AVEC 10

Optimal Regenerative Braking with a push-belt CVT:

an Experimental Study
Koos van Berkel1 , Theo Hofman2 , Bas Vroemen3 , Maarten Steinbuch4

1,2,4
Eindhoven University of Technology
Den Dolech 2, P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Phone: +31 40 247 2811
Fax: +31 40 246 1418
E-mail: 1 k.v.berkel@tue.nl, 2 t.hofman@tue.nl, 4 m.steinbuch@tue.nl
3
Drivetrain Innovations
Croy 46, 5653 LD Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Phone: +31 40 293 1082
Fax: +31 40 293 2885
E-mail: vroemen@dtinnovations.nl

This paper describes the approach and the results of efficiency experiments on a push-belt
Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) in a new hybrid drive train. The hybrid drive
train uses the push-belt CVT to “charge” a flywheel, with the kinetic energy of the vehicle
during regenerative braking and “discharge” during flywheel driving. The experiments are
performed on a test rig with two electric machines following prescribed speed and torque
trajectories, representing the flywheel and vehicle load. The approach includes the design
of a control strategy for the variator, which enables regenerative braking. The experiments
show that the CVT can be used very efficiently in the proposed hybrid drive train.

Topics / Powertrain & Drivetrain Control, Electric Vehicle, Hybrid Vehicle & Fuel Cell Vehicle, Energy
Efficient Vehicles

1. INTRODUCTION F
The market share of Continuously Variable Trans- CVT L
missions (CVTs) is still growing, especially in the
E
A-B-C vehicle segment in Asia. CVTs enable effi-
cient engine operation, thereby increasing the fuel ef-
ficiency of the vehicle. Due to an increasing oil price
and stricter environmental regulations, a higher fuel Fig. 1: Hybrid drive train topology with flywheel
efficiency is still desired. Hybrid transmissions can (F), combustion engine (E), vehicle load (L), CVT,
give a significant improvement (20 − 30%) as shown clutches and brake.
in many hybrid vehicles (e.g., by Toyota and Honda).
Current battery-based systems, however, are too ex-
of the hybrid system components, in particular the
pensive for this segment, due to large battery packs
efficiency of the CVT under flywheel driving and re-
and additional electric machine(s). As a low-cost
generative braking conditions.
alternative, a new mecHybrid-drive train design is
presented, using a flywheel module and a push-belt
1.1 Main contribution of the paper
CVT for energy storage and power transmission, re-
A small number of publications is found concern-
spectively. The topology, which describes how the
ing the efficiency of CVTs during static [2] and con-
energy sources are connected, is shown in Fig. 1.
ventional dynamic driving [3, 4], yet not under regen-
This concept uses the push-belt CVT to “charge”
erative braking or flywheel driving conditions. This
the flywheel (F) with load (L) (kinetic energy of the
paper focuses on the approach and the results of effi-
vehicle) during regenerative braking and “discharge”
ciency experiments on the CVT, under these hybrid
during flywheel driving. To make maximum use of
driving conditions. The experiments are performed
the recuperation energy, the CVT should be con-
on a test rig with two electric machines following
trolled by changing the speed ratio such that the
prescribed speed and torque trajectories, represent-
hybrid system is operated at the most efficient oper-
ing the flywheel and vehicle load. The approach in-
ation points [1]. This requires extensive knowledge
cludes the design of a control strategy for the varia-

