IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO.
7, SEPTEMBER 2010
Dual-Mode Power-Split Transmission for
Hybrid Electric Vehicles
Behrooz Mashadi and Seyed A. M. Emadi
Abstract—In this paper, an innovative power-split device (PSD)
is introduced, and its application in a hybrid powertrain system
is studied. The new PSD is a mechanism that allows operation
in two different power-split modes through locking/unlocking of
two clutches. In one mode, the PSD operates similar to a standard
planetary gear unit, and in the other mode, it works the same as
a compound planetary set. A well-known analogous system is the
Toyota Hybrid System (THS) and is used for comparison purposes.
It is demonstrated that by the new system, the transmission losses
are reduced by a considerable extent, and thus, the efficiency is
improved. A controller is designed based on fuzzy logic, which
receives the battery state of charge (SOC), the vehicle speed, and
the power that is requested at the wheels to coordinate each com-
ponent in such a way as to optimize the entire system efficiency. A
numerical optimization algorithm is applied to sustain the SOC in
high regions and shift engine operating points to higher efficiency
regions. Simulation results demonstrate notable improvements in
fuel economy and performance characteristics.
Index Terms—Dual mode, electronically controlled continu-
ously variable transmission (E-CVT), fuzzy logic, hybrid elec-
tric vehicle (HEV), optimization, power split, powertrain control,
Toyota Hybrid System (THS).
I. I NTRODUCTION
H YBRID electric vehicles (HEVs) offer flexibility to en-
hance the fuel economy and emissions of vehicles with-
out sacrificing vehicle performance factors such as safety,
reliability, and other conventional vehicle features. This has
prompted researchers to make efforts to develop innovative
hybrid powertrain configurations and associated issues such
as component sizing and control strategies. The benefit of
series hybrid vehicles is independence of engine operation
on the instantaneous vehicle load and speed, and their main
disadvantage is the relatively large energy-conversion losses.
The benefit of parallel hybrid vehicles is lower transmission
energy-conversion losses, and their disadvantage is the direct
connection of the engine to the wheels and associated transient
engine operation with respect to the vehicle speed.
Power-split hybrid systems, which are also known as series/
parallel hybrids, are more beneficial because they have the ad-
vantages of both parallel and series types, and their drawbacks
Manuscript received November 14, 2009; revised February 27, 2010;
accepted April 18, 2010. Date of current version September 17, 2010. The
review of this paper was coordinated by Mr. D. Diallo.
B. Mashadi is with the Automotive Engineering Department, Iran University
of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran (e-mail: b_mashhadi@iust.ac.ir).
S. A. M. Emadi was with the Automotive Engineering Department, Iran
University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran. He is now with the R&D
Center, Iran Khodro Company, Tehran, Iran (e-mail: sm.emadi@ikco.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TVT.2010.2049870
0018-9545/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE
3223
can be avoided. The combination of two motors/generators
allows the engine to drive the first as a generator to either charge
the battery or supply power to the motor. Among numerous
power-split transmission designs, two configurations known
as single-mode and two-mode power-split transmissions have
been commercially successful. The single-mode system is used
in Toyota hybrid cars such as Prius and Camry hybrid models,
and the two-mode system can be found in the 2008 GMC Yukon
Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV) and the 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe SUV
[1], [2].
The Toyota Hybrid System (THS) enables the engine to
operate at its efficient regions, independent of the vehicle speed,
and in fact, it provides an electronically controlled continuously
variable transmission (E-CVT). The power-split device (PSD),
which is a planetary gear unit, divides the power from the en-
gine, and the ratio of power directly going to the wheels and to
the generator is continuously variable [3]. Consequently, there
are still energy conversion losses that decrease transmission
efficiency, especially in particular driving conditions [4], [5].
Other types of power-split transmissions are also available, and
comparative analyses can be found in [6]–[9].
Fuzzy- or rule-based control algorithms are suitable tools for
power management strategies in power-split hybrids, and this
technique has been used in many research works [10]–[12].
In this paper, an innovative powertrain that utilizes a new
PSD is introduced. The PSD provides a mechanical connection
between engine, two motors/generators (MG1 and MG2), and
the rotational shaft that transmits the drive force to the wheels.
The powertrain utilizes two clutches to toggle the engagement
of the larger motor/generator (MG2) with two rotational shafts:
one that is directly connected to wheels via differential and the
other that is interrelated by the PSD. This way, the possibility
