters [37,38]. This numerical study is mainly carried
out in MATLAB. As shown in Fig. 6, upper layer is responsible for
Te max ¼ ftorque max ðue Þ (15) evolution of parameters while lower layer calculates objective
functions including fuel economy and acceleration time.

Fig. 4. Engine brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) map. Fig. 5. The efficiency map of the MG1 in Fig. 3.
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286 5

Table 1
Technical specifications and parameters of four 4WDH configurations.

Component Parameter Configurations

Series Series-parallel Power-split Compound-split

Vehicle Vehicle mass/m 1700 kg

Aerodynamic resistance coefficient/CD 0.35
Vehicle frontal area/Af 2.94 m2
Rolling friction coefficient/f 0.015
Wheel radius/Rtire 0.36 m
Engine Maximum power 139 kW
Maximum torque 270 Nm
MG1 Rated power 87 kW 38 kW 38 kW 38 kW
Maximum torque 327 Nm 143 Nm 143 Nm 143 Nm
MG2 Rated power 55 kW 55 kW 55 kW 55 kW
Maximum torque 207 Nm 207 Nm 207 Nm 207 Nm
MG3 Rated power 55 kW N/A 48 kW N/A
Maximum torque 207 Nm N/A 180 Nm N/A
Battery Energy capacity 1.95 kWh
Rated voltage 300 V

Fig. 6. Schematic of the hierarchical optimization framework.

3.1. Energy management strategy

The EMS of HEVs can be generally classified into four categories

i.e., rule-based control, global optimization control, instantaneous
optimization control and model predictive control [39]. A global
optimization method, DP is adopted in this paper to understand the
maximal vehicle fuel economy [40].
DP is a well-known optimization principle (Bellman, 1957),
whose idea is to transform a whole problem into a multi-stage
decision problem, that is, a series of single-stage problems [41].
In the optimal control problem of HEV, the main purpose is to
minimize the fuel consumption while meeting the driver’s power
demand and maintaining the balance of the battery SOC on the
given driving cycles, which are city cycle, Federal Urban Driving
Schedule (FUDS), and highway cycle, Highway Fuel Economy Test
cycle (HWFET). The whole driving cycle is divided into multiple
stages and solved separately.
The Eq. (17) shows the objective function of the optimal control
problem.
N 
X   2
Jfuel ðХ ðtÞjLÞ ¼ gfuel ðkÞ þ m1 Pshift ðkÞ þ m2 SOCdes  SOCf
k¼0
(17)
where the first term is the engine fuel consumption, the second
term is a gear shift penalty to avoid the frequent shift for the series-
parallel configuration and the third term is the terminal state
penalty to enforce the battery SOC bring back to the original value
at the end of the trip. In Eq. (18), L is a standard cycle of FUDS and
P
HWFET, N k¼0 gfuel ðkÞ is the fuel consumption of the HEV through
the driving cycle, SOCdes is the desired SOC at the end of driving
cycle, and SOCf is the terminal SOC value. At the same time, the
range of the state variables and the control variables is limited by
the system itself, such as the MG speed cannot exceed a certain
limit. In summary, the constraints of the optimal control problem
are listed in Eq. (18).
6 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286

8 3.3. Evolutionary algorithms

>
> Tengmin  Teng  Tengmax
>
>
< TMGmin  TMG  TMGmax
uengmin  ueng  uengmax
>
>
>
> u  uMG  uMGmax
: MGmin
SOCmin  SOC  SOCmax :
To execute the DP, the continuous state and control spaces
should be discretized into finite elements. However, the state and
control variables should be selected carefully because the compu-
tation burden will increase exponentially with the increase in their
numbers and magnitudes [42].
State of charge (SOC) and engine speed (ueng ) are chosen as the
states for all 4WD configurations except the series-parallel one. The
engine speed in series-parallel HEV is eliminated because it is
proportion to the vehicle speed. Considering computational burden
of DP, the engine torque can be determined by the best BSFC line
based on the engine speed [10]. For 4WD configurations, torque
ratio between front and rear shafts is an essential control variable.
However, the compound-split configuration is unable to adjust the
torque ratio arbitrarily. In power-split and compound-split config-
urations, MG1 torque (TMG1 ) is also selected as the control variable.
Table 2 shows the state and control variables used in this paper.
For the sizing problem, selecting suitable evolutionary algo-
(18) rithms are significant to search the optimal parameters with high
efficiency. Typical representatives are particle swarm optimization
(PSO) and non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm with elitism
approach (NSGA-II) [43,44]. To validate the performance of two
algorithms, 4 classic benchmark functions are selected, as listed in
Table 4. For fairness, maximal iterations and agent size of two al-
gorithms are all set as 200 and 24. Further parameters can be found
in Refs. [45,46].
Table 5 shows the results of 4 test functions, including the
average calculated by 20 independent runs and the error compared
to theoretical optimum fmin . For F1 and F2 , the value calculated by
NSGA-II is closer to the theoretical value. However, for F3 and F4 ,
PSO has better convergence performance than NSGA-II. It can be
found that NSGA-II is applicable for problems with larger Dim,
while PSO can deal with problem with smaller Dim. Accordingly, in
this paper, NSGA-II is used in series-parallel case and PSO is
adopted in the remaining three cases.
4. Comparative study of configurations

