Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Saxena2014 PDF
Saxena2014 PDF
Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy
h i g h l i g h t s
Model electrical consumption of 2-, 3- and 4-wheelers in India.
Average city energy use is 33 Wh/km for scooters, 61 Wh/km for 3-wheelers.
Average city energy use is 84 Wh/km and 123 Wh/km for low and high power 4-wheelers.
The increased energy use from air conditioning is quantied.
Energy use from variations in vehicle mass and motor efciency are quantied.
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 9 August 2013
Received in revised form 18 October 2013
Accepted 27 October 2013
Available online 20 November 2013
Keywords:
Electric vehicles
Powertrain
Transportation
Vehicle to grid
India
a b s t r a c t
The Government of India has recently announced the National Electric Mobility Mission Plan, which sets
ambitious targets for electric vehicle deployment in India. One important barrier to substantial market
penetration of EVs in India is the impact that large numbers of EVs will have on an already strained electricity grid. Properly predicting the impact of EVs on the Indian grid will allow better planning of new
generation and distribution infrastructure as the EV mission is rolled out. Properly predicting the grid
impacts from EVs requires information about the electrical energy consumption of different types of
EVs in Indian driving conditions. This study uses detailed vehicle powertrain models to estimate per kilometer electrical consumption for electric scooters, 3-wheelers and different types of 4-wheelers in India.
The powertrain modeling methodology is validated against experimental measurements of electrical
consumption for a Nissan Leaf. The model is then used to predict electrical consumption for several types
of vehicles in different driving conditions. The results show that in city driving conditions, the average
electrical consumption is: 33 Wh/km for the scooter, 61 Wh/km for the 3-wheeler, 84 Wh/km for the
low power 4-wheeler, and 123 Wh/km for the high power 4-wheeler. For highway driving conditions,
the average electrical consumption is: 133 Wh/km for the low power 4-wheeler, and 165 Wh/km for
the high power 4-wheeler. The impact of variations in several parameters are modeled, including the
impact of different driving conditions, different levels of loading by air conditions and other ancillary
components, different total vehicle masses, and different levels of motor operating efciency.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
India is one of the worlds most rapidly growing economies, and
is the third largest vehicle market in the world. Annual demand of
vehicles is rapidly growing in India, with 2020 annual projected
sales of 10 million passenger vehicles, 2.7 million commercial vehicles, and 34 million two-wheelers. India currently imports about
85% of its oil and is projected to reach 92% by 2020, creating a significant challenge for the balance of payments and the energy security
of the country [1]. Based on the pressing challenges with growth in
vehicle sales and energy security facing the country, the Central
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: samveg@berkeley.edu (S. Saxena).
0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.10.043
583
584
Table 1
Vehicle specications used in powertrain models.
Scooter
3-Wheeler
150
1.5
6.3805
2.16
1000 300
0.60
1.25
50
6471
N/A
50
500
5.46
6.3805
4.25
1000 4.500
0.35
2.40
100
6080
N/A
73
898
19
6.8737
6.54
P155/70R13
0.335
2.0
200
7095
3476
117
1493
80
7.9377
16.7
P205/55 R16
0.28
2.50
200
123138
73136
120
1
Mean speed is dened as the average of all velocities over the drive cycle. Mean
driving speed is dened as the average of all non-zero velocities.
585
maximum acceleration from stop values are encountered in the Indian city cycles, however the average acceleration is higher in the
US city cycle.
Fig. 4 compares the deceleration characteristics of the US and
Indian drive cycles. The results show that maximum deceleration
and maximum deceleration to stop are higher in Indian city conditions than US city conditions, however higher levels of average
deceleration are seen in the US city cycle.
Summarizing the results in this section, Figs. 14 compared the
drive cycle characteristics for the US and Indian drive cycles. It was
generally observed that the Indian drive cycles involve lower driving speeds, greater frequency of stopping, and higher levels of
maximum acceleration and deceleration. These results suggest that
driving in India may involve more severe stop-and-go conditions,
and previous studies [19,25] have found that these types of driving
conditions create unique opportunities for achieving greater levels
of fuel savings with vehicle electrication.
Fig. 5. Model validation: comparison of modeled and measured electrical consumption for a Nissan Leaf.
Table 3
Electrical consumption range of each vehicle.
