throbber
760121
`
`Hybrid Vehicle for
`
`Fuel Economy
`
`L. E. Unnewehr, J. E. Auiler. L. R. Foote.
`D. F. Moyer, and H. L. Stadler
`Research Sta”. Ford Motor Co,
`
`A HEAT ENGINE/ELECTRIC drive train has
`been evaluated as a means of improving the
`fuel economy of various types of
`automotive vehicles. Computer simulation
`studies and dynamometer tests on a
`prototype system indicate that
`improvements in CVS—Hot fuel economy
`(miles/gallon) of from 302 to 100% can be
`realized with this system in a vehicle of
`identical weight and performance
`characteristics. Preliminary test data
`also indicates that these fuel economies
`
`may be realizable while meeting the
`1975/76 Federal Emission Standards (1.5HC,
`15C0, 3.1NO ) with the use of external
`emissions cgntrols such as catalytic
`converters. Although similar in
`configuration to a standard parallel
`hybrid drive train,
`the control strategies
`and energy flow of this system are
`considerably different from any known
`hybrid drives. This system does not
`appear to be of equal merit for all
`classes of vehicles, but gives the
`greatest fuel economy improvements when
`applied to delivery vans, buses, and large
`passenger cars. There are certain
`drawbacks to this particular hybrid
`
`system, principally in increased initial
`cost as compared to conventional systems,
`but this cost differential may be reduced
`as improved electrical components are
`developed and as automotive production and
`marketing techniques are applied to the
`electrical components. Other potential
`limitations of this hybrid system are
`reduced driving range at very low speeds
`and reduced capability to supply vehicle
`auxiliaries at standstill.
`In general,
`the replacement of a conventional drive
`train by this particular hybrid train will
`not increase the vehicle curb weight.
`From almost
`the beginning of the
`Automotive Age, various combinations of
`drive systems have been tried in order to
`achieve vehicle performance
`characteristics superior to those that can
`be obtained using a single type of drive.
`These efforts have been made in the name
`
`of many worthwhile goals, such as
`increased vehicle acceleration capability,
`audible noise reduction, operation of an
`engine or turbine at optimum efficiency,
`reduction of noxious emissions, and
`improved fuel economy. These efforts have
`so far not led to any commercial
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`
`
`
`
`A heat engine/electric hybrid drive
`train is proposed as a means for improving
`CVS-Hot fuel economy by an estimated 30%
`to 100% in various types of automotive
`vehicles. This drive train, classified as
`a parallel hybrid, has been analyzed by
`means of computer simulation studies to
`evaluate its fuel economy, performance,
`
`and emissions characteristics, and has
`been compared with existing internal
`combustion engine drive trains and other
`types of hybrid drives.
`A prototype
`system has been assembled and evaluated on
`a dynamometer test stand and has
`corroborated the computer analysis and
`predictiOns.
`Problems and limitations of
`this system are discussed.
`
`Page 1 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 1 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`applications, although several
`experimental hybrid buses and rapid
`transit vehicles are being evaluated at
`the present time (1,2,3). For private
`vehicle applications, hybrid drive systems
`have generally been found to offer
`insufficient improvement
`in meeting one or
`more of the goals stated above to justify
`the added cost and complexity compared to
`a singular drive system, particularly
`compared to the conventional Otto cycle
`internal combustion engine drive system.
`Two extensive EPA-sponsored studies of
`heat engine/electrical hybrid systems have
`been published (4,5) and generally concur
`in this conclusion, as does the more
`recent JPL Report.(6)
`It is therefore with some trepidation
`that the subject of this paper, a heat
`engine/electric hybrid drive system,
`is
`proposed as a viable drive train for
`modern automotive vehicles of many
`varieties. However,
`this proposition has
`been developed -- and to large extent,
`confirmed - on premises somewhat different
`from those upon which the EPA studies were
`based:
`
`1.
`
`The critical fuel situation in the
`U.S. and most Western countries has
`
`placed increased emphasis on improved
`fuel economy for all types of vehicles
`since the initiation of the EPA
`studies of Reference 3 and 4. Recent
`large increases in gasoline prices
`have led to the conclusion that a
`sizable increase in initial vehicle
`cost (resulting from the use of a
`hybrid drivetrain) 552 be justified if
`a sufficient improvement
`in vehicle
`fuel economy is realized.