3.2. Optimal sizing
In the upper layer of the integrated optimization method, a
multi-objective optimization problem is.
Formulated as Eq. (19) to derive the optimal sizes of each
configuration.
n o
min f ðxÞ ¼ Jfuel ðxi jLÞ þ Jacc ðxi Þ; L ¼ ½FUDS; HWFET
This section will compare the fuel economy and acceleration
performance of series, series-parallel, power-split and compound-
split 4WDH configurations introduced in Section 2. For fair com-
parison, the parameters of each configuration are optimized using
the integrated optimization method introduced in Section 3. This
section will start with the case study of a series 4WDH powertrain.
(19) 4.1. Case study of parameter optimization

where xi is the parameter to optimized, Jfuel is the fuel consumption
calculated by DP on the city and highway driving cycles (repre-
sented by Lp100km), and Jacc is the acceleration time from 0 to
100kph (represented by T100kph) as shown in Eq. (20).
ð
100 ð
100
1 m
Jacc ¼ dv ¼ dv
av 3:6Tout max ðv; GRÞRtire
0 0
where Tout max ðv; GR =modeÞ represents the maximum output tor-
que of the powertrain in each gear position (series-parallel
configuration) at speed v.
The optimized parameters of each configuration are listed in
Table 3. The gear ratio ranges of motor reducer (K1 K2 ) are deter-
mined by the maximum speed of MGs while the gear ratio ranges of
main reducers (KjF KiR , j ¼ 1 : 1 : 4) are determined by the driving
demand. For the 6-speed transmission in series-parallel configu-
ration, gear ratios ranges (GRj , j ¼ 1 : 1 : 6) are selected based on
Reference 0. In addition, the ring/sun gear ratio of PGs (R1j = S1j R2j =
S2j , j ¼ 1; 2) also need optimization.
By applying the integrated hierarchical optimization framework
(Fig. 6), the Pareto front of the optimization problem is obtained. To
further compare two evolutionary algorithms, the case study
adopts both PSO and NSGA-II (maximal iterations and agent size
are all set as 30 and 12). Fig. 8 shows the fuel economy and accel-
eration results of parameter optimization for series 4WDH pow-
(20) ertrain. It can be found that two algorithms almost achieve the
same performance while PSO is still better than NSGA-II on this
case whose Dim is 3.
It takes about 10 h to derive the Pareto-front solution (T100kph
is 9.19s, Lp100km under FUDS and HWFET are 4.25L and 4.99L
respectively) on a computer with Intel I9e9900K @ 3.6 GHz CPU.
Compared to the initial design, the Pareto-front solution reduces
the acceleration time by 17.28%, improves the fuel economy by
11.27% and 5.49% on city and highway driving cycles, respectively.
In addition, fuel economy and acceleration performance are con-
flicting obviously. The slight acceleration performance improve-
ment would significantly reduce the fuel economy as shown in
Fig. 7 (b).
Fig. 8 summaries the performance improvement for all four

Table 2
State and control variables meshing of different configurations.

