Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A review on hybrid electric vehicles architecture and energy

management strategies
M.F. M. Sabri, K.A. Danapalasingam n, M.F. Rahmat
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM Skudai, 81310 Johor, Malaysia

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Faced with environmental issues caused by fossil fuel burning in the industrial and transportation sectors,
Received 1 February 2015 innovations towards cleaner solutions to replace the ever diminishing fossil fuels have been the focus of not
Received in revised form only researchers but governments all around the world. The hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) technology is the
6 June 2015
result of the desire to have vehicles with a better fuel economy and lower tailpipe emissions to meet the
Accepted 18 September 2015
Available online 10 November 2015
requirements of environmental policies as well as to absorb the impact of rising fuel prices. The objectives are
met by combining a conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) with one or more electric motors powered
Keywords: by a battery pack that can be charged using an on-board generator and the regenerative braking technology to
Hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) power the transmission. The challenge is to develop an efficient energy management strategy (EMS) to satisfy
Energy management strategy
the objectives while not having a reduced vehicle performance. In this paper, EMSs that are proposed and
Plug-in HEV
developed in the recent years are revisited and reviewed. Additionally, the Plug-in HEV is discussed in a new
Through-the-road HEV
perspective from the EMS point of view. The through-the-road (TtR) HEV with in-wheel motors (IWM) is a
fairly new concept in the HEV design that features less complicated configuration with reduced hardware
requirements and lower cost. Recent research findings are evaluated throughout this paper leading to a
hypothetical TtR HEV materialization. A thorough discussion is made encompassing the advantages and
disadvantages of the concept, its performance compared to conventional HEVs and the way forward.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1433
2. HEV advantages and review of recent energy management strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1434
2.1. Online energy management strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1436
2.2. Off-line energy management strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1437
3. Plug-in HEV (PHEV) influence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1438
4. Paving ways for TtR HEV concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1439
4.1. Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1440
4.2. Energy management strategy and performance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1440
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1440
Acknowledgement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1441
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1441

1. Introduction continuous and uncontrolled emissions of hazardous and polluting

elements to the atmosphere from various segments of human
A global reality that the world is facing at the moment is the activities. Burning of fossil fuels in industrial and transportation
deterioration in environmental conditions. It is mostly due to sectors is widely acknowledged as the major contributing factor.
Fossil fuels have been the backbone of world civilizations that have
n
Corresponding author. seen rapid progress since the introduction of machines into the
E-mail address: kumeresan@fke.utm.my (K.A. Danapalasingam). industrial sector and vehicles using internal combustion engines

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.036
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1434 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
(ICEs). However, it is a finite element which has resulted in the
price going onto a steady hike as the result of increasing demand.
However, the end of heavy reliance on fossil fuel is in the fore-
seeable horizon as its reserve are being depleted at a rate at which
there is no option for researches than to come up with immediate
alternative energy solutions. Most if not all mega size oil field
around the world have been discovered during or prior the 1960s
and as production and demands are only trending upwards, var-
ious studies has projected that the global petroleum production
will reach its peak around the year 2030 before facing a steady
decline [1–5]. The biggest challenge is to come up with better or
equivalent solutions that are not just economically viable but also
environmentally friendly.
The industrial sector is experiencing a surge in the adoption of
renewable or green energy in electricity generation [6]. More and
more countries all over the world are increasing or imposing a
certain target to be achieved in the near future for their share of
clean energy sources which include solar, wind, geothermal, etc.
[7]. The transportation sector has also been contributing innova-
tions towards greener vehicles with the ultimate objective of
eliminating hazardous tailpipe emissions.
In recent years, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) have thrived as a
lucrative solution to the aforementioned problems with its inter-
mediate approach to achieve superior mileage and low tailpipe
emission compared to conventional ICE vehicles. HEV is a term
used to describe vehicles that use ICEs in combination with one or
more electric motors (EMs) connected to a battery pack as a sec-
ondary energy storage system (ESS) providing propulsion to the
wheels either together or separately [8]. It is a culmination of
mechanical, electrical, electronic and power engineering technol-
ogies embracing the best of both conventional ICE vehicles and
electric vehicles (EVs). The most notable advantages that an HEV
possesses over a pure EV are superior mileage and flexibility in the
sizing of the components [9]. The former is due to the presence of
an on-board generator to charge the ESS plus the ability to recover
energy via regenerative braking allowing for the sustenance of the
state-of-charge (SoC) of the ESS. The latter allows for the use of a
smaller, more efficient ICE to achieve optimum fuel economy. The
ICE in HEV operates within its most efficient region most of the
time and can be switched ON/OFF when necessary depending on
the energy management strategy (EMS) [8].
In general, HEVs can be classified into three categories based on
their design characteristics namely series, parallel and power-split
series-parallel, all have their own list of benefits which will be
discussed further in the following sections. This paper aims to
pave ways for a more recent concept that retains its own set of
merits that is the through-the-road (TtR) HEV. A TtR HEV has an
ICE and one or more EMs that provide traction forces of front and
rear wheels respectively [9]. By the concept, the TtR HEV is clas-
sified as a parallel HEV. However, in a TtR HEV, the two sources of
traction force are summed up “through the road” whereas in a
conventional HEV, torques from different sources are combined in
the transmission [9]. The proposed design considered here is a TtR
HEV equipped with an ICE that drives the front wheels, and two
in-wheel motors (IWMs) to provide traction forces to the rear
wheels as shown in Fig. 1.
The main issue in the development of HEVs is the management
of the power flow between fuel and ESS that contributes to vehicle
motion. The difficulty arises given the limited energy supply from
the ESS and the requirements to minimize fuel consumption and
exhaust emissions. It is a challenging task to satisfy the constraints
and the requirements simultaneously, and often trade-offs have to
be made to obtain an optimal solution. The problem is further
exacerbated by the desire of not to have a reduced vehicle per-
formance. Regardless of the type of HEV, the performance of the
vehicle in terms of fuel economy and tailpipe emission depends
ICE IWM1
IWM2
Fig. 1. Top view of a TtR HEV with rear IWMs.
heavily on the chosen EMS which has been the topic of interest for
many researchers [10]. This paper will review some of the most
recent approaches to the EMS problem in the recent years while
going into considerable details of the proposed methods [11–19].
The plug-in HEV (PHEV) has recently captured considerable
amount of interests from researchers given its enhanced approach
to the issues of fuel economy and tailpipe emission [20–32]. PHEV
is a type of HEV which can be plugged-in and charged using a
socket outlet from the grid. This gives a PHEV the ability to run
exclusively on electricity before the ICE kicks in when the battery
SoC reaches a pre-set lower threshold value [33,34]. PHEVs differ
from conventional HEVs in a way that the ESS is considered as the
primary energy source. This has given a new dimension to the EMS
approach for a better fuel economy as PHEVs can operate in both
charge depletion (CD) and charge sustaining (CS) modes [20,34].
The influence of PHEVs and its regards will be discussed in further
details in Section 3.