`2. Studies performed during the
`development of this system have shown
`that the relative size and power
`rating of the hybrid drive train
`components with respect to the vehicle
`weight and performance rating have an
`important influence on vehicle fuel
`economy. Hybrid drive trains may not
`improve fuel economy for vehicles of
`every size, weight, and application
`category. Stated in another way,
`hybrid drive trains are not "scalable"
`as a function of vehicle size or
`weight as are singular drive trains.
`The modus operandi or control
`philosophy of a hybrid can have a
`profound influence on both fuel
`economy and emissions. Past hybrid
`developments have tended to use the
`heat engine primarily as a battery
`charger;
`the subject hybrid reverses
`this philosophy and makes minimum use
`of the electric system.
`
`3.
`
`It is hoped that the validity of
`these principles will be amplified by
`Subsequent sections of this paper.
`
`SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
`
`A block diagram of the system
`illustrating functional performance and
`energy flow paths is shown in Figure 1.
`This drive system is intended to replace
`the engine-transmission system in
`conventional vehicles with the result of
`increasing the vehicle CVS—Hot fuel
`economy (miles/gallon) from 30% to 100% at
`1975/76 Federal emission levels using the
`CVS-hot cycle while maintaining
`approximately equivalent accelerating,
`braking, and passing characteristics.
`hybrid-electric system consists of the
`following major components:
`1.
`A different internal combusion engine,
`considerably smaller in displacement,
`and, hence, horsepower capability,
`than the engine in the original drive
`train.
`
`The
`
`3.
`
`2. An electric motor/generator (one unit)
`which may be on a common shaft with
`the engine output shaft or connected
`to the engine output shaft by means of
`a gear, belt, or chain system.
`The
`motor/generator may be of the DC
`commutator, DC homopolar, synchronous,
`or induction types.
`A means of controlling power flow
`between the motor/generator and
`battery. This may be an electronic
`controller using power thyristors or
`transistors, contactor controller
`using battery switching techniques, or
`similar devices.
`The controller must
`be capable of two—way power flow and
`should have high energy efficiency.
`4. An energy storage device. This may be
`any device capable of handling the
`high bursts of power required by the
`drive train during acceleration and
`braking and of supplying the energy
`needs for low—speed driving and the
`operation of vehicle auxiliaries at
`low speeds and standstill. At
`the
`)resent
`time, batteries are the most
`practical energy storage device, with
`the nickel-cadmium battery having
`almost ideal characteristics for this
`
`5.
`
`application but suffering a cost
`penalty. Flywheels, fuel cells in
`combination with batteries, closed
`loop cryogenic expander systems, are
`other possibilities.
`A differential and a drive shaft.
`general, it is desired to use the
`original drive shaft and differential
`of the vehicle.
`The system can be classified as a
`
`In
`
`Page 2 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 2 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`parallel hybrid with engine on—off
`control, and bears some similarity in
`configuration with two other recent hybrid
`developments.
`(9),(10)
`In addition to these major power
`components, other components required by
`control
`the hybrid drive train include:
`circuitry for the proper operation of the
`power controller; modified engine throttle
`and carburetor; sensors for converting
`vehicle speed, battery voltage and charge
`level, component temperatures, etc.,
`to
`electrical signals suitable for use in
`control and protection systems; Protection
`systems for both engine and electrical
`system emission controls; and an overall
`vehicle control system.
`Two modifications of the above system
`(Figure 1) have capabilities for improved
`system performance but usually add some
`cost penalties:
`I.
`The use of an automatically—controlled
`decouple: to permit
`the engine to be
`detached from the electrical motor
`drive shaft when the vehicle is
`operating in an all—electric drive
`mode or in a braking mode.
`It has
`been shown that the use of such a
`clutch will result in a further
`improvement in fuel economy (see
`Figure 5).
`The use of an electrically-controlled
`gear changing system. This will often
`result in 3 reduce electrical system
`weight and an improved electrical
`system efficiency.
`
`
`
`
`
`POWER
`COHTROL
`D
`
`BATTERY
`
`Fig.1 -Ford parallel hybrid
`
`SYSTEM OPERATION
`
`The system has six modes of
`The first five modes are shown
`operation.
`in Figure 2. Mode I is all electric at
`In Mode II the
`speeds below 10 to 15 MPH.