of operation in two electromechanical power-split operating
modes is achieved. In one mode, the PSD operates like a
standard planetary gear unit, and in the other mode, the PSD
works the same as a compound planetary set.
II. P OWERTRAIN D ESCRIPTION
Fig. 1 depicts the overall layout of the hybrid transmission
system mainly consisting of the PSD, two motors/generators,
two clutches (clutch 1 and clutch 2), and reduction gears. The
device connections and operation can be better understood
from Fig. 2. The two clutches that are shown in Fig. 1 enable
the system to operate in two different modes by toggling the
engagement of the larger motor/generator (MG2) with two
rotational shafts. When clutch 2 is engaged (and clutch 1 is
disengaged), MG2 is directly linked to the wheels via the
3224 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO. 7, SEPTEMBER 2010
Fig. 1. Powertrain overall configuration (MG1 and MG2 stators are fixed to
the vehicle body).
Fig. 2. New power-split system input and output.
differential, and the PSD operates equivalent to a planetary
gear system (PG mode). When clutch 1 is engaged (and clutch
2 is disengaged), MG2 is interrelated by the PSD, and the
differential mode is defined. In this mode, engine, MG1, and
MG2 are connected to the rotational shaft R, which transmits
the drive force to the wheels.
In both powertrain modes, two separated torques from the
engine follow different paths. One directly drives the wheels
(mechanical path), and the other turns MG1 and produces
electricity (electrical path). This electric power is either stored
in the battery or sent to MG2 to produce an assist torque. MG2
and MG1 can exchange parts as a generator or a motor.
Control in the HEV is recognized as a two-level control
action: supervisory control and component control. The super-
visory controller translates driver’s intentions into power re-
quirements and coordinates powertrain components to achieve
certain objectives. Common objectives include minimizing fuel
consumption and emissions while maintaining or improving
performance and drivability. The component controller, on the
other hand, receives commands from the supervisory controller
and generates detailed control instructions for its actuators.
In this system, the supervisory controller determines the
engine operating point based on driving conditions and then
calculates MG1 (or MG2) command speed according to the
engine target speed and the output shaft speed, which is pro-
portional to the vehicle speed. The MG1 controller, in turn,
manipulates the torque to achieve the specified speed. In the
meantime, the MG2 controller receives a torque command from
the supervisory control, while its power is directly supplied
either through the generator path or the battery. In the PG mode,
MG2 cannot play the role of a speed controller (speeder) to
manipulate the engine speed because it is directly connected to
the final drive, and MG1 must play this role. In the differential
mode, however, either MG1 or MG2 can operate as the speeder
due to the dynamical characteristics of the PSD, which allow
the speed control of either motors to force the engine to operate
at a specified speed.
In the electric mode or the regenerative braking mode, the
system operates in the PG mode in which MG2 is directly
connected to the wheels and individually supplies power or
regenerates energy of braking. In the engine-only mode, either
MG1 or MG2 acts as a generator, and the other one consumes
the power. In the battery-charging mode, MG1 acts as a gener-
ator, and part of its power charges the battery, and the rest feeds
MG2. Also, it is possible that MG2 or both MG1 and MG2 act
as a generator and charge the battery. In the electric-assist mode,
MG1 acts as a generator, and the resulting current feeds MG2,
together with the battery power. In the engine-only, battery-
charging, and electric-assist modes, the controller determines
that the mode system should operate based on the driving
conditions. It toggles the system to the mode in which there
is less transmission loss and then coordinates all components to
optimize the entire system in that mode.
III. C OMPONENT T ORQUE AND S PEED R ELATIONSHIPS
In the differential mode, the rotational speeds of the MG1,
MG2, engine, and output shaft R are interrelated in the new
two-degree-of-freedom PSD mechanism. The kinematics of the
system can be determined by two parameters m and n, which
are defined as follows:
ωMG1 − ωE
m= − (1)
ωR − ωE
ωMG2 − ωE
n= (2)
ωR − ωE
where ωMG1 , ωMG2 , ωE , and ωR are the rotational speeds of
MG1, MG2, engine, and shaft R, respectively. m and n are
dependent on the number of gear teeth that are existing in the
PSD. Fig. 3 illustrates the relationship among the component
speeds in the differential mode.
The torque relationships under steady-state conditions (com-
ponent rotational inertias are not included) are as follows:
TR + nTMG2 − mTMG1 = 0 (3)
TR + TE + TMG1 − TMG2 = 0 (4)
where TE , TMG1 , and TR are the engine, MG1, and output
shaft (R) torques. At the PG mode, the rotational speeds of the
engine, MG1, and MG2 are interrelated by the PSD, which acts
MASHADI AND EMADI: DUAL-MODE POWER-SPLIT TRANSMISSION FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES 3225