There are several papers from since the last decade and even
recently which previously have contributed to the compilation of
reviews of EMS from various authors [10,33,35–44]. However, with
the advancement and introductions of newer techniques in auto-
motive technology, the author sees EMS for HEV as an ever evol-
ving topic that will continue to attract new ideas for many years to
come. The main objective of this review paper is not only to
contribute to the growing list of discussions regarding recent
proposals for EMS but also as an attempt to direct more attention
to the realization of TtR HEV with rear IWMs which is the main
research interest of the author. As the matter of fact, there are
currently very few references that can be found regarding the
configuration in question and this paper will hopefully fill
that gap.
This paper is organized as follows. After the brief introduction
in Section 1, Section 2 will showcase the advantages of HEV in
general and the review on EMS from recent years. Section 3 ela-
borates the PHEV, its influences to the EMS problem and how it
might be applicable in the TtR concept. Section 4 discusses ways
on how the TtR HEV concept can be hypothetically materialized by
considering various points raised in the previous sections. Section
5 concludes the paper.
2. HEV advantages and review of recent energy management
strategies
In the beginning, the most sought after and immediate solu-
tions spearheading the effort to achieve emission-free vehicles are
EVs and fuel cell vehicles (FCVs). Although both solutions are
theoretically sustainable and emission free, they bear a number of
issues which hinder their immediate mass production and wider
public acceptance. FCVs are currently still in the early stages of its
development cycle and the technology is yet to reach a mature
state as researchers and manufacturers are still working out on
 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
cost reduction and performance optimization [33,45]. On one
hand, the near future target market for the technology is public
transportations. On the other hand, it is still a magnitude away
from actually making it into private vehicles sector mainly due to
safety measures [33].
EVs use rechargeable battery packs, commonly lithium-ion (Li-
ion) batteries as its source of energy to power one or more EMs for
propulsion. It operates in CD mode and ideally, the battery pack
needs to be fully recharged before every trip to ensure maximum
operating range. It is greatly being held back by the current battery
technology which is still unable to provide high energy density
batteries in a smaller, lighter and inexpensive package [46]. The
result is bulkier, heavier and more expensive battery packs with
unfavourable trade-offs [47]. The present battery technology
enables only a relatively short mileage per full charge, which is
unsuitable for long distance trips due to unavailability of nation-
wide recharge stands [20]. A higher energy density battery packs
are not only more expensive, they are also heavier which adds to
the vehicle mass. In addition, recharging of the battery is time
consuming in contrast to the shorter time required for refuelling
which could pose as an inconvenience at times of emergencies.
Another issue related to EVs is the sizing of the components which
must be match the maximum vehicle rated output power that
adds to the cost and weight of the vehicle [9].
However, despite the technology bottlenecking the viability of
EVs, there are a number of models already available on the market,
offered in a spectrum of price range. The lower priced models are
commonly small, compact and lightweight to allow for the
installation of a smaller EM and ESS just enough for short distance
travels within the local area, whereas the premiums offer greater
mileage as expected from their higher price. There is no doubt that
the EV technology is advancing at a steady rate and will be the
force to be reckoned with in the future but given its present
glaring shortcomings, the anticipated day when all vehicles are
fossil fuel-free is still a couple of decades ahead. For instance, the
technology itself still needs to improve its consumers’ perceptions
and expectations which are strongly influenced by mileage and
price [46,48]. A mass adoption for EVs might involves a nationwide
overhaul on electrical distribution channels to accommodate for
the increase in numbers of recharging stations required which will
definitely come at a tremendous cost. There are also expected
changes in grid power demand profile as the penetration of EVs
increases. Currently, EVs are only suitable for urban driving
because most countries still do not have proper charging stations
broadly available [33].
HEVs are regarded as a step in the right direction towards
cleaner and greener vehicles. It has responded soundly to stringent
policies regarding greenhouse gas emissions imposed by govern-
ments and environmental agencies around the world. The general
idea of HEV is to have the best of both worlds. It provides excep-
tional mileage for consumer satisfaction while having a smaller
tailpipe emission footprint [46,48]. These are made possible with a
smaller ICE that operates at its most efficient region most of the
time and can be turned ON/OFF depending on the vehicle oper-
ating condition and driver’s torque demand [9,34]. In certain
driving conditions, propulsion could rely solely on EM for zero
emission drive. Under mild braking, HEVs are also capable of
recapturing kinetic energy, transforming it into electrical energy
and storing it in the ESS. This process is known as regenerative
braking. The kinetic energy during braking is usually just dis-
sipated as heat in conventional vehicles [9,34].
Unlike FCV, HEV is a proven concept that is already possible
with the current level of technology. It is ready for deployment
and it does not have to wait for years to come to fruition. It serves
as the perfect provisional solution to practical, yet economically
viable emission free vehicles. It is also more compelling to the
1435
prospective buyers because they do not have the apprehension of
their vehicle stalling in the middle of nowhere when there is no
charging station especially when driving in suburban or rural
areas. This is a huge advantage that HEVs have over pure EVs at
the moment [46].
A typical HEV operates in CS mode. In this mode, the main
focus of the EMS is not only to achieve the optimum fuel con-
sumption but also to sustain the SoC of the ESS and ensure that it
does not fall below the lower threshold level. This is important to
avoid the ESS from being over-discharged and subsequently
damaging it. Based on the driver’s input, the vehicle’s operating
point is decided depending on the SoC of its ESS [10,34]. Vehicle’s
operating point refers to the ratio of torque supplied from the ICE
and EM based on the total amount of torque requested by the
driver. In terms of design, there is no standard blueprint on how to
design a HEV. HEVs come in many variations that are diverse in
their configurations and sizing but their objectives remain the
same – to achieve the best fuel economy and lowest possible
tailpipe emission. However, HEVs are generally grouped into three
big categories based on their configurations, namely series, par-
allel and power-split series-parallel [8,9]. The dissimilarity that
separates HEV into these categories lies in the design of the power
flow from the sources of energy, i.e. the fuel and ESS, to the
transmission.
Power flow in series HEV is passed down to the transmission
only over a single path as illustrated in Fig. 2 [9].
The ICE will turn the generator to generate electricity which
will be stored in the ESS. The ESS supplies the energy to the EM
that powers the propulsion of the vehicle. In this configuration,
the ICE is not connected directly to the transmission. The advan-
tage of this configuration is the ICE can always operate at its
highest efficiency for the best fuel consumption. This configuration
shares the similar downside with pure EV where the installed EM
must match the rated maximum vehicle power because the EM is
the sole provider to the propulsion of the vehicle [8,9,36].
Parallel HEVs allow power flow through two paths from the
energy sources to the transmission. As per Fig. 3, the ICE and EM
are both connected directly to the transmission through their
respective paths. The path from the ICE is called the mechanical
path and the one from the ESS is the electrical path [9]. The
electrical path allows for power flow in both directions.
