1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to a predictive energy management system for a hybrid electric vehicle and, more particularly, to a predictive energy management system for a hybrid electric vehicle, where the system uses smart vehicle information, such as present location, time, 3-D maps, driving history, etc, to determine current and future engine and motor power commands.
2. Discussion of the Related Art
Hybrid electric vehicles use an engine and one or more electric motors to propel the vehicle to achieve better fuel economy and lower emissions than conventional vehicles. The engine output power does not have to equate power demands as in conventional vehicles. Generally the engine is used at high load demands and the motor is used at low load demands. The electric motor can supplement the power from the engine when the engine cannot sufficiently or efficiently provide the current power demands. The motor can also absorb the engine power and store it in a battery for later use. The engine can also be used to recharge the battery during prolonged use of the motor.
The battery state of charge (SOC) is an important consideration when determining if the motor should be used because a battery is more efficient if the battery state of charge is between an upper bound battery charge and a lower bound battery charge. The hybrid system also needs to be self-sustaining. Therefore, it is desirable to try and maintain the battery state of charge at or near a nominal value. Because it is desirable to have as small of a battery as feasible because of weight and cost requirements, it is necessary to be more selective with the charging and discharging of the battery to maintain the nominal battery state of charge as the motor is operated.
Known power control strategies for hybrid vehicles that determine the engine power and motor power are typically based on current driving conditions. Particularly, the hybrid vehicle controller will determine the combination of engine power and motor power depending on the current vehicle speed and torque requests from the vehicle operator in combination with other parameters, such as the battery state of charge. These power control inputs typically will be provided by look-up tables that have been generated for particular torque requests based on vehicle speed, battery state of charge, etc.
It is desirable to be able to predict future vehicle operating conditions and environment to make better use of the engine power and the motor power to further achieve better fuel economy and lower emissions. For example, if the vehicle controller knows that the vehicle will be traveling down a hill in the near future, it will know that the motor will be able to operate as a generator to charge the battery through regenerative braking when the vehicle goes down the hill. Therefore, it may be desirable to use more motor power than otherwise might be used as the vehicle approaches the hill so that the battery state of charge is first reduced to be later charged by the regenerative braking. Other future conditions, such as traffic information or highway travel, can also better prepare the vehicle controller for these driving conditions if they are known in advance.
In accordance with the teachings of the present invention, a predictive energy management system for a hybrid vehicle is disclosed, where the system uses vehicle input information, such as present location, time, 3-D maps, driving history, etc., to better determine the engine and motor power commands. The predictive energy management system includes a pattern learning and predictions process block that receives the input information, forecasts a driving cycle profile and calculates a driver power demand for a series of N samples of future time horizon starting from the present, where the N samples is based on a predetermined length of time, adaptive learning, etc.
The calculated driver power demand is then applied to a predictive control strategy process block that generates the engine and motor power commands for each N sample. The predictive control strategy block employs predetermined constraint equations to find the optimum sequence of power commands for the series of N samples. The constraint equations may include a battery charge power limit, a battery discharge power limit, a motor mechanical power output, whether the battery state of charge is less than a predetermined maximum value, whether the battery state of charge is greater than a predetermined minimum value, motor power output, engine performance and total emissions. The predictive control strategy process block defines a cost function as the sum of the total weighted predicted fuel consumed for each sample. The predictive control strategy process block then selects the motor and engine power commands for the current sample as the output commands.
Additional advantages and features of the present invention will become apparent from the following description and appended claims, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
The following discussion of the embodiments of the invention directed to a predictive energy management system for a hybrid vehicle is merely exemplary in nature, and is in no way intended to limit the invention or its applications or uses.
The system 10 also includes a predictive control strategy process block 16 that receives the current and predicted profile of the power demand at the wheel from the process block 12. As will be discussed in detail below, the predicted control strategy process block 16 calculates a sequence of power commands for each of the N samples that split the power between the electric motor or motors and the engine on the vehicle in an optimal manner. The predictive control strategy process block 16 receives inputs from various sub-systems 18 for the best fuel economy consistent with the discussion herein including, but not limited to, pedal position, the battery state of charge, the vehicle speed, etc.
Pd=Fr,fV+Fr,rV+FaV+FgV+MaV (1)
In equation (1), M is the vehicle mass, V is the vehicle speed, Fr,f and Fr,r are the front and rear wheel rolling resistant forces, respectively, Fa is the aerodynamic force, Fg is the grade force and a is the vehicle acceleration.
The process block 12 then uses the data input of driving history, including day and time, and 3-D images of roads, to generate a scheme to forecast a driving cycle profile and to predict the vehicle speed V for the next N samples at box 30. As part of the driving cycle profile scheme, the final time of the driving trip (t final) is also predicted. The process block 12 then uses the vehicle parameters, the current and predicted driving cycle and the terrain to calculate a sequence of vehicle power demands at the axle for the next N samples at box 32.
The process block 16 then determines the optimum engine and motor power commands for each N sample at box 34 from the information provided by the process block 12.