Electrical consumption (Wh/km)
Scooter
3-Wheeler
Low power EV
High power EV
Avg city
Avg hwy
Range
33
61
84
123
38
85
133
164
3140
5397
70192
101224
Table 2
Range of parameter variations explored for their impact on vehicle energy consumption.
Scooter
3-Wheeler
0.00.30
150300
5590
0.00.50
500800
5590
0.203.0
8981200
5590
0.204.0
14931800
5590
586
Fig. 6. Electrical energy consumption rate for different types of EVs on different
drive cycles.
Fig. 7. Variation of vehicle electrical consumption with different ancillary component loading.
out values should not be given much weight but instead simply
considered for reference.
The results in Fig. 6 show that electrical consumption per kilometer is highest for the 4-wheelers and lowest for the electrical
scooter, which comes as no surprise given the differences in vehicle mass. For the vehicles which are capable of sustaining highway
speeds (i.e. only the 4-wheelers), electrical consumption is signicantly higher for high speed highway driving.
Table 4
Coefcients for equation of t for impact of ancillary component loading (kW) on vehicle electricity consumption (Wh/km).
UDDS
HWFET
US06
India urban
Delhi
Pune
MIDC
61.62
30.40
1.00
57.59
28.84
1.00
40.59
33.97
1.00
22.75
67.15
1.00
59.28
46.94
1.00
55.40
50.46
1.00
34.42
69.80
1.00
47.11
67.81
1.00
23.72
80.78
1.00
60.64
57.03
1.00
56.86
69.33
1.00
34.49
89.80
1.00
46.14
112.28
1.00
22.88
118.40
1.00
59.57
88.84
1.00
55.73
113.99
1.00
33.38
124.40
1.00
2 Wheeler
m
b
R2
42.35
32.83
1.00
48.13
28.85
1.00
3 Wheeler
m
b
R2
36.47
65.70
1.00
45.85
50.62
1.00
m
b
R2
35.30
87.86
1.00
15.43
117.48
1.00
15.73
189.49
1.00
m
b
R2
34.22
128.27
1.00
14.21
142.42
1.00
14.70
220.64
1.00
India highway
587
HWFET
US06
India urban
India highway
Delhi
Pune
MIDC
0.02
30.88
0.95
0.03
27.64
0.98
0.02
32.73
0.96
2 Wheeler
m
b
R2
0.03
29.94
1.00
0.02
28.12
0.95
3 Wheeler
m
b
R2
0.07
34.43
1.00
0.07
22.27
1.00
0.05
45.54
1.00
0.04
32.00
1.00
0.07
23.64
1.00
0.04
51.03
1.00
m
b
R2
0.07
30.87
1.00
0.05
77.49
1.00
0.07
127.74
1.00
0.07
18.62
1.00
0.06
31.96
1.00
0.04
32.06
1.00
0.07
22.60
1.00
0.05
48.43
1.00
m
b
R2
0.06
44.05
1.00
0.04
83.86
1.00
0.07
114.44
1.00
0.06
31.90
1.00
0.05
42.89
1.00
0.04
39.43
1.00
0.06
37.38
1.00
0.05
60.27
1.00
y mx b
Table 6
Coefcients for equation of t for impact of motor efciency (%) on vehicle electricity consumption (Wh/km).
UDDS
HWFET
US06
India urban
Delhi
Pune
MIDC
49.53
70.89
0.99
51.55
69.97
0.99
54.34
77.54
0.99
118.2
161.4
0.99
74.5
110.2
0.99
99.9
131.3
0.99
118.0
164.6
0.99
286.7
328.7
0.99
266.0
322.9
0.99
167.1
219.4
0.99
274.9
321.1
0.99
251.1
318.9
0.99
268.7
328.7
0.99
266.0
322.9
0.99
167.1
219.4
0.99
274.9
321.1
0.99
251.1
318.9
0.99
2 Wheeler
m
b
R2
54.11
75.97
0.99
50.93
69.54
0.99
3 Wheeler
m
b
R2
125.9
165.3
0.99
106.2
135.6
0.99
m
b
R2
198.8
248.5
0.99
189.0
271.7
0.99
319.0
441.8
1.00
m
b
R2
304.2
361.7
0.99
231.1
326.1
0.99
438.0
568.6
0.99
India highway
588
fairly consistent across the different drive cycles and across the different vehicles (especially the 3-wheeler and both 4-wheelers).