67
AVEC 10
tor, which differs from many traditional designs, to
enable regenerative braking. The experimental re-
sults form a solid basis for future work on an effi-
ciency model of the CVT, which is a valuable input
for the Energy Management Strategy of the mecHy-
brid -drive train. The outline is as follows: Section 2
describes the experimental setup; Section 3 describes
the simulation models of the hybrid drive train and
the experimental setup; Section 4 describes the con-
trol design of the variator; finally, Sections 5 and 6
discuss the experimental results and the conclusions.
2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The hybrid topology of Fig. 1 supports several
functionalities. For the experimental setup, it is suf-
ficient to have a drive train topology that supports
regenerative braking and flywheel driving. Hence, a
reduced drive train topology is chosen, which repre-
sents a series connection of the flywheel (F), CVT
and vehicle load (L), as shown in Fig. 2. The engine
(E) has been left out.
electric machine F CVT electric machine
torque and speed sensors
Fig. 2: Photo of the experimental setup.
In this figure, the left and right electric machine
represent the flywheel and the vehicle load, respec-
tively. The flywheel is coupled to the primary pulley
shaft of the CVT. The considered CVT is a con-
ventional, mass-production system with integrated
pump, torque converter, Drive / Neutral / Reverse
(DNR), variator, final drive and differential. For the
considered experiments, the DNR is put in “Drive”
and the torque converter and differential are locked.
The vehicle load is coupled to the locked differen-
tial. For determining the efficiency, torque measur-
ing shafts and speed sensors are mounted on both
shafts at each side of the CVT.
3. MODELING & SIMULATION
The electric machines and the CVT need to track
setpoints, such that all torques and speeds in the re-
duced drive train (experimental setup), mimic the
behavior of the hybrid drive train with sufficient ac-
curacy, described by a reference vehicle driving a
given velocity profile v(t). First, this section de-
scribes the quasi-static simulation models of the hy-
brid drive train, which consists of the CVT, vehicle
and flywheel. Then, the model of the experimental
setup is described on system level. These models are
used (1) to define the efficiencies of the CVT, for the
analysis of the experimental results in Section 5 and
(2) to derive the setpoints (torques, speeds, speed
ratio) for the experiments at the end of this section.
3.1 CVT model
The CVT consists of a series connection of vari-
ous components, such as the pump, torque converter,
DNR, push-belt variator, final drive and differential.
Its quasi-static model is shown in Fig. 3. In this
model, the torques (Ti ) and speeds (ωi ) are evaluated
at four locations, being the engine (subscript “e”)
and wheel side (subscript “w”) of the CVT and the
primary (subscript “p”), and secondary side of vari-
ator (subscript “s”). The push-belt variator, which
is considered as the key component of the CVT, en-
ables a continuously variable speed ratio, defined by
ωs (t)
rcvt (t) := . (1)
ωp (t)
L
CVT
Tpu ( e,ppu) !var (Tp" p,rCVT) !d
e p s w
Jp Js Jw
Te Tw
Tp Ts
pump variator final drive
inertia prim. side inertia sec. side inertia wheel side
Fig. 3: Quasi-static model of the CVT.
For the considered experiments, the DNR is put
in “Drive” and the torque converter is locked, such
that ωp (t) = ωe (t). The inertias acting on the pri-
mary shaft, such as the DNR, torque converter and
primary pulley set, are lumped to inertia Jp . The
inertia of the secondary pulley set is Js . The iner-
tias of the final drive and differential are lumped to
inertia Jw . The transmission efficiency of the CVT,
as a total system, is defined by
(
Pw
Pe , Pe > 0
ηcvt := Pe , (2)
Pw , Pe ≤ 0
with the powers Pe = Te ωe and Pw = Tw ωw .
In this model, power is dissipated by the pump, final
drive and the variator, which will be discussed below.
Pump: The pump provides pressure ppu for ac-
tuation of the CVT. The power dissipation of the
pump, is described by a torque Tpu (ωe (t), ppu (t)),
which depends on the speed ωe (t) and generated pres-
sure ppu (t). Values of Tpu are obtained from a mea-
sured look-up table, provided by the manufacturer.
68
AVEC 10

Final drive: The final drive gear set gives a speed

reduction with a constant gear ratio, defined by Table 1: Vehicle System Parameters
Jw 1.5 kgm2 inertia of driven wheels
m 1134 kg vehicle mass
ωw (t) Rw 0.282 m dynamic wheel radius
rd := = 0.1864. (3) Cd 0.3 - air drag coefficient
ωs (t)
A 2.15 m2 frontal area vehicle
The power dissipation is modeled as a constant Fr 133 N roll resistance
transmission efficiency of ηd = 0.99, which is defined ρ 1.25 kg/m3 air density at 15o C
by the powers Ps = Ts ωs and Pw = Tw ωw :

with a constant roll resistance Fr , air drag coef-

Ps (t)
(
Pw (t) , Pw (t) > 0 ficient Cd , frontal area of the vehicle A, air density
ηd := Pw (t) . (4)
Pw (t) ≤ 0 ρ, inertia of the driven wheels Jw and vehicle mass m.
Ps (t) ,