Fig. 3. Relationship of component speeds in the differential mode.

Fig. 5. Ratio of engine power that indirectly transmits to wheels (the engine-
only mode).

and torques of MG1 and MG2 in the differential mode are

obtained as

ωMG1 = (1 + m)ωE − mωR (8)

ωMG2 = (1 − n)ωE + nωR (9)

TMG1 = − [n/(m + n)] TE + [(1 − n)/(m + n)] TR (10)

Fig. 4. Relationship of component speeds in the PG mode. TMG2 = − [m/(m + n)] TE − [(1 + m)/(m + n)] TR . (11)

equivalent to a conventional planetary gear set. MG2 is directly The ratios of MG1 and MG2 powers (PMG1 , PMG2 ) to the
linked to the wheels; therefore, it rotates at a fixed ratio to the engine power PE for the differential mode are obtained as
 
wheel speed as PMG1 mn ωR n(m + 1)
= −
nf nR V PE m + n ωE m+n
ωMG2 = ωR = (5)
RW  
Preq m(n − 1) (m + 1)(n − 1) ωE
+ − (12)
where nf , nr , RW , and V are the final drive ratio, the reduction PE m+n m+n ωR
gear ratio, the effective wheel radius, and the vehicle speed,  
respectively. Component speed relationships in the PG mode PMG2 mn ωR m(n − 1)
= − +
can be more easily understood from Fig. 4. PE m + n ωE m+n
The engine torque is divided between MG1 and shaft R. By  
neglecting component rotational inertias, the ratios of the en- Preq n(m + 1) (m + 1)(n − 1) ωE
+ − + (13)
gine torque transmitted to shaft R and to MG1 can be obtained PE m+n m+n ωR
from the following:
where PMG = TMG ωMG , and Preq = TR ωR is the requested
TMG1 1 power at wheels.
=− (6)
TE 1+m In the PG mode, MG1 and MG2 speeds are those expressed
in (8) and (5), respectively. In contrast with the differential
TR m mode, in the PG mode, the MG1 torque depends only on the
=− . (7)
TE 1+m engine torque according to (6). Also, in this mode, the MG2
torque depends on the battery-charging or battery-discharging
power that is added to the MG1 power and feeds to MG2. The
IV. E LECTRICAL P OWER F LOW ratio of the engine power that is indirectly transmitted to the
wheels in the engine-only mode is obtained as
Power flow analysis in hybrid systems is important for the as-
sessment of transmission efficiency [13]–[16]. Here, therefore, PCIR /PE = −1 + [m/(1 + m)] (ωR /ωE ) (14)
it is intended to show that the new PSD decreases the amount
of power circulating through the motors/generators, thereby where PCIR is the part of MG1 or MG2 powers that is
decreasing the losses. named the circulating power. Fig. 5 represents PMG1 /PE and
The speed of shaft R is proportional to the vehicle speed, PMG2 /PE versus ωR /ωE in the engine-only mode (Preq = PE )
and in the differential mode, its torque is proportional to the for the new system with parameters m = 1.5 and n = 1.8. Sim-
requested torque at wheels. According to (1)–(4), at a par- ilar results for the THS have also been generated for comparison
ticular engine speed and torque, i.e., ωE and TE , the speeds purposes based on the dynamic equations of the planetary
3226 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO. 7, SEPTEMBER 2010

Fig. 6. Comparison of the ratio of the engine power that indirectly transmits
to wheels between the new system and the THS (the engine-only mode).

gear system [17]. When the power of each motor/generator is

positive (TMG ωMG > 0), it acts as a motor; otherwise, it acts
as a generator.
Fig. 7. Energy path in the electric-assist mode.
Fig. 6 clearly indicates that the amount of power passing
through the two motors/generators in the new system is less
than those of the THS in all but small operating points.
In range (a), which happens when the vehicle speed is very
low, the system is set to the PG mode, and the electrical power
flow in the differential mode is avoided. In range (b), the
system switches to the differential mode where there is less
electrical power. However, at certain driving conditions, the
control strategy may switch the system to the PG mode based
on optimization algorithms because less electrical power does
not always mean less power loss because the efficiencies of two
electric machines at their operating points may be too low at
those driving conditions. Fig. 23, for instance, shows that the
efficiency values of MG1 at low speeds and high torques are too
low; thus, switching to the PG mode at such conditions changes Fig. 8. Ratio of MG1 and MG2 power to the engine power in the electric-
the operating points of the electric motor to efficient areas. assist mode.
In range (c), there is no much difference between operating
in the PG or differential mode because according to the torque
and speed equations of the PSD, the operating points of electric machines roughly as 0.9, this is 19% loss in the circulating
machines are very close to each other in either of the two power or 1474 W in the THS and 608 W in the new system.
modes. For the new system, there are additional advantages also
In range (d), which happens at low engine speeds and high- in other system-operating modes. In the electric-assist mode,
and mid-range vehicle speeds, for the THS case, the engine is MG1 mostly acts as a generator, and MG2 acts as a motor
set to high speed and low load to avoid too much electrical utilizing powers from MG1 and the battery together (see Fig. 7).
power when retaining the engine operation at the constant Fig. 8 represents PMG1 /PE and PMG2 /PE versus ωR /ωE for
output, but this will result in lower engine efficiencies [10]. For the differential mode of the new system in the electric-assist
the new system, however, there is less electrical power in range mode. At a particular engine speed and torque, when the battery
(d), and it is not necessary to set the engine at inefficient speeds. power increases, in contrast with the THS, the whole battery
To assess this advantage, cruising at 90 km/h is considered power does not flow to MG2. This can be explained by the
as an example to roughly compare the power losses of the THS moving points A to B and C to D in the figure, which means that
and the new system. Using the information in Appendix A, the the fraction of the engine power that is directly transmitted to
required power is 8 kW, and the most efficient engine speed at the wheels will increase. Thus, there is a more efficient electric-
this power is 1200 r/min. The speed of shaft R is 3270 r/min; assist mode in the new system. This characteristic also allows
therefore, the gear ratio (ωR /ωE ) is 2.73. With m = 1 and the use of smaller MG2, which simultaneously receives power
n = 2.5, for the THS, 97% (7760 W) and, for the new system, from the battery and MG1 at high requested power. This way,
40% (3200 W) of engine power are circulated (converted twice the size of MG2 could be selected just to meet performance
in MG1 and in MG2). If we take the efficiencies of both electric requirements in the electric mode or for regeneration purposes.
MASHADI AND EMADI: DUAL-MODE POWER-SPLIT TRANSMISSION FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES 3227