Configuration State variables X Meshing Control variables U Meshing

Series SOC [0.4:0.01:0.7] Torque ratio [0:0.05:1]

ueng [0:200:5200]rpm
Series-parallel SOC [0.4:0.01:0.7] Gear ratio [3.615,2.048,1.3,0.902,0.914,0.756]
Torque ratio [0:0.05:1]
Power-split SOC [0.4:0.01:0.7] TMG1 [-140:5:140] Nm
ueng [0:200:5200]rpm Torque ratio [0:0.05:1]
Compound-split SOC [0.4:0.01:0.7] TMG1 [-140:5:140] Nm
ueng [0:200:5200]rpm
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286 7

Table 3
Parameters information of different configurations to be optimized.

Configurations Optimized Parameters Optimization Range

Series K1 , K1F , K1R [0.50 1.92], [2.50 10.00], [2.50 10.00]

Series-parallel GR1 , GR2 , GR3 , [3.21 4.52], [2.05 3.20], [1.35 1.94]
GR4 , GR5 , GR6 [1.10 1.32], [0.86 1.08], [0.65 0.83]
K2 , K2F , K2R [0.50 1.92], [2.50 5.00], [2.50 10.00]
Power-split R11 =S11 , R12 =S12 , K3F , K3R [1.30 3.70], [1.30 3.70], [2.50 5.00], [2.50 10.00]
Compound-split R21 =S21 , R22 =S22 [1.30 3.70], [1.30 3.70], [2.50 5.00], [2.50 10.00]
K4F , K4R

Table 4
Classic benchmark functions.

Function Dim Range f min

Pn
F1 ðxÞ ¼ i¼1 ½xi 10 cosð2pxi Þ þ 10
2 10 [-5.12,5.12] 0
Pn pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
F2 ðxÞ ¼ i¼1 xi sinð jxi jÞ 10 [-500,500] 4189
1 2 [-5,5] 1.0316285
F3 ðxÞ ¼ 4x1 2  4x2 2 þ x1 6 þ x1 x2 þ 4x2 4  2:1x1 4
3
 2   2 [-5,10], 0.398
5:1 5 1
F4 ðxÞ ¼ x2  2 x1 2 þ x1  6 þ 10 1  cosx1 þ 10 [0,15]
4p p 8p

Dim, Range, fmin represent variable number, search range and theoretical optimum.

4WDH configurations after parameters optimization. Each config- observed in Table 6, revealing the excellent dynamic response
uration achieves considerable acceleration performance and fuel contributed by three MGs. The acceleration performance of series
economy improvement. configuration is relatively poor because the engine in series
configuration cannot drive the vehicle directly. Increasing the MG
4.2. Comparison results size could improve the launching performance. In addition, the
series-parallel and compound-split configurations show similar
In terms of acceleration performance, the power-split configu- acceleration performance.
ration shows the best performance among all configurations as Fig. 9 shows the simulation results of each configuration with
sized parameters under FUDS including vehicle speed trajectory,
battery SOC, components’ rotational speed and torque. The gear
shifting trajectory of the transmission in series-parallel configura-
Table 5
Results of two evolutionary algorithms.
tion is also given in Fig. 9 (b). Since the charge-sustained mode is
adopted in this paper to make a fair comparison between different
Function PSO NSGA-II Error compared to configurations, the terminal SOC of each configuration is enforced
f min
back to its initial value.
F1 3.9798378 0.0400922 Inf Inf To compare the energy efficiency of different 4WDH configu-
F2 3163.357 4052.643 24.48% 3.27%
rations, several performance indicators are computed, including
F3 1.0316284 1.0315065 0% 1.18%
F4 0.3979887 0.3978874 0% 0.03% the average thermal efficiency of engine and total regenerative

Fig. 7. Optimization results using PSO and NSGA-II.