3.3 Flywheel model

The flywheel is modeled as an inertia Jf = 0.03
Push-belt variator: The push-belt variator dis- kgm2 , in series with a gear set and the CVT. The
sipates power, mainly due to mechanical friction, slip gear set gives a constant gear ratio
within the push-belt and deformation of the pulleys
and pulley shafts, among others [5]. The transmis-
sion efficiency of the variator, depends on the torque ωe (t) 1
(Tp (t) or Ts (t)), speed (ωp (t) or ωs (t)), speed ratio rf := = , (10)
ωf (t) 12
rcvt (t) and the safety strategy in the variator control
system (see Section 4.1), and is defined by with ωf (t) the speed of the flywheel. The torque
losses, generated by, e.g., air drag, bearings and gears,
( Ps (t)
are assumed to be negligible compared to the torque
Pp (t) , Pp (t) > 0 required for flywheel driving and braking. Then, the
ηvar (t) := Pp (t) , (5)
Pp (t) ≤ 0 torque generated by the flywheel Tf (t) equals
Ps (t) ,

with the powers Pp (t) = Tp (t)ωp (t) and Ps (t) = d

Ts (t)ωs (t). For the experiments, Tp and Ts can be Tf (t) = Jf ωf (t). (11)
dt
calculated, using torques and speeds measured by the
torque measuring shafts (Te , Tw , ωe and ωw ) and the
pump pressure, by the torque balances:
3.4 Experimental Setup Model
Figure 4 shows the quasi-static model of the ex-
d perimental setup. The electric machine on the left
Tp (t) = Te (t) − Tpu (ωe (t), ppu (t)) − Jp ωe (t), (6)
 dt side (subscript “2”) represents the flywheel, whereas
the electric machine on the right side (subscript “1”)

rd 1 rd d
Ts (t) = Tw (t) + Js + Jw ωw (t), (7) represents the wheels. The electric machines have
ηd rd ηd dt
an inertia (Ji ) and generate torques (Ti ) and speeds
(ωi ), that are measured by the torque measuring
shafts on both sides of the CVT. For a given velocity
3.2 Vehicle model
profile v(t) and initial flywheel speed (ωf,0 ), the set-
The parameters of the reference vehicle (Toyota
points of the electric machines are calculated using
Vitz) are given in table 1. The angular velocity of
(8), (9), (10), (11). Here, the torque required by the
the wheels ωw (t) [rad/s] is, for a given speed profile
flywheel Tf′ , is estimated with an estimated constant
v(t) [m/s] of the vehicle, modeled as ′
transmission efficiency of the CVT, of ηcvt = 0.85:

1
ωw (t) = v(t), (8) d
Rw T1 (t) = T w + J1 ω w , (12)
dt !
Tf′ (t)
Z t
with Rw [m] the dynamic wheel radius, which in-
cludes a constant small slip between the tires and the ω2 (t) = rf 2 dt + ωf,0 , (13)
0 Jf + rf J2
road surface. The torque acting on the drive shaft,
Tw (t), is modeled as the sum of the roll resistance, Tf′ (t) = ′
rf rcvt (t)ηcvt Tw (t). (14)
air drag and inertia torques, and holds

1 3.5 Setpoints for the Experimental Setup

Tw (t) = Rw (Fr + Cd Aρv 2 (t)
2 A velocity profile v(t) is chosen, with constant ve-
Jw d (9)
locities (30 and 50 km/h) and constant accelerations
+ ( 2 + m) v(t)),
Rw dt (−0.8 and 0.8 m/s2 ) that are common in drive cycles,

69
AVEC 10

TCVT (Te !e,rCVT) or (2), which is determined by the control switching

strategy, as will be explained later.
!2 !e !w !1
J2 CVT J1
T2 T1
Te Tw p
Fp
Tp

Fig. 4: Quasi-static model of the experimental setup. ps pp

s
Fs
as shown in the upper graph of Fig. 5. The corre- Ts
sponding reference trajectories of the speed ratio of
the CVT rcvt,d (t), flywheel speed ωf,d (t) with ωf,0 =
30.000 rpm and wheel torque Tw,d (t) as a function of
time are depicted in the lower three graphs of Fig. 5. Fig. 6: Schematic view of the push-belt variator.