Fig. 11. Comparison of the maximum driving force (the engine-only mode).
Fig. 9. Engine speed restriction in the THS due to the maximum permitted
revolution of MG1.

Fig. 10. Comparison of the maximum driving force.

V. P ERFORMANCE
Due to some limitations in hybrid systems with a planetary
gear set, it is not possible to transmit the combined output
power capability of the engine and the battery to wheels.
These restrictions mainly comprise the maximum speed of
MG1, which does not permit the engine to operate above a
certain speed (see Fig. 9), and the maximum power of MG2,
which receives power both from MG1 and the battery at high
requested powers and may restrict the amount of their power
[4], [18].
Using the new PSD, the system is less affected by such limi-
tations and, therefore, allows higher overall power performance
achievements, particularly at the low/medium speed ranges.
The variations of the maximum driving force versus speed for
the THS and the new system are obtained with consideration
of the said limitations. Improvements in the overall power per-
formance and in the engine-only mode can be seen in Figs. 10
and 11.
VI. C ONTROL S TRATEGY
The upper control layer of a hybrid vehicular drive train is
responsible for energy-management strategy and controls the
energy flow among all components, as well as power generation
and its conversion in the individual components. To improve the
fuel economy, it is important to optimize the control strategy as
well as the architecture and components of the hybrid vehicle.
As shown in Fig. 12, the driving force can be produced by
the battery and/or the engine. A hybrid can avoid some of the
Fig. 12. Power distribution of the new system.
energy losses that are associated with engine operation at speed
and load combinations, where the engine is inefficient, by using
the energy storage device to either augment the engine or absorb
a part of the engine output, allowing it to operate only at speeds
and loads where it is most efficient. Based on this idea, a rule-
based control strategy is presented for the energy distribution
between the battery and the fuel tank.
When the power demand is low and the battery state of
charge (SOC) is sufficiently high, the system operates in the
PG mode, and MG2 individually works to drive the vehicle.
As the vehicle speed increases, the power demand increases,
or the battery SOC becomes too low, the engine is started with
MG1 and MG2 to supply the mechanical power. As the power
demand keeps increasing, the requested power might be out of
the engine maximum power limit. For such cases, the battery
provides assistant power to cope with the requested power.
Under these circumstances, based on the driving condition, the
controller sets the system in either the PG or differential modes.
As the vehicle decelerates, the regenerative control system
commands the MG2 (that is directly connected to wheels in the
PG mode) to act as a generator to recharge the battery.
Fig. 13 represents the block diagram of the controller strategy
that is used to determine the optimal engine torque and speed
based on the internal combustion engine (ICE) efficiency maps,
the battery SOC, the vehicle speed, and the torque that is
required at the wheels.
The inputs of the controller are the power that is requested,
which depends on the driving pattern, the vehicle speed, which
3228
Fig. 13. Block diagram of the controller in Simulink.
Fig. 14. Block “Need engine on?” decides when the engine should be on or off.
depends on the driving cycle, the battery SOC, which depends
on the battery model, and the engine coolant temperature,
which depends on the engine model. The outputs are the engine
speed, the engine torque, and the clutch commands (0 or 1).
According to Fig. 13, at first, the block “Need Engine On?”
decides whether the engine should be on or off. If the engine
should be on, the fuzzy logic controller determines the charging
power to the battery. The engine power is the sum of the power
requested and the battery-charging power. Then, the suitable
powertrain mode (PG or differential) is selected. The engine
speed is determined by a numerical optimization algorithm
to maximize the entire system efficiency when retaining the
engine operation on the determined power. The details of the
control strategy at different working modes are explained in
the following.
VII. E NGINE O N –O FF C ONTROL
When an HEV is stopped or the power that is requested is
too low, rather than running the engine at inefficient regions, the
control system may either shut off the engine, with the storage
device providing auxiliary power (for heating or cooling the
vehicle interior, powering headlights, etc.), or run the engine at
a more efficient higher power setting and use the excess power
over auxiliary loads to recharge the storage device.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO. 7, SEPTEMBER 2010
Fig. 14 shows the “Need engine on?” block in the model of