8 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286
Fig. 8. Improvement level in three aspects of various configurations.
Table 6
Pareto front results of all 4WDH configurations.
Configurations Series
Initial Design T100kph (s) 11.11
L100km under FUDS (L/100 km) 4.79
L100km under HWFET (L/100 km) 5.28
Optimal Pareto-front T100kph (s) 9.19
L100km under FUDS (L/100 km) 4.25
L100km under HWFET (L/100 km) 4.99
braking energy as listed in Table 7.
(1) Average thermal efficiency of engine: the series-parallel
configuration shows the worst engine operating efficiency under
city cycle because its engine speed is always related with the
vehicle speed, while, by decoupling the engine from the wheels, the
other three configurations have better engine efficiency. The
decoupling in power-split and compound-split 4WDH is enabled by
ECVT function, which has been widely studied. In terms of series
configuration, since the engine-generator efficiency is the goal of
optimization, its engine efficiency may be worse than the spilt one.
(2) Total regenerative braking energy: the capability of regen-
erative braking is generally determined by the size of the MGs.
Thus, owing to the bigger MGs employed, series and power-split
4WDH recovered higher energy under both city and highway cy-
cles as listed in Table 7. Compound-split configuration recovered
less energy because only MG2 is working during vehicle
decelerating.
The fuel economy of all configurations are listed in Table 7.
Although the series 4WDH has efficient engine operation and
higher recovered energy, the multiple energy conversion result in
the worst fuel economy among all configurations, especially under
highway driving. The power-split configuration has the highest fuel
efficiency under city cycle. In case of highway cycle, the series-
parallel configuration shows the best engine efficiency. Fig. 10 il-
lustrates the energy loss and efficiency of each component under
HWFET. To series-parallel configuration, the total energy loss of
MGs is 621 KJ. However, the total energy loss of MGs in power-split
configuration increase to 789 KJ. Therefore, the series-parallel
configuration shows the best fuel economy while highway
cruising. In addition, compound-split 4WDH shows closed fuel
economy with power-split one, however, only two MGs are
employed. In Section 5, we will summary the pro/cons of each
configuration systematically.
Series-parallel Power-split Compound-split
5.32 4.43 5.06
4.63 4.65 4.74
4.81 4.95 5.11
5.05 4.29 4.75
4.14 3.98 4.09
4.22 4.29 4.39
5. Multi-mode 4WDH configuration and discussions
In Section 4, the comparative results indicate that different
configurations may have their advantages under varying working
conditions. For example, power-split configuration can achieve
efficient energy efficiency under city driving cycle, while series-
parallel configuration may be very efficient in highway driving.
Thus, the concept of multi-mode configuration will increase the
adaptability of the hybrid powertrain to different working condi-
tions. A novel multi-mode 4WDH configuration will be introduced
in this section and a comprehensive comparison between different
configurations will be presented.
5.1. Multi-mode 4WDH configuration
Fig. 11 shows a novel multi-mode 4WDH by adding three
clutches to the compound-split configuration in Fig. 3. Clutch 1 is a
brake to ground the ring gear of PG1 (R1), while clutch 2 and clutch
3 are located between two PGs, to connect R1 with R2 and C1 and
C2, respectively.
By switching clutch states, several operating modes can be
achieved, including series mode, series-parallel mode and
compound-split mode introduced. Table 8 summaries the mode
types based on the clutch states, where 1 represents that the clutch
is engaged, and vice versa. For example, in the EV mode, MG1 and
MG2 drive the vehicle together; while Engine, MG1 and MG2 are
coupled to drive the vehicle, which is the Compound-split mode.
The maximum drive force at the wheel of each operating modes
are depicted in Fig. 12. It is observed that the Compound-split mode
remains the strongest drive force throughout. Hence, the acceler-
ation performance of this multi-mode configuration keeps up with
that of compound-split configuration.
In terms of fuel economy, the DP is employed to calculate the
optimal control rule. Since the multiple modes exist, the mode
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286 9

Fig. 9. Results of power-split and compound-split configuration under FUDS.

Table 7
Energy efficiency analysis.

4WDH configuration Average Engine Efficiency (%) Energy Recovered (J) Fuel Economy (L/100 km) Improvement (%)

City Cycle (FUDS)

Series 36.32 2.23eþ6 4.25 N/A
Series-parallel 35.79 2.16eþ6 4.14 2.59
Power-split 36.80 2.26eþ6 3.98 6.35
Compound-split 36.78 2.11eþ6 4.09 3.76
Highway Cycle (HWFET)
Series 36.29 6.44eþ5 4.99 N/A
Series-parallel 36.81 6.37eþ5 4.22 15.43
Power-split 36.57 6.43eþ6 4.29 14.03
Compound-split 36.60 6.26eþ5 4.39 12.02

switching penalty is added in the cost function to avoid frequent

mode shifting: N 
X   2
JðХ ðtÞjLÞ ¼ gfuel ðkÞ þ m1 Pmode ðkÞ þ m2 SOCdes  SOCf
k¼0
(21)
10 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286

Fig. 10. Energy loss, efficiency of series-parallel and power-split configurations under HWFET.