When the SoC of the battery is at high, the vehicle can be
driven by both the ICE and EM together or by either of them
independently given a specific operating condition. At the time of
low SoC, some torque from the ICE will be diverted to turn the EM
which will now functions as a generator to recharge the battery
pack. The biggest merit of this design is the flexibility in choosing
the size of the ESS and EM to be mounted because the maximum
torque of the vehicle will be supplied in consolidation with the ICE
[9,36]. However, a more complex control mechanism is required to
manage the torque from both sources. By design, parallel HEVs are
not suited well for frequent stop and go traffic as in typical urban
driving conditions. This is due to the unavailability of charging
mechanism when the vehicle is not moving.
The third HEV category is the design assimilation of the pre-
vious two categories put together in single package. Fig. 4 illus-
trates the power-split series-parallel HEV configuration [9].
Fig. 2. Series HEV configuration.
1436 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
Fig. 3. Parallel HEV configuration.
Fig. 4. Power split series-parallel HEV configuration.
At a glance, the configuration looks similar to that of a parallel
HEV. It can be perceived as a parallel HEV with a small series HEV
architecture built into the design [9]. This combined configuration
boasts the advantages of both series and parallel HEV to eradicate
their disadvantages. For instance, the sizing issue of the ESS and
EM in series HEVs is eliminated because the fundamental design
principal adopted here is of the parallel HEV. On the other hand,
the issue of frequent stop and go driving condition unfavourable to
parallel HEVs is also solved with the ability to charge the battery
even when the vehicle is stationary. All these are made possible by
the presence of a power split device such as the planetary gear set
equipped in the Toyota Prius [8,9,36]. Due to these features, series-
parallel HEV has been the choice of many car makers in recent
years [36].
The main objective in the development of HEVs is to reduce
fuel consumption and tailpipe emission. However, trying to
achieve these ultimate goals alone is meaningless if vehicle per-
formance and drivability are not taken into account. After all, these
are the most demanded features that could sway potential cus-
tomers away if it is not done right. Here is where an efficient EMS
plays its role as the deciding factor on how a HEV will perform and
achieve its objectives, usually by determining the optimal trade-
offs between these competing interests [10]. EMS design for HEV
has come a long way since the early years of HEV development. In
this paper, several EMS from recent years are separated into sub-
categories and reviewed which will hopefully become the foun-
dation for the process of designing the state-of-the-art EMS sui-
table for the proposed TtR HEV.
The core for EMS developments is established on several gen-
eral rule-of-thumbs, comprising the optimization in the operation
of both ICE and electrical drivetrain of HEVs. On top of being
downsized in comparison to the other conventional vehicles in its
class, the ICE side of HEVs has gone through a number of inno-
vations such as; (i) they are set to operate at their most efficient
region for the majority of the time to give a significant headroom
advantage in terms of fuel consumption thus resulting in lower
tailpipe emission, (ii) minimization of engine dynamics by the
reduction of fluctuating operating points through regulations of
the ICE operating speed, (iii) reduction of idle time to minimize
unnecessary fuel burning, and (iv) ON/OFF times optimization to
fully take advantage of the dual power sources [8]. On the elec-
trical drivetrain side, the basics in achieving the objectives of HEV
depends on; (i) the rations of battery SoC both to prolong the
battery life and to allow the EM to work efficiently when needed,
(ii) optimization in the EM’s operating point based on the pre-
ferred region on the torque-speed plane, and (iii) intensification of
regenerative braking to maximize energy regeneration based on
driver’s behaviour [8]. In this paper, nine recent proposals on
various EMS were selected from the ScienceDirect and IEEExplore
databases and categorized into online and offline category. The
Author took the liberty to extract their contributions along with
their selected methods on handling the fuel consumption, emis-
sion and drivability problems.
The earliest method of EMS for HEVs used the simple rule-
based concept. Vehicle operating points are dictated based on a
certain set of rules that may consist of several parameters such as
vehicle or engine speed and driver’s torque demand. The advan-
tages of the rule-based EMS are their low cost, simplicity in
execution due to small computational requirement and the ability
to perform in real-time. Although it does keep up to the task, the
resultant performance is usually far from optimum and leaves a lot
to be desired due to the inflexibility of the pre-defined rules [10].
Researchers have adopted fuzzy-logic methods to enhance the
performance of rule-based EMS [13,49,50]. Fuzzy logic-based
controllers use decision-making based on look-up tables to com-
pensate for inexact measurements. This contributes to a wider
range of operating point selection allowing for a more efficient
operation of the EMS. They are more robust in nature and are
easily tuneable to include an assortment of parameters and vari-
ables for a desired performance target [10]. Real-time or online
EMS has its benefits of being easy to implement and are capable of
reacting to the sudden changes in driving conditions or HEV
operating environments. Here are some of the most recent online
EMS approaches.
2.1. Online energy management strategy
Huang et al. proposed an intelligent multi-feature statistical
approach that is able to distinguish different driving conditions to
create multiple sub-models that are used to select the best control
strategy [11]. This model boasts fast and accurate computation and
is able discriminate the conditions in real-time. With the help of
machine learning, the proposed system is able to collect driving
data and mine multiple features that have significant impact to the
HEV performance. The process runs throughout the HEV operation
mode and dynamically selects the best control option corre-
sponding to the driving condition that yields the best performance
[11]. Another method proposed by Murphey et al. uses intelligent
energy controllers that are trained with machine learning frame-
work [16]. These controllers are able to formulate the best ratio of
engine power and battery power in real-time to minimize the fuel
consumption while satisfying the driver's demand and system
constraints [16]. Optimal power split results with multiple initial
SoC and single ending points obtained from a dynamic program-
ming optimization algorithm are used to train the controller for
the best result [16].
EMS determines the amounts of energy generated, stored and
consumed in every single powertrain components. The approach
by Di Cairano et al. focuses on the improvement of the powertrain
efficiency using online EMS controller [17]. The method applied
involves the use of the energy stored in the ESS not only for
operating the EM but also to help smoothen the engine transients
that results from the switching between different operating points
in a series HEV. This is made possible with the assist of model
predictive control (MPC) algorithm integrated in the heart of the
engine control unit [17]. MPC is an effective scheme to control a
system that is subjected by input and limitations where the right
balance between the competing control objectives is crucial to the
performance of the system [17,18]. Driver’s behaviour is a big
contributing factor to the overall performance of any EMS but
modelling structures of driver’s behaviour is currently still under-
developed. This motivated Di Cairano et al. to propose another
 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
MPC based EMS paired with machine learning that is driver-aware
[18]. It combines the on-board learning of a representative driver’s
behaviour and situational-based approach for stochastic optimi-
zation using quadratic programming [18]. Driver's behaviour is a
ubiquitous aspect that varies from one driver to another but the
approach of stochastic model predictive control with learning
(SMPCL) is to model the changes in driver’s behaviour based on
the appropriate responds towards the changes in driving envir-
onment [18]. Thanks to quadratic programming the SMPCL is able
to handle a larger state dimension models compared to dynamic
programming while reconfiguring in real-time to act in response
to the changes in driver’s behaviour [18]. Zhang et al. proposed a
multi-objective approach using instantaneous cost functions
deployed in a parallel HEV that uses varying-domain method to
dynamically switch the priority of the objectives depending on
current vehicle state [19]. The multi-objective problem is trans-
formed into non-linear programming problem and genetic algo-
rithm (GA) is used to find the subsequent optimal solution [19].
The only drawback of rule-based and fuzzy logic-based EMS is
that they are not optimized for a specific drive cycle. HEVs could
perform at a higher level of efficiency if a full knowledge of the
driving conditions is obtained and synthesized beforehand [14].
The idea is to extract as many important features and information
that may influence the performance of a HEV as possible, to gen-
erate a global optimal solution specifically for the selected drive
cycle [14]. These features and information range from traffic con-
ditions to geographical data down to the specific driver torque
demand for the entire journey. Data regarding the trip can be
obtained using various modern tools such as Global Positioning
System (GPS), Geographical Information System (GIS), Intelligent
Traffic System (ITS) and historical driving data. These abundance of
information are used to derive the global optimal solution for a
specific drive cycle. The most commonly used technique is
dynamic programming [12,51,52]. The downside of optimization
through dynamic programming is the heavy burden of calculation
that is time consuming which makes it almost impossible to be
deployed as an online controller. In addition, due to heavy reliance
on future information, global optimal results obtained from
dynamic programming are usually not the reflection of the HEV
performance in real life. They are usually used as benchmarks for
EMS development for best possible outcome [13]. However, results
obtained from dynamic programming and its properties have led
to the derivation of various other methods of EMS. For example,
global optimal solution from dynamic programming is always
used as the material for machine learning and neural network
training [30,53]. EMS that use dynamic programming and its
equivalents that rely on future information are known as
optimization-based EMS and this type of EMS controllers is usually
deployed off-line to give room for more intense calculations to
take place. Recent examples of off-line controllers are listed below.
2.2. Off-line energy management strategy
Zhang et al. presented an EMS using fuzzy multi-objective
optimization for parallel HEVs [13]. The approach taken here is by
converting the energy consumption of the EM into the equivalent
fuel consumption. Consequently, the whole fuel economy and
emission problems are treated as optimization goals [13]. The
optimization algorithm will then simulate the total fuel con-
sumption and emission for the designated trip. Based on the
optimal solution, a portion from the fuel consumption figure will
be translated back into equivalent electrical energy in accordance
to the available SoC allowance to achieve overall better fuel
economy compared to rule-based and fuzzy logic-based con-
trollers [13]. The next proposed method by Borhan et al. intro-
duced a second EM/generator through a torque coupler connected
1437
to the vehicle driveline, providing two degrees-of-freedom for
EMS operation [14]. MPC method is used with a new approximate
cost-to-go function that corresponds to the deviation in the SoC,
embedded into the fuel minimization problem [14]. The EMS is
divided into supervisory and low level controllers respectively to
compromise the complexity of the problem, each controlling their
own set of parameters [14]. As a non-linear MPC-based controller,
each sampling time will take account for current system state and
torque demand prediction appropriate to current vehicle speed
over a predicted horizon [14]. The optimal power-split ratio is
decided upon these predicted states to form an EMS that is both
systematic and highly predictive in nature.
Samanta et al. proposed an EMS designed as an optimization
problem that uses particle swarm optimization (PSO) and some of
its hybrids to find the global optimal result [15]. This method is the
first known application of PSO in EMS design and is currently
limited to off-line implementation due to the time-consuming
nature of PSO but the method is said to be applicable to HEV, PHEV
and also EV [15]. Keulen et al. presented a numerical solution
algorithm that rephrases constrained optimal control problem into
a sequence of unconstrained counterpart [52]. The algorithm is
able to calculate the global optimal power-split curve with a
magnitude of calculations lesser than required by dynamic pro-
gramming for the similar pre-defined power and velocity target
[52]. Although the result from the numerical solution is a mere
approximate equivalent of the original problem, with the appro-
priate grid size of quantization, the proposed method exhibits
superior accuracy compared to dynamic programming [52].
The previous review on online and offline EMS for HEV selected
from recent publications can be summarized as in Table 1.
Up to this point, it is acknowledged that the overall perfor-
mance of the deployed EMS in HEVs is heavily influenced by not
only their configuration of choice but also their approach towards
the EMS design itself. Some methods have been shown to show-
case vast improvements in fuel consumption and tailpipe emis-
sion, but they are almost always developed around a certain
configuration and most probably will not exhibit the same level of
performance if alterations are to be made within its given working
environment. These alterations may consist of the change in types
and sizing of components, modification to the configurations and
most importantly, the whimsical real-time driving conditions and
driving behaviours that are infinitely varied [39]. However, this
actually serves as a huge motivation for researchers to keep
moving forward to further improve HEV performance based on
their own perspective of the problem.
There is also another factor that has to be taken into con-
sideration during EMS development which is the level of hybri-
disation of the said HEV. HEVs can be classified from mild to
strong class depending on the downsizing of the ICE as opposed to
the upsizing of the electrical powertrain [9,44]. Mild hybrid has
smaller electrical powertrain, usually incapable to propel the
vehicle independently. The electrical powertrain only acts in
assisting the ICE for a small injection of torque. The ICE is the main
source of torque and operates as in conventional vehicles most of
the time and could be turned OFF only temporarily during a short
stop and go, under braking or coasting [44]. The implementation is
low cost and simpler while providing high level of vehicle per-
formance but the fuel economy and emission are almost indiffer-
ent to conventional vehicles. On the other hand, most HEVs
available on the market nowadays fall under the strong hybrid
class with their electrical drivetrain sized moderately enough to
offer significantly better fuel economy and emission [44]. How-
ever, there is a limit on how far the level of hybridisation is
allowed to be stretched due to the concern of ending up with an
electrical powertrain so big and heavy that it will affect the overall
performance of the vehicle. However, this next revolution in HEV
1438 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
Table 1
Summary on recent EMS for HEV.
References Modelling approach
Huang et al. [11] Statistical analysis and machine learning with
Neural Network (Parallel HEV)
Murphey et al. Machine learning framework using optimal
[16] solution from dynamic programming (Series–
Parallel HEV)
Di Cairano et al. Model predictive control with power smoothing
[17] algorithm(Series HEV)
Di Cairano et al. Stochastic model predictive control and
[18] machine learning with quadratic programming
(Series HEV)
Zhang et al. [19] Multi-objective non-linear programming and
Genetic Algorithm (Parallel HEV)
Zhang et al. [13] Fuzzy multi-objective optimization (Parallel
HEV)
Borhan et al. [14] Non-linear model predictive control(Series–
Parallel HEV)
Samanta et al. [15] Particle swarm optimization (Series–Parallel
HEV)
Keulen et al. [52] Numerical solution algoritm (Parallel HEV)
technology has allowed the level of hybridisation well beyond the
strong class of HEVs. It is the succeeding step towards fully
emission-free vehicles, allowing connection to the grid and it is
called the PHEV.
3. Plug-in HEV (PHEV) influence
PHEV is the most recent breakthrough in HEV development that
has taken the world by storm. It is perceived as a step closer to truly
emission-free vehicles, enhancing the current advantages of HEV by
reintroducing the most desired feature of pure EV on top of it. This
feature is the ability to drive using the all-electric mode for the first
few kilometres for a totally fuel and emission free drive [33,34].
Unlike conventional HEVs, PHEVs allow its ESS to be charged using
the outlets from the grids. The main alteration in design that dif-
ferentiates a PHEV than a conventional HEV is the electrical drive-
train that serves as the primary source of energy and traction [9,20].
When fully charged, PHEVs can be driven exclusively using the
energy stored in the ESS for a certain distance before it switches to
the normal HEV mode to replenish the SoC of the battery [9,20,33].
This all-electric drive range is known as the AER and it depends on
the size of the on-board ESS. It is a significant augmentation from
the conventional concept as HEV users will now be able to have
100% emission free vehicles if they are driving within the AER most
of the time, given that their vehicles are fully charged before each
trip [20,33]. They also do not have the qualms of their vehicles
running out of charge during long distance driving because a PHEV
operates just like a normal HEV when its AER is exceeded [46,39].
This is proven to be an instrumental feature and a huge selling point
for PHEVs that can help further accelerate the degree of adoption of
green vehicles [48].
Major findings
i. Automatically discriminates driving condition in real-time. Online energy manage-
ii. Fast computation time for online implementation ment strategy
i. Three online intelligent energy controller was proposed
ii. High performance regardless of initial SoC value
iii. Increased fuel saving ranging between 5%-19% depending on
roadway type and congestion level
i. Improved powertrain efficiency by regulating engine transients
ii. Low computational burden for online implementation
iii. Improved fuel consumption over rule-based EMS
i. Driver-aware energy management controller
ii. Quadratic programming handles larger state dimension models
while reconfiguring in real-time depending on changes in dri-
ver’s behaviour
i. Varying-domain method used to switch priority of objectives
based on current vehicle state
ii. Flexible EMS over different driving condition.
i. Optimization algorithm simulated total fuel consumption trea- Offline energy manage-
ted as optimization goal. ment strategy
ii. A portion of simulated fuel consumption translated over to
equivalent electrical energy based on available SoC
iii. Improved fuel consumption over rule-based and fuzzy logic-
based EMS
i. Introduction of a second EM/generator for added degrees-of-
freedom
ii. EMS division into supervisory and low level controllers
iii. Systematic and highly predictive EMS
i. First known PSO application in HEV
ii. Optimization problem applicable across HEV, PHEV and also EV.
i. Global optimal power-split curve calculation with lesser com-
putational requirement compared to dynamic programming
ii. Highly accurate equivalent approximation of optimization com-
pared to dynamic programming
The intervention of PHEVs into the HEV scene has brought a
new dimension to EMS design philosophy. Conventional HEVs only
permit operation in CS mode but PHEVs allow CD mode operation
on top of CS mode [20,39]. The main issue in CS mode operation in
conventional HEVs is the small margin of SoC that the EMS can
fully take advantage of. This is because the SoC preservation is
done using the on-board charging mechanism powered by the ICE
by burning precious fuel from the tank. Consuming available
portion of fuel to fully charge the ESS is seen as a counter-
productive measure because it leads to higher fuel consumption
and resulting in lower EMS efficiency. As prevention, existing EMS
approaches allow only a minor diversion of torque from the ICE to
be used, enough to sustain the SoC of the battery, not fully char-
ging it. That is why it is very important to harvest as much energy
as possible with regenerative braking to help charge the ESS.
PHEVs offer a solution to this problem by replacing the substantial
amount of fuel that would have been used to fully charge the
battery with energy source from the grid [33]. Not only this pro-
vides a wider window of SoC for an optimum EMS operation, it
also opens up a whole new level of flexibility for the design of the
EMS itself. Although this added layer of flexibility has made the
EMS design more complex, it is worth the extra efforts because the
AER of PHEVs greatly improves fuel economy and consequently
tones down tailpipe emission even further [20,33,39]. In this
paper, EMS for PHEVs from recent years are reviewed. The influ-
ence of the external charging capability and AER value on EMS
design, which are better suited for PHEVs are also included into
consideration.
Being rechargeable using the socket outlet from the grid does
not change the fact that PHEVs are fundamentally just HEVs with
oversized electrical drivetrain. Therefore, aside from the addition of
AER into consideration, it is just logical to expect that the evolution
of EMS design for PHEVs will be minimal from conventional HEVs.
 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
Although this might be true to some extent where there are
methods proposed for PHEVs that are basically expansions of EMS
for conventional HEVs, the extra room of flexibility granted by the
plug-in charging has spun several other methods previously not
incorporated in EMS design for conventional HEVs [39]. Some of
these fresher techniques that will be discussed shortly are the
results of the ability to use deep discharge batteries as ESS in PHEVs
[20,33]. Deep discharge batteries differ from conventional batteries
in their capability to be discharged deeper without being damaged.
This is a huge feat as deep discharge batteries are impractical in
conventional HEVs due to being limited to on-board charging and
deep discharge batteries usually have lower charging efficiency
which will greatly affect the HEV performance [33]. With PHEVs,
this could be twisted as an advantage that will allow for larger
portion of the battery charge to be usable by the EMS resulting in
greater AER. As far as hardware level modification is concerned,
there are still several other techniques that can be applied in PHEV
design consideration that will further enhance its potential but they
will not be discussed further in this paper[54–59].
Some of the most recent approaches that mimic the EMS for
conventional HEVs impose no significant changes to the hierarchy
of the primary energy source for the vehicle, which means they
still treat the ICE as the main source of propulsion. The EM only
exclusively drive the car under a certain speed threshold which is
now higher than that of conventional HEVs, thanks to the bigger
electrical drivetrain [20]. Another example is using the engine ON/
OFF control to only shut off the ICE when the speed of the vehicle
is less than the electrical launch speed and during negative torque
demand [20]. There are also similar contribution using optimiza-
tion approach via stochastic dynamic programming that optimizes
its operation based on multiple drive cycles to ration SoC by
mixing the torque from both ICE and EM. This, results in blended
CD mode operation that optimizes ICE operating point and mini-
mize CS mode operation time once the SoC has reached the
determined low value which takes significantly longer than the
AER focused EMS [24]. The next EMS approach utilizes analytical
method designed around blended mode operation, which dictates
the optimal minimum engine power is the supervisory aspect to
achieve optimal fuel consumption based on a certain ESS energy
depletion target [28]. Chen et al. proposed an intelligent online
energy management controller that consists of two neural net-
work modules, trained based on optimized results obtained via
dynamic programming that considers trip length and duration
[30]. The aim is to further improve fuel economy of PHEVs by
selecting the most suitable neural network module depending on
the drive cycle [30].
Similar with conventional HEVs, a priori knowledge can come a
long way to further improve EMS performance. Wu G. et al. pro-
posed a method using full knowledge of real-time vehicle position
and traffic conditions [31]. The traffic conditions that are obtained
with the use of intelligent transportation system is able to synthe-
size down to the vehicle speed projection based on a selected path,
to impose a specific charge depleting control strategy for the trip to
maximize fuel economy [31]. Yu et al. also propose a similar trip-
oriented EMS that uses a feedback control system that optimize
power demand distribution and power delivery split with a certain
target [32]. The EMS pre-plans optimal energy consumption policy
for a known trip by controlling fuel to electricity usage ratio that
will be enforced for the entire trip with minimal losses [32].