the controller. This logic, which is extracted from the default
controller of Prius in Advisor [19], decides when the engine
should be on and when it should be off. If all four condi-
tions “Power low enough?,” “Speed low enough?,” “SOC high
enough?,” and “Coolant temperature high enough?” are satis-
fied, the engine will be off. Otherwise, if one of the conditions
is not met and the engine has been off for 3 s or the engine was
already on, the engine should be on.
From Figs. 4 and 5, it can be seen that when the engine
stops, MG1 starts rotating in the opposite direction, and its
speed will be proportional to the vehicle speed up to the
maximum permissible value, above which it cannot start the
engine. Hence, the controller does not turn the engine off over
a certain speed. In the THS, this speed was initially 45 km/h,
and in the second-generation Prius, it was raised to 65 km/h by
raising the maximum allowable speed of MG1 [18]. By using
the new PSD, due to the change in the gear ratio between MG1
and wheels, it can be further raised to 100 km/h.
VIII. BATTERY-C HARGING C ONTROL
A high-level charge-sustaining strategy is implemented to
assure that the battery SOC remains within the preset upper
and lower bounds. This strategy is the most common design
MASHADI AND EMADI: DUAL-MODE POWER-SPLIT TRANSMISSION FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES
TABLE I
RULES OF THE TAKAGI –S UGENO F UZZY C ONTROLLER
Fig. 15. Membership functions for the SOC.
because it causes efficient battery operation and prevents the
battery from depletion or damage. The 65%–75% SOC range
is chosen for efficient battery operation. During braking, it is
allowed to charge the battery up to 0.9 SOC.
Since the engine is the predominant power source, if it
operates at an efficient manner, the overall vehicle efficiency
would be reasonable. For this reason, to avoid energy losses
that are associated with the engine operation at loads where the
engine is inefficient, the battery is charged by augmenting the
engine and absorbing the part of the engine output allowing it
to operate only at speeds and loads where it is most efficient.
The charging power to the battery is determined, depending
on the battery SOC and the power that is requested, i.e., Preq .
The main points of calculating the battery-charging power are
as follows.
• If the SOC is too high, do not charge the battery.
• If the SOC is too low, charge as much as possible.
• Keep the SOC within the 0.6–0.75 range for most effi-
cient charging and discharging and for preventing battery
damage.
• At low power levels, charge the battery to shift the ICE
operating point to a higher efficiency region.
• The target SOC is 0.65, and at a low SOC, charge the
battery proportional to the difference between the current
and target SOCs.
• Battery charge up to 0.9 SOC is allowed during braking.
Fuzzy logic control is found to be a suitable tool for the im-
plementation of the battery-charging strategy [20], [21]. Based
on the points mentioned, the Takagi–Sugeno type of the fuzzy
logic controller is used for calculating the charging power to the
battery [22]. Table I provides a list of if–then rules that represent
the battery-charging strategy described above.
The membership functions for the SOC and the power that
is requested are illustrated in Figs. 15 and 16, respectively. The
surface in Fig. 17 shows the variation of the charging power
against the SOC and Preq values.
IX. P OWERTRAIN M ODE O PTION
Requested power is determined by driver inputs, and battery-
charging power is determined by the battery-charging strategy,
3229
Fig. 16. Membership functions for the power that is requested.
Fig. 17. Battery-charging power for every SOC and the power that is
requested.
as described in Section VIII. In this powertrain, the power from
the engine is divided into two paths, and the ratio of power
directly going to the wheels and to the two motor/generators
is continuously variable. For a given engine speed and torque,
in which the engine has a certain efficiency, less fraction of the
engine power that indirectly transmits to wheels leads to fewer
electrical losses, although two-motor/generator efficiencies at
their operating points influence the total efficiency. This simple
idea provides a quick solution, but there is no guarantee for its
closeness to optimality. A simple rule-based powertrain-mode
switching strategy based on the engine power and the vehicle
speed can be designed to follow the bold line in Fig. 6 in which
there is minimum fraction of the engine power that indirectly
transmits to wheels.
X. E NGINE S PEED C ONTROL
The engine should operate with an output sum of the power
that is requested and the battery-charging power. The system
must use its motors/generators to operate the engine close to
its optimal efficiency operating line across the engine map.
The important point, however, is that remaining in the optimal