Fig. 11. PSD level diagram in the multi-mode configuration.

Table 8 Fig. 12. Maximum drive force at the wheel of each operating mode.
Operating modes of multi-mode 4WDH configuration.

Mode Engine MG1 MG2 Clutch 1 Clutch 2 Clutch 3

under FUDS and 4.31 L/100 km under HWFET, having 1.96% and
Engine only 1 0 0 0 0 1
EV 0 1 1 1 0 1 1.82% improvement than the compound-split one.
Series 1 1 1 1 0 0 A further simulation running under NEDC (New European
Parallel 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 Driving Cycle) is implemented. As a comprehensive cycle of pas-
Parallel 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 senger car, NEDC embodies typical urban and highway conditions
Compound-split 1 1 1 0 1 0
[33]. Table 9 summarizes the energy efficiency indexes of all con-
figurations under NEDC. It can be inferred that the multi-mode
configuration displays better indexes than initial compound-split
The simulation results of the multi-mode configuration under configuration. Fuel economy of five 4WDH configurations under
FUDS and HWFET are depicted in Fig. 13, including the trajectories three cycles (FUDS, HWFET, NEDC) are compared in Fig. 14. The
of vehicle speed, battery SOC, components’ rotational speed, com- proposed multi-mode 4WDH configuration significantly increases
ponents’ torque and mode state. The mode state number 1 to 6 in the fuel economy compared to compound-split configuration and
the figure refers to Engine only, EV, series, parallel 1, parallel 2 and achieves closed performance with power-split configuration.
compound-split.
It can be observed, the compound-split is widely used under city
cycle because it indicates better energy efficiency at low vehicle 5.2. Comprehensive study
speeds as discussed in last Section. Under highway cycle, the par-
allel mode sometimes is used for cruising. When the vehicle is As discussed in Section 5.1, the introduction of multi-mode
decelerating, the multi-mode configuration. configuration makes the hybrid system achieve higher fuel econ-
Tends using the EV mode because both MGs could recover en- omy, however, the complex structure may incur more cost. Thus, in
ergy from the vehicle body. The total energy recovered by regen- this subsection, the cost, control complexity, fuel economy, off-road
erative braking are 2.22eþ6J and 6.45eþ5J for FUDS and HWFET and acceleration performance of each 4WDH configuration will be
respectively. By comparing to the compound-split in Table 7, the discussed and compared. A radar map which compares the per-
multi-mode configuration could recover more energy. Therefore, formance of all configurations is given in Fig. 15.
the fuel economy of the multi-mode configuration is improved and The hybrid powertrain is generally composed by internal com-
closed to the best fuel economy in Tables 7 and i.e., 4.01 L/100 km bustion engine, MGs, battery and gearbox (e.g., transmission and
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286 11

Fig. 13. Results of multi-mode configuration under FUDS and HWFET.

Table 9 coupling devices are mainly composed by PG sets, the cost of the
Energy efficiency analysis under NEDC. gearbox will be similar. Except the series 4WDH, the power-split
4WDH Average Engine Energy Fuel Economy Improvement configuration also uses three MGs, but it claims the superior fuel
configuration Efficiency (%) Recovered (L/100 km) (%) economy, acceleration and off-road performance. By combining
(J) multiple operating modes in one single powertrain, the multi-
Series 36.30 1.39eþ6 4.51 N/A mode 4WDH with less MGs achieves closed performance with
Series- 36.73 1.37eþ6 4.17 7.54 the power-split one. In addition, as discussed in Section 4.2, the
parallel
series-parallel configuration shows superior fuel economy at
Power-split 36.74 1.41eþ6 4.13 8.43
Compound- 36.67 1.35eþ6 4.24 5.98 highway cruising. For the series 4WDH, redundant energy con-
split sumption caused by multiple energy conversion makes the worst
Multi-mode 36.72 1.40eþ6 4.15 7.98 fuel economy among all configurations. Its acceleration or off-road
performance is highly determined by the size of the traction mo-
tors. Thus, the series 4WDH configuration is not suitable for
PSD). Since different configurations adopt the same engine and
batteries, the cost of each configuration is mainly determined by
the size of MGs and gearbox types, as shown in Table 10. Even the
series configuration uses three MGs, it is still competitive in price
because no gearbox is required to couple the engine with the
wheels. The other configurations all employ a coupling device (AT
or PSD) to connect the engine with the driving wheels. Since