4.2.3. Variations in average motor efciency
The values chosen for the motor efciency maps used for the
baseline vehicle simulations (in Section 4.1) were established to
t the Nissan Leaf model validation results in Section 3.4. Electric
vehicles released in the Indian market, however, may use different
types of motors with different efciency operating proles, thus
this section explores the impact of changes is motor operating efciency. Fig. 9 shows the variation of vehicle electricity consumption with average motor operating efciency for the different
vehicles driving on the different drive cycles.
As expected, the results in Fig. 9 show that vehicle electricity
consumption decreases as a more efcient motor is used. A particularly interesting result, however, is that changes in motor efciency have very little impact on electricity consumption for the
smaller vehicles, especially the two-wheeler. This result is of signicant importance as it suggests that the use of less expensive
motors, which may be less efcient, can be used to lower the cost
of electric scooters while having minimal impact on vehicle electricity consumption (and thus vehicle range). For the larger vehicles and for higher speed driving conditions (i.e. on highways),
however, motor efciency impacts electrical consumption signicantly and thus better motors must be used. The results for the larger vehicles in Fig. 9 show that the relationship between vehicle
electricity consumption and motor efciency is not perfectly linear
(i.e. a slight curvature can be seen on the plots), however the R2 tting parameters in Table 6 show that a linear equation of the form
of Eq. (1), with x being the average motor efciency (%), produces a
good t.
5. Conclusions
Given the ambitious targets for electric vehicle deployment in
India under the National Electric Mobility Mission Plan which
was announced by the Government of India, there are signicant
concerns with the impact that EV charging will have on an already
strained Indian electricity grid. This study is part of a larger effort
towards estimating the impact on the Indian electricity grid from
substantial deployment of EVs on the Indian grid to subsequently
plan the deployment of new generation and distribution
infrastructure.
This study used detailed vehicle powertrain models to estimate
the per kilometer electrical consumption of several types of EVs,
including a scooter, a 3-wheeler, a low power 4-wheeler, and a
high power 4-wheeler. Electrical consumption data for scooters,
3-wheelers, and small 4-wheelers has previously been unavailable
in the literature, particularly for the Indian context where driving
conditions will be different than in developed countries and air
conditioning load will be a signicant factor. The powertrain model
methodology was validated against experimental measurements
for a Nissan Leaf. The main conclusions from this study are as
follows:
1. Average electrical consumption: Vehicle size has the greatest
impact on per km electrical consumption, followed by the
driving characteristics (i.e. city vs. highway driving). In city
driving conditions average electrical consumption results were:
33 Wh/km for the scooter, 61 Wh/km for the 3-wheeler, 84 Wh/
km for the low power 4-wheeler, and 123 Wh/km for the high
power 4-wheeler. For highway driving conditions average electrical consumption results were: 133 Wh/km for the low power
4-wheeler, and 165 Wh/km for the high power 4-wheeler. The
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Assistant Secretary of Policy
and International Affairs, Ofce of Policy and International Affairs,
of the US Department of Energy and the Regulatory Assistance
Project through the US Department of Energy under Contract No.
DE-AC02-05CH11231.
Appendix A.
This Appendix presents a brief description of the powertrain
and component models that are used to model the four types of
electric vehicles considered in this study. For a detailed description
of each model, readers are referred to the documentation associated with the commercially available powertrain modeling software Autonomie, which was used in this study.
A.1. Overall powertrain architecture
The electric vehicle models in Autonomie include the component models shown in Fig. 10, as well as an overarching propulsion
and brake control model.
The propulsion control model translates driver acceleration
commands, which are governed by the specied drive cycle, into
motor torque demands while simultaneously considering vehicle
and motor speed, battery state of charge, maximum torque output
before wheel slip at a given speed, and loading from ancillary
components.
The braking control model performs a similar function of translating driver braking commands, which are governed by the specied drive cycle, into braking torque demands while considering
several factors and constraints. One further function of the braking
589
SOC
I
dt
3600
Ahinit
Ahmax
Ahmax f T cell
The values for Ahmax are specied in an initialization le using measurement data for the maximum capacity of a cell that is discharged
at a C/5 rate.