`engine is the primary source of propulsion
`and there is no energy in or out of the
`
`
`
`
`HIGHARGE
`
`Fig.2 —Five hybrid modes of operation
`
`electrical system. Mode III is the
`battery charging mode.
`The engine still
`drives the rear wheels; however, excess
`energy is used to charge the battery.
`When acceleration demands exceed the power
`input of the engine,
`the motor provides
`the needed additional power. This is
`shown as Mode IV. Mode V is regenerative
`breaking.
`The deceleration energy of the
`vehicle is used to charge the battery.
`Fuel is shut off to the engine during the
`all electrical mode and during braking.
`The battery state of charge is maintained
`between fairly narrow limits by the
`control system around a state of charge of
`about 75% of full charge. This strategy
`prevents deep discharge cycles on the
`battery.
`The sixth mode is at vehicle
`standstill, during which condition both
`the engine and electrical motor are
`inoperative or "dead". Required vehicle
`auxiliaries are supplied electrically at
`standstill.
`
`The objective of this system is to
`provide an increase in fuel economy over a
`conventional automotive drive system while
`maintaining equivalent acceleration
`performance. Comparisons between the
`hybrid system and conventional systems
`have been stressed in all studies.
`The
`manner in which this comparison is viewed
`from an overall systems standpoint is
`important in understanding the
`significance of this particular hybrid
`configuration and its operation.
`Figures 3 and 4 Show that the fuel
`economy for both a conventional and hybrid
`system can be expressed as follows:
`
`Page 3 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 3 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`ENGINE
`
`
`TORUUE
`CONVERTER
`
`
`IRANSHlssmI
`
`
`
`”SYS
`
`
`
`ENGINE Emcmucv
`
`rowsamm EFFICIENOY
`
`SYSIEM EFFICIENCY
`
`gauge.IN
`
`Ew
`WWII-ETC-
`e
`”$5.71!.IN
`
`wommu
`m . _._..____
`mus I canon
`m «Maw/mu)
`
`7}:
`
`MPG: (Ew/MILE)
`
`'7)PT ( Om /GAL)
`
`Fig.3 ~Average fuel economy for a conven—
`tional vehicle in terms of system efficien—
`cies
`
`
`
`
`ENGINE emcreucv
`
`Elc
`. __.._
`0m
`
`771-:
`
`
`- 5-9-—
`ELECTRICAL 5mm imam 77
`EL ECH
`
`
`memmn Emczencv
`
`._E.w_
`7,
`PT E";
`
`SYSTEH EFFICIENCY
`
`IFS (MILES ICAliON)
`
`
`
`(Ew/IIILE)
`Fig.4 ~Average fuel economy for a hybrid
`vehicle in terms of system efficiencies
`and energies
`
`”E "pr (g/calg
`MPG = (Ew7Mile)
`
`Page 4 of 18
`
`where ”E is the average engine brake
`termal efficiency, "P
`is the average
`transmission efficiency,
`(Q/Gal) is the
`energy content per gallon gasoline
`consumed and (E lMile) is the total energy
`requirement at ghe drive wheels per mile
`necessary to accelerate the vehicle and to
`overcome vehicle friction and aerodynamic
`drag.
`The quantities in this expression
`represent average values over a prescribed
`driving cycle.
`It should be noted that
`the average powertrain efficiency is
`defined as the ratio of total positive
`engine shaft work to total positive energy
`requirement at the drive wheels.
`Stated
`in another way,
`this represents the
`fraction of total engine work used to
`propel
`the vehicle.
`For the hybrid drive
`train state of charge is assumed to be the
`same at the beginning and end of the drive
`cycle,
`thus the net energy input
`to the
`transmission from the battery is zero.
`The task facing the hybrid system can
`now be clearly seen.
`In order to provide
`an increase in fuel economy over a
`conventional system the quantity "E nPT
`/(Bw/Mile) must be increased.
`The present
`hybrid system will be described in terms
`of how it strives to maintain high average
`engine efficiency, high average
`transmission efficiency and low work
`requirements at the drive wheels while
`maintaining the equivalent acceleration
`performance of the conventional system it
`replaces.
`A. High Average Engine Efficiency
`1.
`Small engine — The engine used in
`the conventional system is
`replaced by a much smaller engine
`in the hybrid system.