Fig. 14. Fuel economy of five 4WDH configurations under three cycles. Fig. 15. Comprehensive comparison of five 4WDH configurations.
12 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286
Table 10
Gearbox types of different 4WDH configurations.
4WDH configuration MGs number/MGs total power Gearbox Type
Series 3/197 kW e
Series-parallel 2/93 kW AT
Power-split 3/141 kW PSD
Compound-split 2/93 kW PSD
Multi-mode 2/93 kW PSD*
PSD* represents the PSD containing three clutches, as shown in Fig. 11.
passenger car application.
In terms of the control complexity, since the engine in series
4WDH is completely decoupled from the vehicle, only the engine
operating duration should be decided. Thus, the control of the se-
ries confirmation is the simplest. The power-split, compound-split
and multi-mode 4WDH should be controlled carefully to achieve
efficient engine operation, while the series-parallel 4WDH focuses
on the generator/motor assist control. In addition, the multi-mode
4WDH needs to consider the mode shift issues to avoid insufficient
shift. Thus, the control of the multi-mode 4WDH is the most
complicated.
The off-road performance is the key indicator of 4WDH system,
which is mostly determined by the torque split ratio between front
and rear wheels. As presented in our previous study [12], the
compound-split and multi-mode configurations adopting double
PGs with double output shafts have wider torque allocation range
between front and rear wheels, indicating better off-road capa-
bility. For the other configurations, the off-road performance is
mainly determined by the size of MG at rear axle as shown in
Fig. 15.
6. Conclusion
This paper firstly conducts a systematical review and compari-
son study between various 4WDH configurations, i.e. series, series-
parallel, power-split and compound-split HEVs. To make a fair
comparison of fuel economy and acceleration performance, an in-
tegrated hierarchical optimization framework is presented to
derive the optimal component sizes of each configuration. In the
lower-level of the optimization framework, the energy manage-
ment strategy is solved by using an optimal control method, dy-
namic programming. In addition, a novel multi-mode 4WDH
configuration, including the series, parallel, EV and compound-split
modes is proposed by adding clutches between PG nodes of
compound-split hybrid.
Among all five 4WDH configurations, the power-split 4WDH
configuration with three MGs claims the superior fuel economy and
acceleration performance. The multi-mode configuration with less
MGs achieves closed performance with power-split configuration
because multiple operating modes are achieved in one single
powertrain. While considering the system cost and control
complexity, the series-parallel configuration could be a competing
design.
Two prospects of future efforts are supplemented as follows.
First, the integrated hierarchical optimization approach is feasible
for optimal design. However, this approach needs further
improvement encountering large-scale engineering optimization
problems. Future work will focus on strengthening the approach
using rapid-DP technique and gravitational search algorithm. Sec-
ond, changing the locations of clutches and powertrain compo-
nents (engine, MGs and output shafts) will result in different hybrid
designs. Thus, identifying the configuration with the best fuel
saving potential and acceleration performance should be the future
study.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Fei Ju: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal
analysis, Writing - original draft. Weichao Zhuang: Software, Data
curation, Writing - original draft, Funding acquisition. Liangmo
Wang: Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Writing -
review & editing. Zhe Zhang: Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant 51805081.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118286.
Declaration of competing interests
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] SAE J1715 information report, hybrid vehicle (HEV) and electric vehicle ter-
minology. 2007.
[2] Andress D, Das S, Joseck F, Nguyen TD. Status of advanced light-duty trans-
portation technologies in the US. Energy Pol 2012;41(4):348e64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.10.056.
[3] Koubaa R, Bacha S, Smaoui M, Krichen L. Robust optimization based energy
management of a fuel cell/ultra-capacitor hybrid electric vehicle under un-
certainty. Energy 2020;200:117530. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2020.117530.
[4] Palmer K, Tate JE, Wadud Z, Nellthorp J. Total cost of ownership and market
share for hybrid and electric vehicles in the UK, US and Japan. Appl Energy