engine operating area does not necessarily provide the optimal
vehicle fuel economy due to losses in the transmission [23],
[24]. Under certain operational conditions, the engine should
not operate on the optimal efficiency line because the other
losses are too high. In such circumstances, the engine speed
should be increased from its corresponding optimum speed. As
Fig. 18 illustrates, the engine operating point is compromised to
a lower efficiency, instead of unnecessarily sending the engine
output power through transmission losses.
To optimize the entire system efficiency, taking Fig. 19 into
consideration, the equivalent specific fuel consumption (SFC)
3230
Fig. 18. Engine speed increasing from the engine optimum speed to optimize
the entire system.
Fig. 19. Losses in the powertrain.
can be defined as follows:
SFCeq = ṁf /(Preq + Pch )
= SFCE PE /(PE − LossMG1 − LossMG2 )
where ṁf is the fuel mass flow rate, and LossMG1 and LossMG2
are the power losses of MG1 and MG2, respectively. SFCE
is the specific fuel consumption of the engine, and PE is
the engine power. The engine speed should be determined by
minimizing SFCeq in every working condition [25], [26].
In the controller model of Fig. 13, there are two lookup
tables for each PG and differential powertrain modes. These
are obtained by a numerical optimization algorithm based on
minimizing the equivalent specific fuel consumption, which
receives the vehicle speed, the power that is requested, and
the engine power and decides how much engine speed should
increase from its optimum speed to optimize the entire system.
Fig. 20 shows this engine speed increase in the engine-only
mode for the PG mode. A similar surface is also obtained for
the differential mode. Fig. 20 also shows that at high speeds
and low power demands, in which there is more circulating
power, the engine speed should increase accordingly. In ad-
dition, sometimes, the engine speed should be increased to
release one motor/generator from its very inefficient operating
condition.
XI. S IMULATION AND R ESULTS
The vehicle modeling and simulations have been performed
using Advisor, owing to its potential as a simulation tool for
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO. 7, SEPTEMBER 2010
Fig. 20. Revolutions per minute added to the engine optimum speed to
optimize the entire system efficiency in the engine-only mode.
TABLE II
S IMULATION R ESULTS FOR F UEL C ONSUMPTION AND P OLLUTION
similar works [27]–[29]. Information available in the software
for the first generation of Prius has also been used for the new
configuration (see Appendix A). Simulations have been carried
out for three systems, namely, the THS with a default controller,
the new system with the same components as the THS, and,
finally, the new system with a new designed control strategy.
(15) The main differences between the Advisor default controller
and the designed controller are in the battery-charging strategy
and the engine control. For simulation of the new system, some
blocks in the Simulink model of Prius and some M-files in
Advisor have been replaced. Simulations have been carried
out using the City Highway Test Procedure. It runs a cold-
start FTP-75 cycle and a hot-start highway fuel economy test
(HWFET) cycle. Table II summarizes the simulation results.
The results show that for both systems with the default
controller of Advisor, there is some 8% improvement in fuel
consumption for the new system relative to the THS. It also
shows a further 3% improvement in fuel consumption when the
new control strategy is used instead of the default controller of
Advisor. The pollution results also shown in Table II are almost
similar for the two systems; however, some small improvements
are still seen for the new system. It is worth noting that the
pollution was not taken as the input of the controller design.
Figs. 21 and 22 illustrate the fraction of the engine power that
is indirectly transmitted to wheels in every system operating
point in the FTP-75 and HWFET cycles. The figures clearly
show a considerable decrease in the amount of power that is
indirectly transmitted to the wheels for the case of the new
system.
Acceleration tests were also carried out to investigate the
potential of the new system in utilizing the maximum engine
torque. Acceleration test results based on the Partnership for
a New Generation of Vehicles performance standard [30] are
MASHADI AND EMADI: DUAL-MODE POWER-SPLIT TRANSMISSION FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Fig. 21. Fraction of the engine power that is indirectly transmitted to wheels
in the city cycle.
Fig. 22. Fraction of the engine power that is indirectly transmitted to wheels
in the highway cycle.
TABLE III
ACCELERATION T EST R ESULTS
summarized in Table III. A notable improvement in the accel-
eration performance can be seen for the new system.
XII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, an innovative power-split hybrid transmission
