2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.06.158
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A hierarchical energy management strategy for fuel cell/battery/supercapacitor hybrid electric vehicles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
49
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
49
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, under 7 kW load, the fuel economy obtained is still high, being of about 8% (=100•12.16/152.3) and 9% (=100•14.46/150) using the Air-LFW and Fuel-LFW strategies. The experimental and simulation studies [69][70][71] validate the aforementioned fuel savings by comparison with a baseline strategy, reporting a fuel economy in the same range, as follows: a fuel economy of 12.36% (=100•(4.47−3.9782)/3.9782) using a hierarchical energy management strategy [69]; a lower fuel economy of 6.25% (=100•(64.91−61.09)/61.09) using a Kriging-based bi-objective constrained optimization strategy as reported in [70]; a fuel economy of 8.6% and 13.5% compared with those based on the charge-depletion-charge-sustaining strategy and equivalent consumption minimization strategy have been reported for a multi-objective hierarchical prediction energy management strategy [71] when the drive cycle is unknown.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, under 7 kW load, the fuel economy obtained is still high, being of about 8% (=100•12.16/152.3) and 9% (=100•14.46/150) using the Air-LFW and Fuel-LFW strategies. The experimental and simulation studies [69][70][71] validate the aforementioned fuel savings by comparison with a baseline strategy, reporting a fuel economy in the same range, as follows: a fuel economy of 12.36% (=100•(4.47−3.9782)/3.9782) using a hierarchical energy management strategy [69]; a lower fuel economy of 6.25% (=100•(64.91−61.09)/61.09) using a Kriging-based bi-objective constrained optimization strategy as reported in [70]; a fuel economy of 8.6% and 13.5% compared with those based on the charge-depletion-charge-sustaining strategy and equivalent consumption minimization strategy have been reported for a multi-objective hierarchical prediction energy management strategy [71] when the drive cycle is unknown.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…E-powertrain of future electric vehicles could consist of energy generation units (e.g., fuel cells and photovoltaic modules), energy storage systems (e.g., batteries and supercapacitors), energy conversion units (e.g., bidirectional DC/DC converters and DC/AC inverters) and an electric machine, which can work in both generating and motoring modes [1][2][3][4][5][6]]. An energy management system is responsible to operate the above-mentioned components in a way that the technical constraints are satisfi ed.…”
Section: E N G I N E E R I N G G R O U Pmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different types of energy sources (e.g., batteries, supercapacitors, fuel cells) can be utilized in electric vehicles to store and provide energy in the e-powertrain through power electronic devices [1][2][3][4][5][6]. The lifetime of the components in the e-powertrain depends on their load profi le [7,8].…”
Section: E N G I N E E R I N G G R O U Pmentioning
confidence: 99%