2018;209:108e19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.089.
[5] Saxena S, Phadke A, Gopal A. Understanding the fuel savings potential from
deploying hybrid cars in China. Appl Energy 2014;113:1127e33. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.057.
[6] Raslavicius L, Kersys A, Makaras R. Management of hybrid powertrain dy-
namics and energy consumption for 2WD, 4WD, and HMMWV vehicles.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;68:380e96. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2016.09.109.
[7] Wu G, Zhang X, Dong Z. Powertrain architectures of electrified vehicles: re-
view, classification and comparison. J Franklin Inst 2015;352(2):425e48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2014.04.018.
[8] Li Y, He H, Peng J, Wang H. Deep reinforcement learning-based energy
management for a series hybrid electric vehicle enabled by history cumulative
trip information. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2019;68(8):7416e30. https://
doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2019.2926472.
[9] Finesso R, Spessa E, Venditti M. Layout design and energetic analysis of a
complex diesel parallel hybrid electric vehicle. Appl Energy 2014;134:
573e88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.007.
[10] Liu J, Peng H. Modeling and control of a power-split hybrid vehicle. IEEE Trans
Contr Syst Technol 2008;16(6):1242e51. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TCST.2008.919447.
[11] Yang Y, Pei H, Hu X, Liu Y, Hou C, Cao D. Fuel economy optimization of power
split hybrid vehicles: a rapid dynamic programming approach. Energy
2019;166:929e38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.149.
[12] Ju F, Zhuang W, Wang L, Zhang Z. Optimal sizing and adaptive energy man-
agement of a novel four-wheel-drive hybrid powertrain. Energy 2019;187.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116008.
[13] Wishart J, Zhou YL, Dong Z. Review of multi-regime hybrid vehicle powertrain
architecture. Int J Electr Hybrid Veh (IJEHV) 2008;1(3):248e75. https://
doi.org/10.1504/IJEHV.2008.0199.
[14] Geng W, Lou D, Wang C, Zhang T. A cascaded energy management optimi-
zation method of multimode power-split hybrid electric vehicles. Energy
 F. Ju et al. / Energy 209 (2020) 118286
2020;199:117224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117224.
[15] Chen ZY, Li XJ, Jiao B. Design and control strategy of a 4WDH electric vehicle
with a two-speed transmission. Appl Mech Mater 2013;380:605e8. https:// [31]
dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.380-384.605.
[16] Xiong W, Zhang Y, Yin C. Optimal energy management for a serieseparallel
hybrid electric bus. Energy Convers Manag 2009;50(7):1730e8. https:// [32]
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.03.015.
[17] Wang E, Guo D, Yang F. System design and energetic characterization of a
four-wheel-driven serieseparallel hybrid electric powertrain for heavy-duty [33]
applications. Energy Convers Manag 2015;106:1264e75. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2015.10.056.
[18] Zhang X, Li CT, Kum D, Peng H. Priusþ and volt- : configuration analysis of [34]
power-split hybrid vehicles with a single planetary gear. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol 2012;61(8):3544e52. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2012.2208210.
[19] Miller JM. Hybrid electric vehicle propulsion system architectures of the e- [35]
CVT type. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2006;21(3):756e67. https://doi.org/ [36]
10.1109/TPEL.2006.872372.
[20] Yoshimura T. Vehicle power transmission device. US; 2013US8535189. [37]
[21] Qin Z, Luo Y, Pan Z, Li K, Peng H. Optimal design of hybrid track-type dozers
with two-planetary-gear sets and clutches. International symposium on
advanced vehicle control avec. 2016. [38]
[22] Pan Z, Zhang X, Silvas E, Peng H, Ravi N. Optimal design of all-wheel-drive
hybrid pick-up trucks. In: ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference;
2015. 57243:V001T10A002.
[23] Zhuang W, Zhang X, Ding Y, Wang L, Hu X. Comparison of multi-mode hybrid [39]
powertrains with multiple planetary gears. Appl Energy 2016;178:624e32.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.111.
[24] Pei H, Hu X, Yang Y, Tang X, Hou C, Cao D. Configuration optimization for [40]
improving fuel efficiency of power split hybrid powertrains with a single
planetary gear. Appl Energy 2018;214:103e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2018.01.070.
[25] Li G, Go€rges D. Ecological adaptive cruise control and energy management [41]
strategy for hybrid electric vehicles based on heuristic dynamic programming.
IEEE Trans Intell Transport Syst 2018;20(9):3526e35. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TITS.2018.2877389. [42]