has been introduced, which enables vehicles to work in two
modes of operation: the PG and differential modes. For the
assessment of the new system, it has been compared with
the THS due to existing similarities. A supervisory control
system has been designed using the Takagi–Sugeno type of a
fuzzy logic controller to calculate the battery-charging power
in every driving condition. The controller receives the battery
SOC, the vehicle speed, and the power that is requested at
wheels and decides which powertrain mode is suitable for
system operation. Then, a fuzzy logic controller determines the
charging power to the battery to sustain the SOC in high regions
3231
TABLE IV
V EHICLE I NFORMATION U SED FOR THE N EW THS C ONFIGURATION [17]
Fig. 23. Efficiency map of motor/generator MG1.
and shift the engine operating point to a higher efficiency region
when needed. The engine speed has also been determined by
minimizing the equivalent specific fuel consumption in every
condition to optimize the entire system efficiency. A numerical
optimization algorithm to optimize the entire system efficiency
has been devised for each powertrain mode to control the engine
speed.
Simulation results have shown improvements in the overall
performance by a great deal and reduction in the fuel con-
sumption of some 8%. In addition, the results have shown that
the designed control strategy improved the fuel consumption
a further 3%, in comparison with the default controller of
Advisor for the original vehicle. It has been shown that the new
system decreases the amount of power passing through the two
motors/generators, thereby decreasing overall system losses.
The new system also has additional advantages. In the
electric-assist mode, the whole battery power does not need
flow to MG2; therefore, the need for a large electric motor is
eliminated. By using the new PSD, the threshold value in the
condition “speed low enough” is raised to 100 km/h in the
new system compared with 45 km/h in the THS. Therefore,
in contrast with the THS, at high speeds, it is allowed to turn
off the engine at regenerative braking or setting the system in
the electric-only mode. The possibility of increasing the engine
3232 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 59, NO. 7, SEPTEMBER 2010
speed at a low/medium speed range enables the new system to
reach higher power performance.
A PPENDIX A
V EHICLE I NFORMATION
The vehicle information used in the simulations is also
available in Advisor (2002 version) and is presented in Table IV
for easy access.
A PPENDIX B
M OTOR E FFICIENCY
The efficiency map of the motor/generator MG1 is shown in
Fig. 23.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. Liu, “Modeling, configuration and control optimization of power-split
hybrid vehicles,” Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI,
2007.
[2] A. E. Fuhs, Hybrid Vehicles and the Future of Personal Transportation.
Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 2009, p. 56.
[3] Evaluation of 2004 Toyota Prius Hybrid Electric Drive System, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, May 2005.
[4] S. Abe, “Development of the hybrid vehicle and its future expectation,”
presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive Eng., Warrendale, PA, 2000,
Paper 2000-01-C042.
[5] D. Hermance and S. Abe, “Hybrid vehicles lessons learned and future
prospects,” presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive Eng., Detroit, MI,
2006, Paper 2006-21-0027.
[6] T. M. Grewe, B. M. Conlon, and A. G. Holmes, “Defining the general mo-
tors 2-mode hybrid transmission,” presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive
Eng., Detroit, MI, 2007, Paper 2007-01-0273.
[7] B. Conlon, “Comparative analysis of single and combined hybrid electri-
cally variable transmission operating modes,” presented at the Conf. Soc.
Automotive Eng., Detroit, MI, 2005, Paper 2005-01-1162.
[8] J. M. Miller, “Hybrid electric vehicle propulsion system architectures of
the e-CVT type,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 756–
767, May 2006.
[9] A. Emadi, K. Rajashekara, S. S. Williamson, and S. M. Lukic, “Topo-
logical overview of hybrid electric and fuel cell vehicular power system
architectures and configurations,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 54,
no. 3, pp. 763–770, May 2005.
[10] J. Liu, H. Peng, and Z. Filipi, “Modeling and analysis of the Toyota
hybrid system,” in Proc. IEEE/ASME Int. Conf. Adv. Intell. Mechatron.,
Monterey, CA, Jul. 23–28, 2005, pp. 134–139.
[11] F. U. Syed, M. L. Kuang, M. Smith, S. Okubo, and H. Ying, “Fuzzy gain-
scheduling proportional-integral control for improving engine power and
speed behavior in a hybrid electric vehicle,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.,
vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 69–84, Jan. 2009.
[12] F. U. Syed, M. Kuang, J. Czubay, M. Smith, and H. Ying, “Fuzzy control
to improve high-voltage battery power and engine speed control in a
hybrid electric vehicle,” in Proc. 24th North Amer. Fuzzy Inf. Process.
Soc., Ann Arbor, MI, 2005, pp. 343–348.
[13] H. Yangi, B. Kimi, Y. Park, W. Lim, and S. Cha, “Analysis of planetary
gear hybrid powertrain system part 2: Output split system,” Int. J. Autom.
Technol., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 381–390, Jun. 2009.
[14] F. U. Syed, M. L. Kuang, J. Czubay, and H. Ying, “Derivation and exper-
imental validation of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle model,” IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1731–1747, Nov. 2006.
[15] M. Schulz, “Circulating mechanical power in a power-split hybrid electric
vehicle transmission,” Proc. Instrum. Mech. Eng.—Part D J. Autom. Eng.,
vol. 218, no. 12, pp. 1419–1425, Dec. 2004.
[16] D. Zhang, J. Chen, T. Hsieh, J. Rancourt, and M. R. Schmidt, “Dynamic
modelling and simulation of two-mode electric variable transmission,”
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. D, Transp. Eng., vol. 215, no. 11, pp. 1217–1223,
2001.
[17] M. Duoba, H. Ng, and R. Larsen, “Characterization and comparison of
two hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs)—Honda insight and Toyota Prius,”
presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive Eng., Detroit, MI, 2001, Paper
2001-01-1335.
[18] K. Muta, M. Yamazaki, and J. Tokieda, “Development of new-generation
hybrid system THS II—Drastic improvement of power performance and
fuel economy,” presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive Eng., Detroit, MI,
2004, Paper 2004-01-0064.
[19] W. Wang, “Revisions on the model of Toyota Prius in ADVISOR 3.1,”
presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive Eng., Detroit, MI, 2002, Paper
2002-01-0993.
[20] N. A. Kheir, M. A. Salman, and N. J. Schouten, “Emissions and fuel
economy trade-off for hybrid vehicles using fuzzy logic,” Math. Comput.
Simul., vol. 66, no. 2/3, pp. 155–172, Jun. 2004.
[21] N. J. Schouten, M. A. Salman, and N. A. Kheir, “Fuzzy-logic control
for parallel hybrid vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 10,
no. 3, pp. 460–468, May 2002.
[22] R. Babuska, Fuzzy and Neural Control Disc Course: Lecture Notes.
Delft, The Netherlands: Delft Univ. Technol., 2001.
[23] J. Liu and H. Peng, “Modeling and control of a power-split hybrid vehi-
cle,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1242–1251,
Nov. 2008.
[24] K. Ahn, S. Cho, S. W. Cha, and M. Lee, “Engine operation for the
planetary gear hybrid powertrain,” Proc. Instrum. Mech. Eng.—Part D J.
Autom. Eng., vol. 220, no. 12, pp. 1727–1735, 2006.
[25] G. Paganelli, S. Delprat, T. M. Guerra, J. Rimaux, and J. J. Santin, “Equiv-
alent consumption minimization strategy for parallel hybrid powertrains,”
in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., 2002, vol. 4, pp. 2076–2081.
[26] C. Kim, E. Nam Goong, and S. Lee, “Fuel economy optimization for par-
allel hybrid vehicles with CVT,” presented at the Conf. Soc. Automotive
Eng., Detroit, MI, 1999, Paper 1999-01-1148.
[27] K. B. Wipke, M. R. Cuddy, and S. D. Burch, “ADVISOR 2.1: A user-
friendly advanced powertrain simulation using a combined backward/
forward approach,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1751–
1761, Nov. 1999.
[28] T. Markel, A. Brooker, T. Hendricks, V. Johnson, K. Kelly, B. Kramer,
M. O’Keefe, S. Sprik, and K. Wipke, “ADVISOR: A systems analysis
tool for advanced vehicle modelling,” J. Power Sources, vol. 110, no. 2,
pp. 255–266, Aug. 2002.
[29] J. M. Tyrus, R. M. Long, M. Kramskaya, Y. Fertman, and A. Emadi,
“Hybrid electric sport utility vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 53,
no. 5, pp. 1607–1622, Sep. 2004.
[30] T. C. Moore and A. B. Lovins, “Vehicle design strategies to meet and ex-
ceed PNGV goals,” in Proc. Elect. Hybrid Veh.-Implementation Technol.,
1995, pp. 79–121.
Behrooz Mashadi received the B.Sc. and M.Sc.
degrees in mechanical engineering from Isfahan Uni-
versity of Technology, Isfahan, Iran, and the Ph.D.
degree from Leeds University, Leeds, U.K., in 1996.
Since then, he has been engaged in the automotive
industry. Since 2002, he has been an Assistant Pro-
fessor with the Automotive Engineering Department,
Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran,
Iran. His current research interests include vehi-
cle dynamics, powertrain systems, hybrid propul-
sion systems, and vehicle modeling, simulation, and
control.
Seyed A. M. Emadi received the B.Sc. degree in
mechanical engineering from Mazandaran Univer-
sity, Mazandaran, Iran, in 2005 and the M.Sc. degree
in automotive engineering from Iran University of
Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran, in 2008.
Since 2007, he has been a Research Engineer with
Iran Khodro Company, Tehran. His current research
interests include hybrid electric propulsion systems
and powertrain system modeling, simulation, and
control.