`The smaller
`engine operates at higher load
`factors, resulting in increased
`efficiencies.
`The hybrid engine
`is sized to meet vehicle cruise
`requirements up to a specified
`road speed. This enables the
`vehicle to be propelled by the
`engine alone for extended cruise
`periods. This corresponds to Mode
`II in Figure 2.
`2. Fuel off during idle and
`deceleration - Approximately 202
`of the CVS—H fuel consumption is
`used during idle and braked
`deceleration for the conventional
`vehicles with automatic
`transmission considered in this
`study. Elimination of idle and
`braked deceleration fuel flow in
`the hybrid configuration results
`in significant improvements in
`average engine efficiency.
`3. Fuel off during low speed
`operation - Since the engine is
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 4 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`geared directly to the drive
`wheels the fuel is shut off at low
`
`vehicle speeds and the vehicle is
`propelled by the electrical
`system. This corresponds to Mode
`I in Figure 2.
`The fuel savings
`must be weighed against the
`electrical energy dissipated that
`must be replaced by charging the
`battery later in the driving
`cycle. Since this charging is
`done at a higher engine
`efficiency, this mode has a
`positive effect an the average
`engine efficiency. However,
`this
`charging has an adverse effect on
`the average transmission
`efficiency since a lower fraction
`of the engine work shows up as
`useful work at the drive wheels.
`
`The total gasoline used to replace
`the battery energy expended during
`this mode can actually exceed the
`amount of gasoline used in a
`conventional vehicle in
`
`accelerating up to the
`The
`corresponding vehicle speed.
`energy requirements of this mode
`can be substantially improved by
`lowering the work required to
`motor the engine by opening the
`throttle, collapsing the valves or
`by de-clutching the engine. Other
`approaches include gear changes or
`use of motors with better
`lOstpeed efficiencies.
`Charging the battery at
`high-engine efficiency - When the
`battery requires charging from the
`engine as represented by node III
`in Figure 2,
`the basic strategy is
`to provide the charging energy at
`the most efficient engine
`operating point. This contributes
`to a high overall engine energy
`efficiency; however, this effect
`must be weighed against the effect
`on transmission efficiency since
`the optimum engine efficiency will
`not in general correspond to the
`most efficient charging torque
`level for the electrical system.
`Additional trade-offs appear when
`the effect of engine torque on
`emissions is discussed in a later
`section.
`
`Accelerate at high—engine
`efficiency n When the vehicle
`acceleration demands exceed the
`power capacity of the engine,
`the
`electrical system is used to
`provide the extra needed power.
`This is described as Mode IV in
`Figure 2.
`In general the engine
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`torque level at which the
`electrical system is called upon
`corresponds to a high—engine
`efficiency point.
`The effect on
`transmission efficiency must also
`be considered since a lower engine
`torque requires more electrical
`energy.
`Transmission Efficiency w The
`transmission in a hybrid drive train
`is the portion of the system that
`transmits useful work from the engine
`to the drive wheels.
`Since all the
`
`the vehicle
`energy needed to propel
`ultimately comes from the engine
`(assuming the battery ends the drive
`cycle at the same state of charge) the
`basic objective of the transmission is
`to minimize the amount of engine
`energy used for other purposes. This
`is achieved as follows:
`
`1. Engine geared directly to rear
`wheels for primary source of
`propulsion u When the electrical
`system is not in use,
`the energy
`from the engine is transmitted
`directly to the rear wheels
`through the differential. This is
`Mode II in Figure 2.
`The
`instantaneous transmission
`
`The
`
`efficiency during this mode is
`essentially equal
`to the
`differential efficiency.
`engine is sized to provide
`sufficient torque in this mode for
`extended high~speed cruise.
`2. Use of electrical system only when
`needed - To keep the use of the
`electrical system to a minimum,
`the motor is used only when
`needed.
`The two modes requiring
`the motor are the all electric
`
`mode at low speed anode I) and
`during heavy accelerations (Mode
`1V).
`3. Use of regenerative braking -
`During braking the kinetic energy
`of the vehicle is used to charge
`the battery. This is described as
`Mode V in Figure 2. This has a
`substantial effect on transmission
`efficiency by reducing the charge
`energy required from the engine.