[26] Zhu C, Lu F, Zhang H, Sun J, Mi CC. A real-time battery thermal management
strategy for connected and automated hybrid electric vehicles (CAHEVs)
based on iterative dynamic programming. IEEE Trans Veh Technol
2018;67(9):8077e84. https://doi.org/10.1109/JESTPE.2018.2852218. [43]
[27] Xie S, Hu X, Xin Z, Brighton J. Pontryagin’s minimum principle based model
predictive control of energy management for a plug-in hybrid electric bus.
Appl Energy 2019;236:893e905. https://doi.org/10.1016/ [44]
j.apenergy.2018.12.032.
[28] Li X, Han L, Liu H, Wang W, Xiang C. Real-time optimal energy management
strategy for a dual-mode power-split hybrid electric vehicle based on an
explicit model predictive control algorithm. Energy 2019;172:1161e78. [45]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.01.052.
[29] Du G, Zou Y, Zhang X, Liu T, Wu J, He D. Deep reinforcement learning based
energy management for a hybrid electric vehicle. Energy 2020;201:117591.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117591. [46]
[30] Han X, He H, Wu J, Peng J, Li Y. Energy management based on reinforcement
learning with double deep Q-learning for a hybrid electric tracked vehicle.
13
Appl Energy 2019;254:113708. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2019.113708.
Uebel S, Murgovski N, Tempelhahn C, B€ aker B. Optimal energy management
and velocity control of hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol
2017;67(1):327e37. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2017.2727680.
Uebel S, Murgovski N, Ba €ker B, Sjo
€ berg J. A two-level MPC for energy man-
agement including velocity control of hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol 2019;68(6):5494e505. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2019.2910728.
Yang Y, Hu X, Pei H, Peng Z. Comparison of power-split and parallel hybrid
powertrain architectures with a single electric machine: dynamic program-
ming approach. Appl Energy 2016;168:683e90.
Enang W, Bannister C. Modelling and control of hybrid electric vehicles (A
comprehensive review). Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;74:1210e39.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.075.
The Toyota, “RAV4 hybrid”, <https://www.toyota.com/rav4hybrid/>.
The Toyota, “RAV4 EV 2013”, <https://www.hybridcars.com/2013-toyota-
rav4-ev-review/>.
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm:
NSGA-II[J]. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2002;6(2):182e97. https://doi.org/
10.1109/4235.996017.
Jiang H, Xu L, Li J, Hu Z, Ouyang M. Energy management and component sizing
for a fuel cell/battery/supercapacitor hybrid powertrain based on two-
dimensional optimization algorithms. Energy 2019;177:386e96. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.110.
Qiu L, Qian L, Zomorodi H, Pisu P. Global optimal energy management control
strategies for connected four-wheel-drive hybrid electric vehicles. IET Intell
Transp Syst 2017;11(5):264e72. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2016.0197.
Lei F, Bai Y, Zhu W, Liu J. A novel approach for electric powertrain optimi-
zation considering vehicle power performance, energy consumption and ride
comfort. Energy 2019;167:1040e50. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2018.11.052.
Silvas E, Hofman T, Murgovski N, Etman LP, Steinbuch M. Review of optimi-
zation strategies for system-level design in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans
Veh Technol 2017;66(1):57e70. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2016.2547897.
Perez LV, Bossio GR, Moitre D, García GO. Optimization of power management
in an hybrid electric vehicle using dynamic programming. Math Comput
Simulat 2006;73(1e4):244e54. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matcom.2006.06.016.
Gao B, Liang Q, Xiang Y. Gear ratio optimization and shift control of 2-speed I-
AMT in electric vehicle[J]. Mech Syst Signal Process 2015;50:615e31. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2014.05.045.
Feng Z, Niu W, Zhou J, Cheng C. Linking NeldereMead simplex direct search
method into two-stage progressive optimality algorithm for optimal opera-
tion of cascade hydropower reservoirs. J Water Resour Plann Manag
2020;146(5):04020019.
Feng Z, Liu S, Niu W, Li S, Wu H, Wang J. Ecological operation of cascade
hydropower reservoirs by elite-guide gravitational search algorithm with
Levy flight local search and mutation. J Hydrol 2020;581:124425. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124425.
Zhou X, Qin D, Hu J. Multi-objective optimization design and performance
evaluation for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle powertrains. Appl Energy
2017;208(dec.15):1608e25.