4.1 Torque Transfer Control

Setpoints for flywheel driving and regenerative braking
The level of the clamping forces determines the
50 velocity profile [km/h] amount of slip between the push-belt and pulley sheaves.
40
30 When the clamping force is too low, the increased
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 slip may cause heavy damage and reduced efficiency.
2 When the clamping force is too high, the increased
1.5 CVT ratio [−]
1 friction losses compromise the transmission efficiency
0.5 of the variator and raise the pump load. The minimal
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
clamping force, required to transfer torque without
30.000
24.000 macroscopic slip (i.e., slip that may cause damage),
18.000 flywheel speed [rpm] is computed by means of a Coulomb based friction
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 model of the variator (see, e.g., [2], [6]):
400
200
0 wheel torque [Nm]
cosθ|Tx |
−200 Fx,min = 2µRx , x ∈ {p, s}, (15)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s]
with θ half the pulley wedge angle, µ the friction
coefficient between the pulleys and the belt and Rx
the geometric running radii of the belt on the pul-
Fig. 5: Velocity profile and setpoints for the speed leys. In most production CVTs, a safety strategy
ratio rcvt , flywheel speed ωf and wheel torque Tw . is employed to compensate for disturbances and un-
certainties in the variator model. Typically, safety
strategies combine a relative fr with an absolute
4. VARIATOR CONTROL SYSTEM safety factor fa . In case the variator efficiency is suf-
ficiently high, one may assume that Fp,min ≈ Fs,min .
For the considered experiments, the variator con-
Hence, the minimal “safe” clamping force Fsaf e , which
trol system is of significant importance as: (1) the
holds for both pulleys, is formulated as:
level of the clamping forces influences the transmis-
sion efficiency of the CVT; and (2) regenerative brak-
cosθ(|(1+fr )Tp |+fa Tp,max )
ing, with negative power flow through the variator Fsaf e = 2µRp . (16)
(Tp < 0), requires a specific control design. Fig. 6
gives a schematic view of the variator. The varia- For the experiments, common values are used:
tor consists of a metal push-belt, which is clamped fr = 0.15, fa = 0.2 and Tp,max = 124 Nm.
between a pair of pulleys on each side of the varia-
tor (primary side, subscript “p”, and secondary side, 4.2 Speed Ratio Control
subscript “s”). Each pulley pair consists of one ax- The ratio of the clamping forces determines the
ially fixed sheave and one axially moveable sheave. speed ratio of the variator. The speed ratio is con-
On each moveable sheave, an axially pulley force (Fp trolled with a feedforward (open-loop) controller and
and Fs ) is generated by an oil pressure, controlled by a feedback (closed-loop) controller. For the design of
a hydraulic system. The level of the clamping forces a feedforward controller, static and dynamic mod-
determines the maximum allowable torque transfer, els are used, to prescribe reference trajectories for
without macroscopic slip between the push-belt and the clamping forces. The static model, relates the
pulley sheaves, whereas the ratio of the clamping static pulley-thrust ratio κ(rcvt , Tp ) with the speed
forces determines the speed ratio. Hence, the ob- ratio (rcvt ) and primary torque (Tp ) for a given safety
jective for the variator control system is twofold: (1) strategy in the torque transfer control:
transfer of torque Tp or Ts ; and (2) tracking of the 
reference speed ratio rcvt,d . The control objective Fp 
κ(rcvt , Tp ) = , (17)
of each pulley set may be decoupled, i.e., either (1) Fs ṙcvt =0

