In this paper we compare energy performance and environmental impact of four nominal weight classes of commercial vehicles with different powertrain solutions: conventional diesel internal combustion engine (ICE), Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PHEV), Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) and Plug-In Fuel Cell Vehicle (PFCV). First, the sizing of the various powertrain components is performed adopting a simplified calculation based on a rule-based model. Then, the energy performances are evaluated through simulation over different driving cycles carried out with a self-developed Matlab/Simulink® simulator tool based on a forward-looking approach, that implements a control strategy that targets the instant velocity specified by the driving cycle. We show that when the optimal control strategy based on the Pontryagin's Minimum Principle is adopted, the fuel consumption significantly reduces with respect to the simplified rule-based control strategy approach. Finally, the overall specific energy consumption and the corresponding greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are evaluated by means of a well-to-wheel analysis, considering various possible scenarios, covering the main traditional and low emission solutions for production, transportation and distribution of diesel, electricity and hydrogen. As expected, the highest GHG emissions are obtained in case of fossil origin of the energy carrier, with maximum value of 270 gCO2/km/kg in case of 3.5 ton truck with traditional diesel ICE, due to the low powertrain efficiency compared to the other considered solutions. Moreover, both the specific primary energy consumption and GHG emissions proportionally reduce with tonnage, as a consequence of the progressive reduction of the fraction of the powertrain weight with respect to the total vehicle mass.

Energy performance and well-to-wheel analysis of different powertrain solutions for freight transportation

Iora P.
2020-01-01

Abstract

In this paper we compare energy performance and environmental impact of four nominal weight classes of commercial vehicles with different powertrain solutions: conventional diesel internal combustion engine (ICE), Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PHEV), Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) and Plug-In Fuel Cell Vehicle (PFCV). First, the sizing of the various powertrain components is performed adopting a simplified calculation based on a rule-based model. Then, the energy performances are evaluated through simulation over different driving cycles carried out with a self-developed Matlab/Simulink® simulator tool based on a forward-looking approach, that implements a control strategy that targets the instant velocity specified by the driving cycle. We show that when the optimal control strategy based on the Pontryagin's Minimum Principle is adopted, the fuel consumption significantly reduces with respect to the simplified rule-based control strategy approach. Finally, the overall specific energy consumption and the corresponding greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are evaluated by means of a well-to-wheel analysis, considering various possible scenarios, covering the main traditional and low emission solutions for production, transportation and distribution of diesel, electricity and hydrogen. As expected, the highest GHG emissions are obtained in case of fossil origin of the energy carrier, with maximum value of 270 gCO2/km/kg in case of 3.5 ton truck with traditional diesel ICE, due to the low powertrain efficiency compared to the other considered solutions. Moreover, both the specific primary energy consumption and GHG emissions proportionally reduce with tonnage, as a consequence of the progressive reduction of the fraction of the powertrain weight with respect to the total vehicle mass.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/529117
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 19
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact