Research Papers

Distributed Supervisory Controller Design for Battery Swapping Modularity in Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles

[+] Author and Article Information
Shifang Li

 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125sfli@umich.edu

Ilya V. Kolmanovsky

 Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2140ilya@umich.edu

A. Galip Ulsoy

 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125ulsoy@umich.edu

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 134(4), 041013 (May 07, 2012) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006214 History: Received March 27, 2011; Revised January 05, 2012; Published May 04, 2012; Online May 07, 2012

A distributed supervisory controller is proposed to achieve battery component swapping modularity (CSM) for a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). The CSM permits the designer to distribute a part of the supervisory controller to the battery module such that the PHEV can use a range of batteries while providing corresponding optimal fuel economy. A novel feedback-based controller for the charge sustaining mode is proposed to facilitate distributed controller design for battery CSM. The method based on sensitivity analysis of the control signals with respect to the battery hardware parameter is introduced to define the controller distribution architecture. The distributed controller gains are obtained by solving a bilevel optimization problem using the collaborative optimization and the augmented Lagrangian decomposition methods. The simulation results demonstrate that the proposed distributed controller can achieve battery CSM without compromising fuel economy compared to the centralized control case.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Diagram of the PHEV model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Engine fuel consumption map (g/W/h)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

EPA US06 driving cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The saturated non-negative wheel power command for the vehicle with battery 3 (Bs  = 2.57 × 10−5 ) and corresponding optimal controller to follow the US06 cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

An example power split between the engine and the battery for the vehicle with battery 3 (Bs  = 2.57 × 10−5 ) and corresponding optimal centralized controller over the US06 cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Battery SoC profiles for each vehicle configuration with different batteries and corresponding optimal centralized controllers over the US06 cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Diagram of the vehicle components showing the distributed supervisory controller (compared to the centralized controller in Fig. 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

The fourth order polynomial fit of the centralized controller gains

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Normalized sensitivity of the controller gains with respect to the battery parameter

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

The bidirectional communication between the VSC and the BSC

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Flowchart for the solution algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Normalized fuel economy comparison between the PHEV with centralized controller and the PHEV with distributed controller that provides battery CSM



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In