`Drive Wheel Energy - In converting a
`conventional vehicle to a hybrid
`configuration the total energy
`requirements at the drive wheel must
`also be considered in assessing the
`potential fuel economy gains.
`The
`primary factors that could reduce fuel
`economy are an increase in the vehicle
`weight and an increase in the
`rotational inertia due to higher
`rotational speeds of the engine and
`
`Page 5 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 5 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`System weights will vary
`motor.
`considerably with the vehicle
`acceleration requirements. For the
`hybrid configurations considered in
`this study small weight savings were
`realized. These differences were
`
`generally not enough to change the
`inertial weight class of the vehicle
`and were not considered in the fuel
`economy projections.
`The effects of
`increased rotational inertias were
`also seen to be minimal for the
`
`configurations investigated.
`
`METHOD OF ANALYSIS
`
`The
`
`A computer program was developed to
`simulate all elements of the drive train
`for the six basic modes of operation over
`an arbitrary drive cycle.
`The required
`power at the drive wheel is computed from
`the drive cycle data,
`the vehicle
`friction, aerodynamic drag, inertial
`acceleration and rotational inertias.
`corresponding power levels are computed
`throughout the drivetrein based on
`rotational speeds and torques and
`component performance characteristics.
`Motor/generator and controller
`efficiencies are computed from efficiency
`tables in terms of torque and RPM.
`The
`efficiency tables used for the D.C. system
`are based on experimental data from
`reference (7). Similar tables for a
`brushless synchronous motor system are
`based on experimental data from reference
`(8). Battery efficiency is computer from
`equivalent circuit models for specific
`battery types as described in Reference
`(16).
`
`The engine is sized to provide
`sufficient power for extended cruise
`without
`the electrical system. Fuel flows
`are computed in terms of engine speed and
`torque.
`In general, automatic calibration
`fuel island data is used with simulated
`exhaust system, fan on, alternator
`operated at one—half charge and power
`steering pump loaded. Engine motoring
`torque is computed as a function of engine
`RPM from experimental data.
`Axle ratio between the engine and
`drive wheels and gear ratio between the
`motor and engine are varied in the
`analysis until a suitable compromise is
`reached between fuel economy,
`top speed,
`acceleration, maintaining battery charge
`and,
`in some cases, emissions.
`Comparisons with conventional
`drivetrsins are made by applying the same
`basic technique of starting at the rear
`wheels and describing each element
`individually. Transmission efficiencies
`are computed for each gear from output
`
`speed. Automatic transmission shift
`schedules are determined from driveshaft
`RPM and manifold vacuum. Manifold vacuum
`must be implied from engine torque which
`cannot be computed until the proper gear
`is determined.
`The engine torque and
`transmission shift schedule must,
`therefore, be matched iteratively.
`The approach is similar to techniques
`described in Reference (11) for
`conventional vehicles and in Reference
`(16) for electric vehicles.
`
`DYNAMOHETER TESTS
`
`Early in the course of the computer
`simulation and other analytical studies of
`the hybrid concept,
`the need for some
`experimental evidence to support
`the
`computer predictions of fuel economy and
`performance was recognized. Also,
`emission measurements and engine strategy
`for emission control were required.
`The
`first step in such experimental
`evaluations has been the testing of an
`engine-electric drivetrain with a
`dynamometer and inertia wheel as loading
`devices. Ultimate evaluation of any
`alternate engine or other drivetrain
`component must of necessity by made
`through a long series of vehicular tests
`under typical or prescribed driving
`conditions. However, for systems so far
`removed from conventional automotive
`practice as a hybrid drivetrain,
`dynamometer testing appears essential
`before vehicular testing is initiated.
`The principal goals of the hybrid
`dynamometer tests were:
`1.
`To test the computer predictions of
`fuel economy, performance, and
`emissions using a production engine.
`To establish that the fuel economy
`improvement is attainable at
`acceptable emission levels. This
`required that near optimum engine
`strategy regarding spark, air—fuel
`ratio, and exhaust gas recirculation
`be developed. This was done by
`dividing the speed torque plane in a
`grid pattern, studying each area in
`the grid and summing the total for
`hybrid operation. This process is
`called engine mapping in subsequent
`discussions.
`To determine that the on-off fuel
`control required by the hybrid was
`practical at acceptable performance,
`emissions and cost. This was
`determined using a carburetor and
`minor modifications.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`To determine that the selected battery
`was adequate.