The open circuit voltage and the internal resistances of the cell
on charging or discharging are determined as a function of SOC and
cell temperature, as shown in Eq. (3) through Eq. (5) respectively:
V OC f SOC;T cell
11
Finally, the module temperature is calculated through the balance of heat generation and heat dissipation rates in Eq. (12),
and it is assumed that each cell within the module will have the
same temperature.
Q_ cooling
_ cooling air C p;module
m
T cell T module
R_
Q gen Q_ cooling dt
mmodule C p;module
12
10
In situations where the cooling fan remains off, Eq. (10) is simply set
to zero. The module air temperature is calculated using Eq. (11):
F T=rwheels
13
In Eq. (13), T is the total input or output torque to the tires, and
rwheels is the wheel radius. Torque input or output is calculated
using Eq. (14):
T T in T braking T res
14
In Eq. (14), Tin is the torque input from the vehicle powertrain,
Tbraking is the braking torque exerted by the mechanical brakes,
and Tres is the resistive torque from tire rolling resistance which is
calculated using a third-order polynomial function of speed. The
590
F loss;aero 1=2qC d AV 2
15
F loss;hill mg sinh
16
F in F loss
mstatic mdynamic
17
In Eq. (17), Fin is the input from the vehicle powertrain, Floss is the
sum of all opposing forces, mstatic is the static mass of the vehicle
and mdynamic is the dynamic mass of the vehicle from rotating components. Vehicle speed is calculated by integrating Eq. (17) over
time.
A.6. Ancillary components models
Power losses from ancillary components (such as air conditioning and electronic in-vehicle equipment) are calculated as a specied continuous power draw. The power that is owed to
ancillary components is assumed to travel through a power converter which maintains its output voltage at the required voltage
input for ancillary components (i.e. 12 V). The power converter is
assumed to have 95% conversion efciency.
References
[1] Department of Heavy Industry, Government of India, National Electric Mobility
Mission
Plan
2020,
<http://dhi.nic.in/NEMMP2020.pdf>,
[accessed
19.03.2013].
[2] Foley A, Tyther B, Calnan P, Gallachoir BO. Impacts of Electric Vehicle charging
under electricity market operations. Appl Energy 2013;101:93102. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.06.052.
[3] U.S. Department of Energy, EV Everywhere grand challenge blueprint, 2013,
<http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/electric_vehicles/pdfs/
eveverywhere_blueprint.pdf>.
[4] The Central Peoples Government of the Peoples Republic of China, Energysaving and new energy automotive industry development plan, 2012, <http://
www.gov.cn/zwgk/2012-07/09/content_2179032.htm>.
[5] Romero JJ. Blackouts illuminate Indias power problems. IEEE Spectrum
2012;49(10):112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6309237.
[6] Hidru MK, Parsons GR, Kempton W, Gardner MP. Willingness to pay for electric
vehicles and their attributes. Resour Energy Econ 2011;33(3):686705. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2011.02.002.
[7] Collins MM, Mader GH. The timing of EV recharging and its effects on utilities.
IEEE Trans Vehicular Technol 1983;VT-32(1):907. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
T-VT.1983.2394.
[8] Rahman S, Shrestha GB. An investigation into the impact of electric vehicle
load on the electric utility distribution system. IEEE Trans Power Deliv
1993;8(2):5917. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/61.216865.
[9] Farmer C, Hines P, Dowds J, Blumsack S. Modeling the impact of increasing
PHEV loads on the distribution infrastructure, In: 43rd Hawaii international
conference on system sciences; 2010, doi:10.1109/HICSS.2010.277.
[10] Denholm P, Kuss M, Margolis RM. Co-benets of large scale plug-in hybrid
electric vehicle and solar PV deployment. J Power Sources 2013;236:3506.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.10.007.
[11] Qian K, Zhou C, Allen M, Yuan Y. Modeling of load demand to EV battery
charging
in
distribution
systems.
IEEE
Trans
Power
Systems
2011;26(2):80210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2057456.
[12] Wang J, Liu C, Ton D, Zhou Y, Kim J, Vyas A. Impact of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles on power systems with demand response and wind power. Energy
Policy 2011;39(7):401621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.042.