The process block 16 then determines if the procedure should be terminated based on reaching the final time t-final or the last of the N samples. At decision diamond 38, the process block 16 determines whether the final time t-final has been reached. If the final time has not been reached, then the process block 16 sets t=t+1 at box 40 and returns to the box 28. If the final time has been reached, then the process block 16 sets N=N−1 at box 42 and determines if N is greater than zero at decision diamond 44. If N is greater than zero, then the process block 16 sets t=t+1 at the box 40, and returns to the box 28, otherwise the procedure is stopped.
The process block 16 then computes a sequence of matrices that are used in developing the constraint equations for each of the N samples of the time horizon at box 56. These constraint equations are identified as non-limiting examples of equations that can be used to predict the future optimal engine power and motor power. Those skilled in the art may recognize other constraint equations that may also be beneficial, such as total emissions. In this example, the hybrid vehicle includes a front motor and a rear motor. However, this is by way of a non-limiting example in that any suitable number of motors can be used. Engine output power Peng(k), rear motor charging power Pm1
The constraint equations used by the process block 16 are defined as follows. The difference between the initial and the end of horizon of battery state of charge (SOC) is limited by:
SOC(t+N)−SOC(0)≧d(t+N) (2)
For the charge sustaining operation, the difference between the initial and final state of charge should be very small. This can be achieved by adding the difference between the initial and the end of horizon state of charge bounded by a value that depends on the end of horizon time. This bound should be very small because the end of horizon gets close to the final time. As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given as:
Σphi(k)+Σsigma(k)≧d(t+N); phi(k)=H(k)*C(k)*Peng(k)+[1/J(k)/C(k)−H(k)*C(k)]*Pm1
The battery charge power is limited by:
Pe1−(k)+Pe2−≦max_charge (4)
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given as:
0*Peng(k)+E(k)*Pm1
The battery discharge power is limited by:
Pe1+(k)+Pe2+≦max_discharge (6)
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given as:
−C(k)*Peng(k)+C(k)Pm1
The rear motor mechanical power output is non-negative:
Pm1+≧0;Pm2+≧0 (8)
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given as:
Peng(k)−Pm1
The battery state of charge (SOC) at each instant in time should be less than the allowed maximum range.
SOC(k)≦SOCmax (10)
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given for all k=t, t+1, . . . , t+N as:
−phi(t)−phi(t+1)− . . . −phi(t+N−1)≦SOCmax+SOC(t)+sigma(t+1)+sigma(t+2)+ . . . +sigma(t+N−1) (11)
The battery state of charge (SOC) at each instant in time should be greater than the allowed minimum range.
SOC(k)≧SOCmin (12)
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given for all k=t, t+1, . . . , t+N as:
−phi(t)−phi(t+1)− . . . −phi(t+N−1)≦−SOCmin+SOC(t)+sigma(t+1)+sigma(t+2)+ . . . +sigma(t+N−1) (13)
The rear motor power output should be less than the maximum allowed value.
Pm1+≦Pm1
As a function of the control variables, this constraint equation is given as:
−Peng(k)+Pm1
The equations that describe engine performance are given as:
−m(k)+A1(gr(k)*w(k))Peng(k)+B1(gr(k)*w(k))X(k)≦0
−m(k)+A2(gr(k)*w(k))Peng(k)+B2(gr(k)*w(k))X(k)≦0 (16)
The process block 16 then defines a cost function as the sum of the total weighted predicted fuel consumed in the next N samples at box 58 as:
The weights α are selected based on the confidence in the predictions of the driving pattern and the future power demand. The sequence of weights is chosen based on several factors, such as credibility of the forecast, type of journey, battery size, etc. If the credibility of the predicted driving pattern is low, all weights corresponding to the future fuel consumption can be equal to zero. The cost function will be equal to the current fuel consumption.
The process block 16 uses a standard iterative method for mixed integer linear programming optimization solution to find the sequence of optimum values of the control variables for the next N samples at box 60. The sequence of control variables includes a binary value for turning the engine off when it is not being used, where X(k)=0 when the engine is off and X(k)=1 when the engine is on.
The process block 16 then computes the optimum rear motor traction power, the front motor regenerative braking power, and the rear motor regenerative braking power by using the following equations, respectively, as:
Pm1+(k)=(−Peng(k)+(Pd+(k)−Pm2+)/(dtr_tract_eff)+Pm1
The process block 16 then returns these values to select the current power commands at the box 34 as discussed above.
The foregoing discussion discloses and describes merely exemplary embodiments of the present invention. One skilled in the art will readily recognize from such discussion and from the accompanying drawings and claims that various changes, modifications and variations can be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5627752 | Buck et al. | May 1997 | A |
5650931 | Nii | Jul 1997 | A |
5716301 | Wild et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5778326 | Moroto et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5804947 | Nii et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5806617 | Yamaguchi | Sep 1998 | A |
5832400 | Takahashi et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5836291 | Kinugasa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5995895 | Watt et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6016457 | Toukura et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6098005 | Tsukamoto et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6275760 | Saito et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6314347 | Kuroda et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321143 | Phillips et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
20020107618 | Deguchi et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20050166580 | Pfaeffle et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050228553 | Tryon | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060277898 | McCarthy, Jr. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060293822 | Lattermann et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 745 788 | Dec 1996 | EP |
2 393 404 | Mar 2004 | GB |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050274553 A1 | Dec 2005 | US |