This article performs a novel comparison of the life-cycle costs of the series and parallel architectures for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Economic viability is defined as having a payback period less than 2 years and number of battery replacements less than or equal to three over a vehicle life of 12 years along-with drivability and gradability constraints. Economic viability is compared for two plug-in hybrid electric vehicle applications (Medium-duty Truck and Transit Bus) using series and parallel architectures over multiple drivecycles, for three economic scenarios (viz. 2020, 2025 and 2030 where the fuel price, battery price and motor price are varied such that latter scenarios are more favorable for hybridization). One battery overnight recharge is assumed. The results demonstrate that by 2020 the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle transit buses are viable for the duty cycles Manhattan, Orange County, and China (Normal and Aggressive). By 2025, plug-in hybrid electric vehicle Class 6 trucks are viable for all duty cycles considered (Pick-up and delivery, Refuse and New York Composite). The parallel architectures generally require less than 50% of the initial cost of the series architecture, due to smaller motor sizes, driving earlier viability for parallel architectures. The transit bus scenarios generally achieve payback sooner than the medium-duty truck due to higher fuel cost savings, driving earlier viability for transit bus applications.
BayindirKÇGözüküçükMATekeA. A comprehensive overview of hybrid electric vehicle: powertrain configurations, powertrain control techniques and electronic control units. Energ Convers Manage2011; 52: 1305–1313.
2.
ChanCCBouscayrolAChenK. Electric, hybrid, and fuel-cell vehicles: architectures and modeling. IEEE T Veh Technol2010; 59: 589–598.
3.
FreyermuthVFallasERousseauA. Comparison of powertrain configuration for plug-in HEVs from a fuel economy perspective. SAE Int J Engine2009; 1: 392–398.
4.
LiXWilliamsonSS. Comparative investigation of series and parallel hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) efficiencies based on comprehensive parametric analysis. In: 2007 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (VPPC), Arlington, TX, 9–12 September 2007, pp.499–505. New York: IEEE.
5.
VinotETriguiRJeanneretB, et al. HEVs comparison and components sizing using dynamic programming. In: 2007 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (VPPC), Arlington, TX, 9–12 September 2007, pp.314–321. New York: IEEE.
6.
LiXWilliamsonSS. Efficiency and suitability analyses of varied drive train architectures for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) applications. In: 2008 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (VPPC’08), Harbin, China, 3–5 September 2008, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
7.
ZhouXQinDHuJ. Multi-objective optimization design and performance evaluation for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle powertrains. Appl Energ2017; 208: 1608–1625.
8.
TulpulePMaranoVRizzoniG. Effects of different PHEV control strategies on vehicle performance. In: American control conference (ACC’09), St. Louis, MO, 10–12 June 2009, pp.3950–3955. New York: IEEE.
9.
WilliamsonSSWirasinghaSGEmadiA. Comparative investigation of series and parallel hybrid electric drive trains for heavy-duty transit bus applications. In: 2006 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (VPPC’06), Windsor, 6–8 September 2006, pp.1–10. New York: IEEE.
10.
VoraAPJinXHoshingV, et al. Design-space exploration of series plug-in hybrid electric vehicles for medium-duty truck applications in a total cost-of-ownership framework. Appl Energ2017; 202: 662–672.
11.
WangJPurewalJLiuP, et al. Degradation of lithium ion batteries employing graphite negatives and nickel–cobalt–manganese oxide+spinel manganese oxide positives: part 1, aging mechanisms and life estimation. J Power Sources2014; 269: 937–948.
12.
PatilRMKellyJCFilipiZ, et al. A framework for the integrated optimization of charging and power management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE T Veh Technol2013; 62: 2402–2412.
13.
LinC-CPengHGrizzleJW, et al. Power management strategy for a parallel hybrid electric truck. IEEE T Contr Syst T2003; 11: 839–849.
14.
PiccoloAIppolitoLzo GaldiV, et al. Optimisation of energy flow management in hybrid electric vehicles via genetic algorithms. In: 2001 IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics proceedings (Cat No.01TH8556), vol. 1, Como, 8–12 July 2001, pp.434–439. New York: IEEE.