`To determine that the engine is
`
`Page 6 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 6 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`basically suited to the unique or
`unusual operations in this concept,
`such as:
`
`3. Motoring the engine between 0 and
`800 RPM as required by the direct
`coupling to the wheels. Normally
`an engine is cranked and
`immediately accelerated to an idle
`speed of 700 RPM or more.
`b. Operation at high torque most of
`the time.
`c. Higher than normal total use and
`long duration of high torque at
`high speed.
`The experimental hybrid drivetrain
`was configured as in the block diagram of
`Figure l with two exceptions:
`The
`electric motor was on a common shaft with
`
`the engine, and the driveshaft was
`directly coupled to a dynamometer and
`inertia wheel
`to simulate the vehicle
`
`road, aerodynamic, and inertial loads.
`The principal components used were:
`'74
`1. Engine:
`Ford 2.3L, 4-cylinder,
`production engine, modified for fuel
`off operation.
`2. Motor: Westinghouse, ZoOHP, 240 V.,
`1750 RPM industrial shunt motor;
`blower cooled.
`
`SCR chopper for motor
`3. Controller:
`armature control during motoring and
`regenerative braking (designed and
`assembled at Ford); separate power
`supply for field control.
`d. Battery:
`140 cells connected in
`series of Marathon,
`type 20D120, NiCd;
`auxiliary forced~air cooling to
`maintain cells at approximately 20 C;
`plus required monitoring equipment.
`5. Loading Device: Absorpt’on
`dynamometer of 150 lbwf
`inertia and
`a flywheel of 360 lb—ft
`inertia.
`The combined inertias of the rotating
`members of the experimental system are
`equivalent to a vehicle of 7500 lb.
`inertia weight based upon an engine
`RPM/vehicle MPH (N/V) ratio of 53.5.
`Conventional gas analysis equipment was
`used to measure emissions under conditions
`of steady state engine operation.
`Measurements of exhaust CO, CO , HC, 0
`and NO
`and intake CO were made.
`Foe
`x
`2 .
`flow was measured by weight.
`Since the hybrid application requires
`operating an engine under conditions
`considerably different from those
`associated with conventional Vehicles,
`preliminary evaluation and modification of
`the 2.3L engine was necessary:
`1.
`The engine was modified to permit fuel
`to be turned off during deceleration
`and at speeds below 15 MPH. This was
`accomplished by means of a small
`solenoid valve to block fuel flow in
`
`2.
`
`the idle jet, removal of the throttle
`stop to permit full closure of the
`throttle plate, a means of admitting
`air below the throttle, and PCV
`modification.
`A sequence control was required for
`minimum emissions and quality
`performance during engine fuel turn-on
`and turn-off.
`For example, during
`turn~off,
`the following sequence was
`used:
`(a) close throttle, idle
`solenoid, and PCV valve,
`(b) open
`by~pass air valve around throttle to
`permit air without fuel into intake
`manifold,
`(c) turn~off ignition, with
`elapsed time between these events.
`3. Removal of some engine auxiliaries;
`for example,
`the engine alternator is
`not required in a hybrid drive; air
`conditioner was not used.
`The power
`steering pump was connected and
`driven.
`
`4.
`
`In a
`Low—speed engine friction:
`conventional vehicle,
`the engine is
`operated below the idle speed (about
`800 RPM) for only a few seconds during
`start—up.
`In the hybrid, much longer
`operation may be required.
`The
`low-speed friction torques of the 2.3L
`engine were measured.
`. Low-speed lubrication was evaluated.
`O‘Ui I
`The EGR valve and plumbing were
`enlarged to permit large EGR flow at
`wide-Open throttle operation.
`Another interesting problem for which
`there was almost no precedent was the
`measurement of HC emissions during the
`frequent engine off/on transitions that
`the engine passes through during a typical
`driving cycle.
`Since GVS equipment for
`this measurement was not available a
`
`technique using diluted samples from the
`engine—off period was developed and
`considered to giVe reasonable accuracy.
`This method was used to predict the
`emissions discussed in later sections of
`
`this paper.
`The resulting experimental system
`proved to be very "driveable" with smooth
`transitions between the various operating
`modes.
`The system was "driven" through
`several of the standard test driving
`cycles with ease and accuracy after a few
`learning cycles by the operator.