Some of recent examples of EMS that take full advantage of
bigger electrical drivetrain in PHEVs include blended control
strategy that combines CD mode operation with ICE propulsion
until the SoC reaches the low threshold point before switching to
CS mode operation [20]. This method allows for smooth and
steady discharging of the ESS that puts less strain on the battery
and can contribute to longer battery life. The torque split between
1439
the ICE and EM are also more evenly distributed compared to
conventional HEVs allowing for higher efficiency operation of the
ICE and thanks to the initial CD mode operation, the amount of
fuel used for charging the ESS is significantly less. Another
example of EMS focusing on CD mode operation is deployed in
companion with modern global positioning system (GPS) tracking,
intelligent traffic system (ITS) and geographical information sys-
tem (GIS) to accurately define current position and state of vehicle
[21]. Information obtained using these devices and a pre-set des-
tination will be used as input for an advanced traffic-flow mod-
elling technique that will generate a unique power flow manage-
ment for the defined destination so that the SoC will fall to a
specific terminal value when destination is reached [21]. The
accuracy of the generated power flow management is improved
using historical traffic information analysed with dynamic pro-
gramming algorithm [21].
Tara et al. apply fuzzy logic to define a new quantity called the
battery working state (BWS) which are derived from the terminal
voltage of the battery and its SoC [22]. The BWS acts as an cau-
tionary measure to make sure the battery is safe from over dis-
charging due to erroneous estimation of SoC and is used by the
fuzzy logic based EMS instead of SoC value to decide on the power
split between the ICE and EM based on the power demand from
the driver [22]. While the previous EMS focuses of battery health,
the approach by Stockar et al. decide the power split based on total
CO2 dispersed by the utilization of vehicle either directly or
indirectly [26]. Another EMS implementation for PHEVs that is
notable to be listed adopts a simplified mathematical model with
CD mode operation that monitors the SoC depletion under con-
stant vehicle speed [27]. Only the total trip distance is needed for
the formulation of the power flow management with the electrical
drivetrain serves as the primary source of propulsion. The engine
will be turned on when the demand of power exceeds a certain
value [27]. This is done to limit the mechanical power output of
the EM within a certain limit to allow for extended use of the
power from the ESS.
As revealed in this section, the introduction of PHEVs has cer-
tainly made a tremendous effect on the EMS design and more
importantly the efficiency and fuel economy of HEVs by the inte-
gration of external charging using the grid. AER certainly is the
decisive point on deciding between which technology suits the
consumer’s needs best. For people mostly driving short distances
or just within the local area, a PHEV is the undisputed option as it
will provide the best fuel economy out of the two. However for
those who constantly drive long distances, a PHEV might not be
the best option because a conventional HEV has higher efficiency
in CS mode operation compared to a PHEV due to the smaller
electrical powertrain contributing to lighter overall package. HEVs
and PHEVs have been discussed throughout the paper and their
respective advantages and disadvantages are well documented.
Both are still undergoing further developments simultaneously
and there is no doubt that we will witness better implementations
of EMS and higher performing HEVs coming out in the near future.
However the aim of this paper is to lead the way for the TtR HEV
concept, and it is hoped that the merits and demerits of the
aforementioned technologies will be the underlying foundation of
the next HEV technology toward its fruition into production.
4. Paving ways for TtR HEV concept
A TtR HEV with IWMs is a relatively new concept in vehicular
technology. As the matter of writing, there are but little materials
available on breakthroughs in TtR HEV design including EMS
approach fitted for such technology. This still uncharted territory
appeals as a big opportunity for new discoveries waiting to be
1440 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
exploited. However, many fundamental questions that are relevant
to the research area still not answered by the global research
community. This paper will attempt to provide revelations to
possible workarounds to the tangible limitations in TtR HEVs
developments.
4.1. Design
By concept, TtR HEVs fall under parallel HEV category which
means, in theory, the vehicle can be driven either by the ICE or the
IWMs together or independently. The only major difference
between a TtR HEV and a conventional parallel HEV is in the
absence of physical connection between the mechanical path and
electrical path [9]. This makes the complex torque coupling device
unnecessary and inherently warrants a simpler and cheaper
implementation of parallel HEVs. The advantage of this config-
uration is the 4-wheel drive capability that provides stability to
the vehicle and it also offers exceptional acceleration [9]. Another
advantage of this feature is the prospect to retrofit any conven-
tional ICE vehicles and transform them into HEVs [60,61]. The
prospect of transforming current ICE vehicles into TtR HEV poise as
an excellent motivation for consumers to start embracing greener
vehicles at a reasonable cost considerably lower than buying a
whole new vehicle. However it is not seen as an enticing prospect
for car manufacturers unless radical measures and policies are
imposed.
The trade-off for the simpler architecture is the lower efficiency
for ESS charging compared to conventional HEVs, since the extra
torque needed to recharge the ESS is supplied from the ICE
externally through the contact with the surface of the road and
limited only when the vehicle is in motion. Even with the assist
from regenerative braking, the amount of energy that can be
harvested internally is significantly less than a conventional HEV.
The result is a much smaller window for optimum EMS operation
and reduced amount of electrical energy supply for the EM which
will affect the HEV performance target. However, if PHEV design is
to be adopted here, the SoC allowance will no longer be such a
problem. The external charging feature will provide sufficient
amount of energy for a TtR HEV to perform at its highest efficiency.
Conventionally, a TtR HEV, also known as separate axle parallel
HEV, is designed with an EM propelling the rear axle of the vehicle
to drive the rear wheels. This configuration provides propulsion
for the vehicle through two independent transmissions compared
to only one in conventional HEV. The emphasis is on a big EM that
is capable of an output power enough to turn the axle which will
in turn, spin the wheels. This mechanism results in system loss
due to the extra power needed to initialize vehicle movement and
during acceleration. By taking advantage of the separate axle
transmission, instead of a big EM turning the axle, smaller and
highly efficient EMs are fitted in the rear wheels as IWMs to
provide propulsion power directly to the wheels to lower the
system loss. The smaller IWMs also have the advantage of being
lighter than conventional EM giving a TtR HEV the much needed
advantage in terms of the mass of the vehicle. The smaller size also
means that IWMs are theoretically gentler to the ESS, coupled with
PHEV architecture, will grant a longer CD mode operation.
4.2. Energy management strategy and performance
The key to a successful deployment of TtR HEVs lies in the EMS
design. The real performance of the EMS will remain as theoretical
until the real model is constructed and simulations or experi-
mental works are done extensively. However, hypothetically a TtR
HEV is conceived as having a great potential to deliver desired
level of performance. This reflection is based on the studies done
on various types of HEV, their EMS implementations and the
knowledge regarding their advantages and disadvantages. The
major problem is due to the unavailability of information that is
only measurable in the future, such as trip distance, vehicle speed,
driving behaviour, road conditions, weather, etc. An energy man-
agement controller can only determine an optimal power flow
strategy if the above information of an entire future trip is avail-
able in advance. Although current technology level has allowed for
very detail terrain preview and real-time traffic information
updates [62], other attributes such as driver’s actions and changes
in weather conditions that affect vehicle operations are unfa-
thomable beforehand. This impossibility immediately warrants for
an energy management control strategy that is independent of the
future information. Currently, PHEV is the obvious route to be
taken as it patches up the major drawback of the TtR HEV concept.
At the same time, the external charging allows for bigger ESS with
higher energy density to be fitted thanks to the reduced weight
and the extra room left behind by the decision to use IWMs
instead of a conventional EM.
The performance of IWMs is also yet to be observed and it is
important to see how they fare against a conventional EM in
producing the torque required for propulsion. To put less strain on
the IWMs, the preferred EMS approach would be blended CD
mode operation with both ICE and IWMs driving the car simul-
taneously. Although this will eliminate the emission-free AER from
the equation, this strategy will still be able to offer exceptional fuel
consumption and most importantly a farther CD mode operation
in a system with favourable advantages of having high energy
density ESS and smaller IWMs to begin with. Vehicle performance
or drivability is also easier to be preserved this way because the
core of the vehicle operation will not be bottlenecked by any
singular factor. If the vehicle operation consists of mainly short
distance journeys, this will allow for a longer period between the
need of recharging.
There are definitely still ways available to improve the perfor-
mance indicator of TtR HEVs and the potential is just as promising
if not even better than conventional HEVs. Development and
experimental setup is currently undergoing progress and hope-
fully the hypotheses can be proven and desired performance tar-
get is achievable in the near future.
5. Conclusion
With the impending energy crisis due to the depletion in world
fuel reserves and dwindling environmental conditions, the intro-
duction of HEVs into the market is seen as a huge contributing
factor to the lift of awareness towards environmentally friendly
vehicles. It is a proven technology that is already available out
there and with the steady growth in adoption rate and increased
emphasis by car manufacturers, the technology is becoming more
affordable and accessible than ever. HEV is the bridge that con-
nects to the future of emission-free vehicles and steady progresses
made in the field are certainly pointing in the right direction with
improvements in EMS design and the embracement of PHEV
technology. TtR HEV is a relatively fresh aperture in the field and is
still underdeveloped. The challenges associated with the TtR HEV
include lower efficiency compared to a conventional HEV and
underdeveloped EMS. However, further research and under-
standing of the vehicle technology will hopefully eradicate those
inadequacies and in turn, will increase its chances to be the con-
figuration of choice for manufacturers and consumers alike.
 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Grant
Scheme (R.J130000.7823.4F273) from the Ministry of Higher
Education, Malaysia and the eScienceFund (R.J130000.7923.4S100)
from the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation Malaysia.
The authors would like to thank Md Ridzuan Md Yusof, Head of
Technology & Innovation Strategy, Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional
Sdn. Bhd. (PROTON) for his valuable input.
References
[1] Mohr SH, Wang J, Ellem G, Ward J, Giurco D. Projection of world fossil fuels by
country. Fuel 2015;141:120–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.10.030.
[2] Sorrell S, Speirs J, Bentley R, Miller R, Thompson E. Shaping the global oil peak: a
review of the evidence on field sizes, reserve growth, decline rates and depletion
rates. Energy 2012;37:709–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.10.010.
[3] Sorrell S, Speirs J, Bentley R, Brandt A, Miller R. Global oil depletion: a review
of the evidence. Energy Policy 2010;38:5290–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2010.04.046.
[4] Sorrell S, Miller R, Bentley R, Speirs J. Oil futures: a comparison of global
supply forecasts. Energy Policy 2010;38:4990–5003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.enpol.2010.04.020.
[5] Owen NA, Inderwildi OR, King DA. The status of conventional world oil
reserves-Hype or cause for concern? Energy Policy 2010;38:4743–9. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.02.026.
[6] Mathews J a. The renewable energies technology surge: a new techno-
economic paradigm in the making? Futures 2013;46:10–22. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.futures.2012.12.001.
[7] Stigka EK, Paravantis J a, Mihalakakou GK. Social acceptance of renewable
energy sources: A review of contingent valuation applications. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2014;32:100–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.026.
[8] Liu W. Introduction to hybrid vehicle system modeling and control. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1002/9781118407400.
[9] Husain I. Electric and hybrid vehicles: design fundamentals. Florida: CRC
Press; 2011.
[10] Salmasi FR. Control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles: evolution, classifi-
cation, comparison, and future trends. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2007;56:2393–
404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2007.899933.
[11] Huang X, Tan Y, He X. An intelligent multifeature statistical approach for the
discrimination of driving conditions of a hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans Intell
Transp Syst 2011;12:453–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2010.2093129.
[12] Opila DF, Wang X, McGee R, Gillespie RB, Cook J a, Grizzle JW. An energy
management controller to optimally trade off fuel economy and drivability for
hybrid vehicles. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2012;20:1490–505. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2011.2168820.
[13] Zhang Y, Liu H-P. Fuzzy multi-objective control strategy for parallel hybrid
electric vehicle. IET Electr Syst Transp 2012;2:39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/
iet-est.2011.0041.
[14] Borhan H, Vahidi A, Phillips AM, Kuang ML, Kolmanovsky IV, Cairano S Di.
MPC-based energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle.
Control Syst Technol IEEE Trans 2012;20:593–603.
[15] Panigrahi SP, Panigrahi BK, Samanta CK, Padhy SK. Hybrid swarm intelligence
methods for energy management in hybrid electric vehicles. IET Electr Syst
Transp 2013;3:22–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-est.2012.0009.
[16] Murphey Y, Park J, Kiliaris L. Intelligent hybrid vehicle power control—part II:
online intelligent energy management. Veh Technol IEEE Trans 2013;62:69–79.
[17] Di Cairano S, Liang W, Kolmanovsky IV, Kuang ML, Phillips AM. Power
smoothing energy management and its application to a series hybrid power
train. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2013;21:2091–103. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/TCST.2012.2218656.
[18] Cairano S, Di, Bernardini D, Bemporad A, Kolmanovsky IV. Stochastic MPC with
learning for driver-predictive vehicle control and its application to hev energy
management. Control Syst Technol IEEE Trans 2014;22:1018–31.
[19] Zhang Y, Liu H, Guo Q. Varying-domain optimal management strategy for
parallel hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2014;63:603–16. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2013.2276432.
[20] Ehsani M. Design and control methodology of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE
Trans Ind Electron 2010;57:633–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2009.2027918.
[21] Gong Q, Li Y, Peng Z. Trip-based optimal power management of plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles. Veh Technol IEEE Trans 2008;57:3393–401.
[22] Tara E, Shahidinejad S, Filizadeh S, Bibeau E. Battery storage sizing in a ret-
rofitted plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2010;59:2786–
94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2010.2046659.
[23] Li SG, Sharkh SM, Walsh FC, Zhang CN. Energy and battery management of a
plug-in series hybrid electric vehicle using fuzzy logic. IEEE Trans Veh Technol
2011;60:3571–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2165571.