[13] Wu D, Aliprantis DC, Gkritza K. Electric energy and power consumption by
light-duty plug-in electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Power Systems
2011;26(2):73846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2052375.
[14] Kelly JC, MacDonald JS, Keoleian GA. Time-dependent plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle charging based on national driving patterns and demographics. Appl
Energy 2012;94:395405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.02.001.
[15] Weiller C. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle impacts on hourly electricity demand
in the United States. Energy Policy 2011;39(6):376678. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.005.
[16] Peterson SB, Whitacre JF, Apt J. Net air emissions from electric vehicles: the
effect of carbon price and charging strategies. Environ Sci Technol
2011;45(5):17927. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es102464y.
[17] Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, V2G-Sim - A platform for
understanding vehicle-to-grid integration, <http://powertrains.lbl.gov/
research-projects/v2g-sim>.
[18] U.S. Department of Transportation, National Household Travel Survey, <http://
nhts.ornl.gov/download.shtml>, [accessed 19.03.2013].
[19] Saxena S, Phadke A, Gopal A, Srinivasan V. Understanding fuel savings
mechanisms from hybrid vehicles to inform optimal battery sizing for India.
Int J Powertrains IJPT-44428 2013;1:23.
[20] Ericsson E. Independent driving pattern factors and their inuence on fuel-use
and exhaust emission factors. Transport Res Part D: Transport Environ
2001;6(5):32545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(01)00003-7.
[21] Kudoh Y, Ishitani H, Matsuhashi R, Yoshida Y, Morita K, Katsuki S, et al.
Environmental evaluation of introducing electric vehicles using a dynamic
trafc-ow model. Appl Energy 2001;69(2):14559. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S0306-2619(01)00005-8.
[22] Joumard R, Andr M, Vidon R, Tassel P, Pruvost C. Inuence of driving cycles on
unit emissions from passenger cars. Atmos Environ 2000;34(27):46218.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(00)00118-7.
[23] Hansen JQ, Winther M, Sorenson SC. The inuence of driving patterns on petrol
passenger car emissions. Sci Total Environ 1995;169(13):12939. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-9697(95)04641-D.
[24] Wang H, Fu L, Zhou Y, Li H. Modelling of the fuel consumption for passenger
cars regarding driving characteristics. Transport Res Part D: Transport Environ
2008;13(7):47982. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.09.002.
[25] Saxena S, Gopal A, Phadke A. Understanding the Fuel Savings Potential from
deploying hybrid cars in China. Appl Energy 2014;113:112733. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.057.
[26] Chugh S, Kumar P, Muralidharan M. et al. Development of Delhi driving cycle:
a tool for realistic assessment of exhaust emissions from passenger cars in
Delhi. SAE technical paper 201201-0877; 2012. doi:10.4271/2012-01-0877.
[27] Kamble SH, Mathew TV, Sharma GK. Development of real-world drive cycle:
case study of Pune, India. Transport Res Part D: Transport Environ
2009;14(2):13240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.11.008.
[28] Automotive Research Association of India, Testing type approval and
conformity of production (COP) of vehicles for emission as per CMV rules
115, 116 and 126, Chapter 3, Doc. No. MoRTH/CMVR/TAP-115/116, Issue 4, pp.
914,
<http://www.araiindia.com/CMVR_TAP_Documents/Part-14/Part14_Chapter03.pdf>.
[29] Environmental Protection Agency, Detailed Test Information, <http://
www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml>, [accessed 18.06.2013].
[30] Johnson VH. Fuel used for vehicle air conditioning: a state-by-state thermal
comfort-based approach, SAE technical paper 200201-1957; 2002.
doi:10.4271/2002-01-1957.
[31] Lukic SM, Emadi A. Performance analysis of automotive power systems: effects
of power electronic intensive loads and electrically-assisted propulsion
systems. IEEE Vehicular Technol Conf 2002;56(3):18359. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/VETECF.2002.1040534.
[32] Carlson RB, Lohse-Busch H, Diez J, Gibbs J. The measured impact of vehicle
mass on road load forces and energy consumption for a BEV, HEV, and ICE
Vehicle. SAE Int J Alternat Powertrains 2013;2(1):10514. http://dx.doi.org/
10.4271/2013-01-1457.