70
AVEC 10
with ṙcvt the rate of ratio change. Here, pulley-
thrust ratio κ(rcvt , Tp ) is based on static experiments
under various conditions, such as different engine
speeds, wheel torques and speed ratios, see Fig. 7.
|T | ≈ 11 Nm
p p
ln(κ) [−]
0.5 0.5
0 0
−0.5 −0.5
−0.5 0 0.5
|Tp| ≈ 49 Nm
ln(κ) [−]
0.5 0.5
0 0
−0.5 −0.5
−0.5 0 0.5
ln(r
CVT
) [−]
Fig. 7: Static pulley-thrust ratios plotted on loga-
rithmic scale as a function of speed ratio, for positive
and negative torques, based on static experiments
(ṙcvt = 0) under various conditions.
For the dynamic model, several designs are pro-
posed in literature, among others, by Ide et al [7]
and Carbone et al [8]. Ide introduces a relatively
simple grey-box model, which reasonably describes
the dynamic shift behavior, validated by various ex-
periments, e.g., in [5]. Carbone introduces a theoreti-
cal model (CMM-model), which accurately describes
the dynamic shift behavior, validated by experiments
under various operating conditions. Carbone found,
that Ide’s model appears to be a first order approx-
imation of the CMM-model. Here, Ide’s model is
chosen, due to its simple implementation and its rea-
sonable accuracy. This model relates the rate of ratio
change (ṙcvt ), the speed ratio (rcvt ), primary pulley
speed (ωp ) with a shifting force:
ṙcvt
Fshif t = .
kr (rcvt )|ωp |
Here, kr (rcvt ) is an experimentally obtained damp-
ing. The models (17) and (18) are used to derive the
following control laws (Fp,ratio and Fs,ratio ) to track
the desired speed ratio and change (rcvt,d and ṙcvt,d ):
Fp,ratio = Fshif t,d + κFsaf e ,
Fs,ratio = −Fshif t,d +
ṙcvt,d + u
Fshif t,d = ,
kr (rcvt,d )|ωp |
using a linear feedback control action u (with
PID -control). Further details regarding the design
of a ratio controller can be found, e.g., in [2] and [6].
4.3 Control Switching Strategy
The clamping force on each pulley controls either
the torque transfer or the speed ratio. Traditionally,
the majority of the approaches control the torque
transfer via the secondary pulley (Fs ≈ Fsaf e ) and
speed ratio via the primary pulley (Fp ≈ Fp,ratio ),
see, e.g., [9]. This control approach is based on the
observation, that in conventional driving conditions
(Tp > 0), the static pulley-thrust ratio κ & 1 is such
|T | ≈ 22 Nm that Fp & Fs , see Fig. 7. In this situation, macro-
scopic slip is avoided when Fs ≈ Fsaf e > Fs,min ,
such that with a sufficiently large safety factor (see
Section 4.1), Fp & Fs ≈ Fsaf e > Fp,min . How-
−0.5 0 0.5
ever, during regenerative braking (Tp < 0), the static
|Tp| ≈ 74 Nm pulley-thrust ratio (κ) changes, as shown in Fig. 7.
κ for T >0
Especially when rcvt < 1, Fp << Fs holds, such that
p
the control objectives need to be switched in order
κ for T <0
p to avoid macroscopic slip. Hence, in that situation,
the torque transfer needs to be controlled via the
−0.5 0 0.5
ln(r
CVT
) [−] primary pulley (Fp ≈ Fsaf e ) and speed ratio via the
secondary pulley (Fs ≈ Fs,ratio ). This is employed
with the following control switching strategy [6]:

Fp,d = Fp,ratio
if Fshif t,d + κFsaf e ≥ Fsaf e , (22)
Fs,d = Fsaf e

Fp,d = Fsaf e
if Fshif t,d + κFsaf e < Fsaf e , (23)
Fs,d = Fs,ratio
with Fp,d and Fs,d the reference trajectories for
the clamping forces Fp and Fs , respectively.
5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The flywheel driving and regenerative braking ex-
periment is performed using the setpoints derived in
Section 3 and the variator control system of Section
4. The resulting control actions and the efficiency of
the CVT are evaluated in the following sections.
5.1 Variator control system
Figure 8 shows the tracking results of the speed
ratio controller and the corresponding clamping forces.
From this experiment, the following observations can
(18) be made: (1) the variator control system is able to
accurately track its reference rcvt,d ; (2) indeed, dur-
ing regenerative braking, the control objectives are
switched, e.g., Fp (instead of Fs ) tracks Fsaf e .
5.2 Transmission efficiency of the CVT
The resulting transmission efficiency of the CVT
as a system, as defined by (2), and of the variator
(19) separately, as defined by (5), are shown in Figure 9.
Fsaf e From this experiment, the following observations can
, (20) be made: (1) This CVT can be used very efficiently
κ
for regenerative braking, e.g., during this period, the
(21) average efficiency is 85%. (2) This CVT and variator
have a relatively high transmission efficiency during
acceleration, medium vehicle velocity and decelera-
tion, e.g., 81 − 91% and 88 − 97%, respectively.
The difference between the transmission efficien-
cies of the CVT and the variator, are caused by the
pump and the final drive, but also due to the kinetic
energy storage in the inertias. The energy losses are
shown in figure 10. From this figure, it can be ob-
served that the energy losses are dominated by the
71
AVEC 10