15.
PoursamadAMontazeriM. Design of genetic-fuzzy control strategy for parallel hybrid electric vehicles. Control Eng Pract2008; 16: 861–873.
16.
MouraSJSteinJLFathyHK. Battery-health conscious power management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles via electrochemical modeling and stochastic control. IEEE T Contr Syst T2013; 21: 679–694.
17.
BorhanHVahidiAPhillipsAM, et al. MPC-based energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE T Contr Syst T2012; 20: 593–603.
18.
KimNChaSPengH. Optimal control of hybrid electric vehicles based on Pontryagin’s minimum principle. IEEE T Contr Syst T2011; 19: 1279–1287.
19.
SerraoLOnoriSRizzoniG. ECMS as a realization of pontryagin’s minimum principle for HEV control. In: 2009 American control conference (ACC’09), St. Louis, MO, 10–12 June 2009, pp.3964–3969. New York: IEEE.
20.
ChasseASciarrettaA. Supervisory control of hybrid powertrains: an experimental benchmark of offline optimization and online energy management. Control Eng Pract2011; 19: 1253–1265.
21.
PaganelliGErcoleGBrahmaA, et al. General supervisory control policy for the energy optimization of charge-sustaining hybrid electric vehicles. JSAE Rev2001; 22: 511–518.
22.
SerraoLOnoriSRizzoniG. A comparative analysis of energy management strategies for hybrid electric vehicles. J Dyn Syst2011; 133: 031012.
23.
van ReevenVHofmanT. Multi-level energy management for hybrid electric vehicles—part I. Vehicles2019; 1: 3–40.
24.
ZhaoBLvCHofmanT. Driving-cycle-aware energy management of hybrid electric vehicles using a three-dimensional markov chain model. Automot Innov2019; 2: 146–156.
25.
PisuPRizzoniG. A comparative study of supervisory control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE T Contr Syst T2007; 15: 506–518.
26.
SorrentinoMRizzoGArsieI. Analysis of a rule-based control strategy for on-board energy management of series hybrid vehicles. Control Eng Pract2011; 19: 1433–1441.
27.
HofmanTvan DrutenRSteinbuchM, et al. Rule-based equivalent fuel consumption minimization strategies for hybrid vehicles. IFAC P2008; 41: 5652–5657.
28.
YangCDuSLiL, et al. Adaptive real-time optimal energy management strategy based on equivalent factors optimization for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Appl Energ2017; 203: 883–896.
29.
MusardoCRizzoniGGuezennecY, et al. A-ECMS: an adaptive algorithm for hybrid electric vehicle energy management. Eur J Control2005; 11: 509–524.
30.
SalmasiFR. Control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles: evolution, classification, comparison, and future trends. IEEE T Veh Technol2007; 56: 2393–2404.
31.
WirasinghaSGEmadiA. Classification and review of control strategies for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE T Veh Technol2011; 60: 111–122.
32.
SabriMDanapalasingamKRahmatM. A review on hybrid electric vehicles architecture and energy management strategies. Renew Sust Energ Rev2016; 53: 1433–1442.
33.
SaxenaSLe FlochCMacDonaldJ, et al. Quantifying EV battery end-of-life through analysis of travel needs with vehicle powertrain models. J Power Sources2015; 282: 265–276.
34.
LunzBYanZGerschlerJB, et al. Influence of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle charging strategies on charging and battery degradation costs. Energ Policy2012; 46: 511–519.
35.
DebnathUKAhmadIHabibiD. Quantifying economic benefits of second life batteries of gridable vehicles in the smart grid. Int J Elec Power2014; 63: 577–587.
36.
MaranoVOnoriSGuezennecY, et al. Lithium-ion batteries life estimation for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. In: 2009 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference, Dearborn, MI, 7–10 September 2009, pp.536–543. New York: IEEE.
37.
LaverRSchneckDSkorupskD, et al. Useful life of transit buses and vans. Report No. FTA-VA-26-7229-07.1, April2007. Washington, DC: Federal Transit Administration, United States Department of Transportation.