[24] Moura SJ, Fathy HK, Callaway DS, Stein JL. A stochastic optimal control approach
for power management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Control
Syst Technol 2011;19:545–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2010.2043736.
1441
[25] Salisa a R, Zhang N, Zhu JG. A comparative analysis of fuel economy and
emissions between a conventional HEV and the UTS PHEV. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol 2011;60:44–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2010.2091156.
[26] Stockar S, Marano V, Canova M, Rizzoni G, Guzzella L. Energy-optimal control
of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles for real-world driving cycles. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol 2011;60:2949–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2158565.
[27] Zhang B, Mi CC, Zhang M. Charge-depleting control strategies and fuel opti-
mization of blended-mode plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol 2011;60:1516–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2122313.
[28] Zhang M, Yang Y, Mi CC. Analytical approach for the power management of
blended-mode plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol
2012;61:1554–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2012.2187318.
[29] Moura SJ, Stein JL, Fathy HK. Battery-health conscious power management in
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles via electrochemical modeling and stochastic
control. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2013;21:679–94. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/TCST.2012.2189773.
[30] Chen Z, Mi CC, Xu J, Member S. Energy management for a power-split plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle based on dynamic programming and neural networks.
IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2014;63:1567–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TVT.2013.2287102.
[31] Wu G, Boriboonsomsin K, Barth MJ. Development and evaluation of an intel-
ligent energy-management strategy for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE
Trans Intell Transp Syst 2014;15:1091–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TITS.2013.2294342.
[32] Yu H, Kuang M, McGee R. Trip-oriented energy management control strategy
for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol
2014;22:1323–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2013.2278684.
[33] Amjad S, Neelakrishnan S, Rudramoorthy R. Review of design considerations
and technological challenges for successful development and deployment of
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:1104–10.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.11.001.
[34] Somayajula D, Meintz A, Ferdowsi M. Designing efficient hybrid electric
vehicles. Veh Technol Mag IEEE 2009;4(2):1.
[35] Pisu P, Rizzoni G. A comparative study of supervisory control strategies for
hybrid electric vehicles. Control Syst Technol IEEE Trans 2007;15:506–18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2007.894649.
[36] Çaǧatay Bayindir K, Gözüküçük MA, Teke A. A comprehensive overview of
hybrid electric vehicle: Powertrain configurations, powertrain control tech-
niques and electronic control units. Energy Convers Manag 2011;52:1305–13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.09.028.
[37] Panday A, Bansal HO. A review of optimal energy management strategies for
hybrid electric vehicle. Int J Veh Technol 2014 2014.
[38] Zhang P, Yan F, Du C. A comprehensive analysis of energy management stra-
tegies for hybrid electric vehicles based on bibliometrics. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;48:88–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.093.
[39] Wirasingha SG, Emadi A. Classification and review of control strategies for
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2011;60:111–22. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2010.2090178.
[40] Kumar L, Jain S. Electric propulsion system for electric vehicular technology: a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;29:924–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2013.09.014.
[41] Torres JL, Gonzalez R, Gimenez a, Lopez J. Energy management strategy for
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. A comparative study. Appl Energy
2014;113:816–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.007.
[42] Hannan M a, Azidin F a, Mohamed a. Hybrid electric vehicles and their chal-
lenges: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;29:135–50. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.097.
[43] Wu G, Zhang X, Dong Z. Powertrain architectures of electrified vehicles:
review, classification and comparison. J Franklin Inst 2006;60, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2014.04.018.
[44] Malikopoulos A a. Supervisory Power management control algorithms for
hybrid electric vehicles: a survey. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 2006;60,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2014.2309674.
[45] Pollet BG, Staffell I, Shang JL. Current status of hybrid, battery and fuel cell
electric vehicles: From electrochemistry to market prospects. Electrochim
Acta 2012;84:235–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.03.172.
[46] Egbue O, Long S. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: an
analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy 2012;48:717–
29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009.
[47] Axsen J, Kurani KS, Burke A. Are batteries ready for plug-in hybrid buyers?
Transp Policy 2010;17:173–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.01.004.
[48] Axsen J, Kurani KS. Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric – What do car buyers want?
Energy Policy 2013;61:532–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.122.
[49] Pusca R, Ait-Amirat Y, Berthon A, Kauffmann J.-M. Fuzzy-logic-based control
applied to a hybrid electric vehicle with four separate wheel drives, In: Pro-
ceedings of IEE on Control Theory and Applications. 2004; vol. 151: p. 73–81.
[50] Syed FU, Kuang ML, Smith M, Okubo S, Ying H. Fuzzy gain-scheduling pro-
portional-integral control for improving engine power and speed behavior in
a hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2009;58:69–84. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2008.923690.
[51] Koot M, Kessels JTB a, de Jager B, WPMH Heemels, Van den Bosch PPJ, Steinbuch
M. Energy management strategies for vehicular electric power systems. Veh
Technol IEEE Trans 2005;54:771–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2005.847211.
[52] Van Keulen T, Gillot J, de Jager B, Steinbuch M. Solution for state constrained
optimal control problems applied to power split control for hybrid vehicles.
Automatica 2013;50:187–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2013.09.039.
1442 M.F. M. Sabri et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 1433–1442
[53] Murphey YL, Kuang ML, Masrur M a, Phillips a M. Intelligent hybrid vehicle
power control—part I: machine learning of optimal vehicle power. IEEE Trans
Veh Technol 2012;61:3519–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2012.2206064.
[54] Emadi a. A new battery/ultracapacitor hybrid energy storage system for
electric, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Power Elec-
tron 2012;27:122–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2011.2151206.
[55] Amjadi Z, Williamson SS. Power-electronics-based solutions for plug-in hybrid
electric vehicle energy storage and management systems. IEEE Trans Ind
Electron 2010;57:608–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2009.2032195.
[56] Amjadi Z, Williamson SS. Prototype design and controller implementation for
a battery-ultracapacitor hybrid electric vehicle energy storage system. IEEE
Trans Smart Grid 2012;3:332–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2011.2161623.
[57] Yoo H, Sul S, Park Y, Jeong J. System integration and power-flow management
for a series hybrid electric vehicle using supercapacitors and batteries. IEEE
Trans Ind Appl 2008;44:108–14.
[58] Vahidi a. Route preview in energy management of plug-in hybrid vehicles.
IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2012;20:546–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TCST.2011.2115242.
[59] Mapelli FL, Tarsitano D, Mauri M. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle: modeling,
prototype realization, and inverter losses reduction analysis. IEEE Trans Ind
Electron 2010;57:598–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2009.2029520.
[60] Mathews JC, Walp KJ, Molen GM. Development and implementation of a
control system for a parallel hybrid Powertrain. n.d.
[61] Moghbeli H, Fuzzy energy control strategy of through-to-road hybrid electric
vehicle. 2014: 1660–1665.
[62] Chen Z, Vahidi a, Pisu P, Xiaopeng L, Tennant K. Role of terrain preview in
energy management of hybrid electric vehicles. Veh Technol IEEE Trans
2010;59:1139–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2009.2038707.