Tracking of speed ratio and clamping forces Energy losses in CVT during experiment
Speed ratio [−]
2
35
rcvt
1.5
30 CVT
1 rcvt,d
25

Energy [kJ]
0.5 20 pump
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
15
Force [kN]

20 Fp,d Fp 10 variator
10 5
F final drive
safe 0
0 inertia
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 −5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s]
Force [kN]

10
F
s

5
Fs,d
Fsafe
0 Fig. 10: Experimental result: energy losses of each
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s] component.

efficiently for regenerative braking, flywheel acceler-

Fig. 8: Experimental result: tracking of clamping
pressures for torque transfer and speed ratio control.
Push−belt CVT and variator efficiency during experiments
90
Efficiency [%]
ation and flywheel driving at medium velocity. The
transmission efficiency of the CVT may be even fur-
ther increased, by the design of a hydraulic scheme
which reduces the pump load during flywheel driv-
ing. Based on these results it can be concluded that a

ηcvt ηcvt
push-belt CVT, in combination with a flywheel sys-
70 flywheel regenerative
tem, can be a promising design solution for efficient
driving braking hybrid vehicle propulsion.
50

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

REFERENCES
90
Efficiency [%]

ηvar ηvar [1] H. Yeo, S. Hwang, and H. Kim. Regenerative

70 flywheel
driving
50
0 5 10 15
Time [s]
Fig. 9: Experimental result: transmission efficiency
of the CVT as a system and the variator separately.
pump (average of 57%) and the variator (average
of 43%). The energy loss due to the pump is rela-
tively high, especially during periods with low power
demand. This is mainly due to the relatively high
speeds of the pump caused by the flywheel, which is
almost proportional to the power consumed by the
pump. Based on this result, it can be concluded
that the transmission efficiency of the CVT may be
further increased, by revision of current hydraulic
scheme for the mecHybrid drive train.
6. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, an approach is described for effi-
ciency experiments on the push-belt CVT, under re-
generative braking and flywheel driving conditions.
From the measured static pulley-thrust ratio it can
be concluded, that to enable regenerative braking,
a control switching strategy needs to be adopted in
the variator control system. From the experiments
it can be concluded that a CVT can be used very
regenerative braking algorithm for a hybrid electric vehicle
braking with cvt ratio control. 220(11):1589–1600, 2006.
[2] B.G. Vroemen, A.F.A Serrarens, and F.E. Veld-
20 25 30 paus. Hierarchical control of the zero inertia pow-
ertrain. JSAE Review, 22(4):519 – 526, 2001.
[3] A. Bonthron. Cvt: Efficiency measured under
dynamic running conditions. In SAE Int. Con.
and Exp., number 850569, 1985.
[4] T. F. Chen, D. W. Lee, and C. K. Sung. An
experimental study on transmission efficiency of
a rubber v-belt cvt. Mechanism and Machine
Theory, 33(4):351 – 363, 1998.
[5] B.G. Vroemen. Component Control for The Zero
Inertia Powertrain. PhD thesis, Technische Uni-
versiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, 2001.
[6] M. Pesgens, B. Vroemen, B. Stouten, F. Veld-
paus, and M. Steinbuch. Control of a hydrauli-
cally actuated continuously variable transmis-
sion. Int. Journal of Vehicle Mechanics and Mo-
bility, 44(5):387–406, 2006.
[7] T. Ide, A. Udagawa, and R. Kataoka. A dynamic
response analysis of a vehicle with a metal v-belt
cvt. JSAE Review, 16(2):230–235, 1995.
[8] G. Carbone, L. Mangialardi, B. Bonsen, C. Tursi,
and P.A. Veenhuizen. Cvt dynamics: Theory and
experiments. Mechanism and Machine Theory,
42(4):409 – 428, 2007.
[9] W. Ryu, J. Nam, Y.. Lee, and H. Kim. Model
based control for a pressure control type cvt. Int.
Journal of Vehicle Design, 39(3):175–188, 2005.

72