`In order to experimentally verify the
`calculated values of fuel economy that had
`been obtained from the various computer
`simulations described above, several
`dynamic runs over both CVS—H and SAE (17)
`driving cycles were performed on the
`experimental hybrid system mounted on a
`dynamometer test stand.
`The SAE driving
`cycle is a simplified version of the CVS—H
`cycle developed mainly for the electric
`
`Page 7 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 7 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`vehicle tests. Many comparisons of the
`two driving cycles have shown that both
`result in approximately the same fuel
`consumption for both ICE and electric
`vehicles.
`Since the "driving" of an
`experimental drivetrain on a dynamometer
`test stand over the SAE cycle is much
`simpler than over the CVS~H cycle, and
`since the control of the system was not
`fully automated but required considerable
`manual control,
`the SAE cycle was chosen
`as the means for comparing calculated with
`measured fuel ecouomy of the hybrid
`drivetrain.
`It was found that after only
`a few tries, manual control was able to
`follow the required speed and acceleration
`variations specified by the SAE cycle
`almost perfectly.
`The actual efficiencies
`of the components in the electric branch
`of the hybrid and the actual road load
`simulated by the dynamometer were fed into
`the computer model to obtain the
`calculated fuel economy.
`The engine
`throttle positions were likewise made to
`correspond between the measure and
`calculated test runs.
`The results are
`summarized below:
`
`TABLE I
`COM?ARISON 0F MEASURED AND CALCULATED
`DYNAMIC FUEL ECONOMY OF HYBRID
`
`Simulated vehicle
`
`inertia weight
`Length of test run
`
`Calculated fuel economy
`Measured fuel economy
`
`7500 lbs
`3 SAE cycles
`(3 miles)
`15.2 mpg
`15.8 mpg
`
`FUEL ECONOMY STUDIES WITH AUTOMATIC ENGINE
`CALIBRATIONS
`
`A variety of studies was conducted by
`applying the computer program to hybrid
`and conventional versions of the same
`vehicle using fuel island data for stock
`engines with automatic calibrations.
`The
`hybrid electrical systems were sized to
`provide approximately equivalent
`acceleration performance.
`The results of
`these studies are summarized in Figure 5.
`The purpose of this section is to discuss
`the reasons for the fuel economy
`improvement resulting from a hybrid system
`and to discuss the effects of fundamental
`system changes on fuel economy.
`A. Reasons for Fuel Economy Improvement
`Resulting from a Hybrid System ~ The
`Econoline Van and the Mark IV
`configurations received the most
`emphasis in these studies. Figures 6
`and 7 present summaries of compariBOns
`made between typical hybrid and
`conventional versions of the Econoline
`
`The
`Van and Mark IV, respectively.
`computations were done for the CVS—H
`drive cycle and both comparisons are
`based on equivalent acceleration
`performance between the respective
`hybrid and conventional
`
`configurations. Both hybrid systems
`represent typical configurations with
`automatic engine calibrations, DC
`motor and controller and normal idle
`throttle engine motoring friction
`during fuel off modes.
`In Figure 6 a 4500 lb.
`conventional van with 300 CID engine
`
`ME
`
`Hybrid Power Train
`
`
`Motor
`
`Calculated Fuel Econou
`(m)
`
`5295;;
`13.5
`sec
`
`(c)
`
`1;;
`1&.a“’
`14m
`
`:15
`
`zmo
`
`aka
`
`2L7
`21.3
`
`Zlk
`
`13.7
`2L9
`
`:«m
`
`tea
`
`u.4
`
`“.4
`14.4
`
`1L6
`
`10»5(t]
`1m:
`
`1 lap rovueam
`Hybrid/ICE
`22
`n
`
`n
`
`3
`
`53
`
`as
`as
`
`m
`
`75
`[M
`
`M:
`DC
`Dc
`
`DC
`nc
`
`DC
`
`Disc“)
`Dine
`
`at
`
`nxuc(‘)
`
`mule
`
`Van“)
`Van
`mm
`
`Van
`Von
`
`Van
`
`Van
`Van
`
`Ll with closed throttle
`Ll with wide—open throttle
`1.1 , vnlvcn cloned
`
`1.1 . clutch
`1.) diesel
`
`2.} diesel, clutch
`
`Ll . clutch
`2.] diesel. clutch
`
`Hark tv‘“’
`
`Mark xv
`
`2.:
`
`2.:
`
`(rec). clutch
`
`(ICE), clutch
`
`(a) 6500 lb- Inertia Hz.
`(b) 5500 lb. Inertia Ht.
`
`(c) All fuel economy calculations based upon vehicle driving the Federal cvs-u cycle: no no: change in battery
`Itute-oE-cmrae.
`(d) Calculated [or unenioalonlzod, “.0 cm engine.
`Calculations based upon the W75. cumulonlzed 300 CID engine used
`3.6 «to.
`I
`on 1975 vehicles reunited in a fuel economy of
`(Sec neinrcncen (a) and 06)).
`(0) Axial. Air-guy reluctance motor developed by Ford.
`(5! Calculated for 1974 460 etc cnglnc with automatic calibration.
`
`Fig.5 -Ca1culated fuel economy comparisons
`
`Page 8 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`Page 8 of 18
`
`FORD 1229
`
`

`

`0V8
`
`MPG-I34 TIE 9234
`
`H mm
`
`cvs
`MN; . “.5
`
`during braking. Gearing between the
`engine and rear wheels gives a ratio
`of engine RPM to vehicle speed in MPH
`(N/V) of 100, while the ratio of
`electric motor RPM to engine RPM is
`1.75.
`The weight summary of this
`substitution is shown in Table II. The
`performance predictions (acceleration)
`for this same vehicle are given in
`Table III.
`
`In Figure 7 a 5500 lb.
`conventional 1974 Mark IV with 460 CID
`engine and automatic transmission is
`compared to a 5500 lb. hybrid Mark IV
`with a 2.3 liter engine, DC motor with
`260 ft. lb. peak torque and 80 KW of
`NiCd batteries. Accelerations are
`
`done at wide—open throttle, while
`battery charging is done at optimum
`fuel consumption.
`Fuel is shut off at
`
`TABLE II
`VEHICLE WEIGHT EXCHANGE
`
`Production Systems — 1975 Nantucket Weight
`(lbs)
`
`
`Delete:
`
`Curb
`
`. 300 CID Engine
`. 0-4 Automatic Transmission
`. Exhaust System
`. Fuel System (22 gal. base tank)
`. Battery and Alternator
`
`5.42:
`. 1.1L Engine
`. Exhaust System
`. Fuel System (13.3 gal.
`base tank)
`. Motor
`(Provision
`. 2-spd. Trans.
`—- not
`included in fuel
`
`economy)
`. Controller
`. Battery and Cooling
`(Ni-Cad System)
`12V Inverter
`
`.
`
`631
`155
`56
`29
`__5_4
`222 lbs.
`
`243
`25
`
`18
`120
`
`80
`70
`
`170
`__§
`1;; lbs.
`
`ENGINE
`
`MPG
`
`POUERTRAII
`
`SYSTEM
`
`0I02030‘I050801080
`% IIPRDVEIEHT OVER GONVEITIOIAL
`
`Fig.6 ~CVS—H fuel economy and efficiency
`comparison between hybrid ana conventional
`econoline van
`
`fiflwlfl
`"ARK II
`
`«we!»
`
`5500 La
`HYBRID
`
`am It
`
`25 ”‘5"
`
`
`
`77 -.263
`
`E
`
`”7c
`
`3:05.“
`
`3:: - I‘I5
`
`ENQNE
`
`Panama
`
`69 as
`
`SYSTEM
`
`m
`
`80l$h
`
`870%
`
`66.7%
`
`01020304050607030
`% INPROVEHENI OVER CONVENTIONAL
`
`Fig.7 ~CVS—H fuel economy and efficiency
`comparison between a hybrid and conventional
`Mark IV
`
`NOTE: Structural and other small
`conponent changes may alter this
`weight comparison.
`
`and automatic transmission is compared
`to a 4500 lb. hybrid van with a 1.1
`liter engine, DC motor with 130 ft.
`lb. peak torque and 45 KW of NiCd
`batteries. Aceeleration and battery
`charging are both done at wide~open
`throttle and fuel is shut off at
`engine speeds below 1000 RPM and
`
`engine speeds below 800 RPM and during
`braking. Engine RPM to vehicle MPH is
`58.66, and e

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket