Simplified Electric Vehicle Power Train Models

and Range Estimation

John G. Hayes, R. Pedro R. de Oliveira, Sean Vaughan, Michael G. Egan
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering
University College Cork, Ireland
john.hayes@ucc.ie

Abstract- In this paper, simplified EV power train models are implemented. The models are compared to published range
developed for new and existing production vehicles. The models information and on-going road tests.
are developed based on published vehicle parameters and range
information for the Nissan Leaf and the Tesla Roadster. The
models are compared with published manufacturer TABLE I
specifications for range under various route and driving RANGE ESTIMATES FOR NISSAN LEAF [1]
conditions, and for various drive cycles. The models are
Driving Average Speed Temperature Range Climate
additionally validated against test results for the Nissan Leaf
and Tesla Roadster vehicles, where the test route topography is condition mph km/h °F °C mi km Control
modeled using Google Earth and a GPS-based smart-phone EPA LA4 20 31 68-86 20-30 100 160 Off
application. Excellent correlations are demonstrated between Ideal driving
the experimental results and manufacturer data and the vehicle 38 61 68 20 138 221 Off
conditions
models. Impacts of battery degradation with time and vehicle Highway, summer 55 88 95 35 70 112 AC
HVAC loads are considered in the study.
Stop-and-go,
15 24 14 -11 62 99 Heat
winter
I. INTRODUCTION EPA five-cycle
Varying Varying 73 117 Varying
In recent years, there has been significant societal interest test
in the development, production and sale of electric vehicles.
Announcements occur regularly on proposed new product Vehicle auxiliary loads for heating, ventilation, and air
introductions into the automotive marketplace. Electric conditioning (HVAC) can restrict vehicle range significantly.
vehicles can range from the hybrid-electric vehicle (HEV) Based on the stop-and-go winter conditions above in Table I,
technologies currently on the market such as the Toyota Prius it is estimated that the maximum heating load is
and Honda Insight to the new production battery electric approximately 6 kW for the Nissan Leaf. Similarly, it appears
vehicles (BEV) such as the Nissan Leaf, the Mitsubishi that that the maximum AC load is 6 kW for the highway
iMiEV and the Tesla Roadster, to the extended-range electric summer driving condition. Thus, driving in extreme
vehicle (EREV) Chevy Volt [11]. Key factors in customer temperature conditions can result in significant range
acceptance of the new technologies will be the cost and range reduction and significant HVAC is required for the passenger
of the battery electric vehicles. cabin and for the batteries. LiIon batteries require significant
Significant information has been published on BEV thermal management in order to meet the automotive lifetime
performance by manufacturers, the Environmental Protection specifications and various management approaches are
Agency (EPA), and by the public on the internet. On-going implemented [5, 6].
vehicle testing is providing additional information. The In this paper, an understanding of the vehicle power train
information provided often is not consistent and some and vehicle performance under various conditions is used to
customization is required in order to predict vehicle range develop a vehicle model. The vehicle range characteristics for
under the various driving conditions. For example, driving various drive conditions and topographies can then be easily
range results are presented for the Nissan Leaf on the derived. Given the significant information available in the
company website and are presented in Table I [1]. The public domain for the Nissan Leaf and Tesla Roadster, these
nominal range for the EPA LA4 drive cycle is quoted by two vehicles are initially investigated. Range estimations are
Nissan and is given at 100 miles. The EPA sticker cites a available for the Roadster in [10], while [9] refers to the use
range of 73 miles based on a standardized five-cycle test [3]. of a 4 kW heater for the Roadster.
Given the inherent range limitations of BEVs and The simplified electric vehicle models are discussed,
associated driver anxiety, it is necessary to estimate vehicle derived, and presented in Section II. Section III discusses the
range for varied sets of battery, road and driving conditions. drive cycles and simulation results. Section IV presents
The purpose of this paper is to take the material available Nissan Leaf test results. The Tesla Roadster is discussed in
from various sources and to use the material to create Section V.
simplified power train models that can be easily

978-1-61284-247-9/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE

 II. ELECTRIC VEHICLE MODELS The electric vehicle parameters for the Nissan Leaf and
A significant body of literature and a wide variety of Tesla Roadster are presented in Table II. The top rows outline
software tools are available for vehicle modeling [7, 8]. For the published vehicle parameters. The middle rows outline
this study, the power train models are implemented using the assumptions in generating the model. Several estimated
EXCEL and are easily implemented using other mathematical parameters for the model are shown in the bottom rows.
software. The basic on-vehicle power train components are These and others can be generated based on the following
illustrated in Fig. 1. Published or assumed values are input to discussion.
the model and these parameters are as shown above the The electrical power is typically converted from ac to dc by
diagram along the top of Fig. 1. Resulting operating an on-vehicle charger. The on-board charger on the Leaf is
conditions and machine parameters are output from the model approximately 3 kW and is an isolated ac-dc converter. The
and these parameters are shown below the diagram along the Tesla Roadster features a non-isolated on-board integral
bottom of Fig. 1. charger which can charge at high power. The Leaf uses a
permanent-magnet ac machine for propulsion. Tesla vehicles
use squirrel-cage induction motors.
TABLE II
For simplicity related to on-board energy usage, it is
ELECTRIC VEHICLE PARAMETERS
assumed in this study that the on-board charger and inverter
Parameters Nissan Leaf Tesla Roadster
can be modeled simply by their efficiencies at 90 % and 98
%, respectively. These are reasonable efficiency values over a
wide load range. The battery is modeled by the no-load
battery voltage at full charge and the battery internal
impedance is estimated based on 95 % efficiency at full load.
Published
Machine parameters for the propulsion motors are generated
Curb Weight (kg) 1521 1235 using nominal efficiencies and power factors at the rated
Drag coefficient 0.28 0.35 condition. The machine losses are nominally distributed
Final gear ratio 7.98 8.28 between stator and rotor copper loss and core, friction and
windage losses. The important machine parameters are then
Battery Voltage (V) 345 375
easily determined. The rated machine voltage is based on the
Battery Storage (kWh) 24 53 available dc inverter voltage at rated load using space-vector
Rotor Output Torque (Nm) 280 370 modulation or 3rd harmonic addition. A machine constant
Rotor Output Power (kW) 80 215 relating torque to current can then be determined for the
PMAC with phase current and the SCIM with rotor current.
Battery Type Li Ion Li Ion
Gearing ratios are typically published and a gear efficiency of
Motor Type PMAC SCIM
97 % is assumed. Various vehicle parameters, such as the
Max Speed (mph) [km] 93 [150] 125 [201] drag coefficient, are widely available. Estimations using
0-60mph (s) 9.9 3.9 vehicle drive performance are used for key parameters such
Assumed
as the coefficient of rolling resistance and cross-sectional
area.
Wheel radius (m) 0.3 0.3
Accessory power is an assumed figure while the auxiliary
Gear efficiency (%) 97 97 power is estimated based on the various data. Accessory
Inverter efficiency (%) 98 98 power is assumed to be 0.2 kW, a reasonable average power
Motor efficiency (%) 95 95 consumption related to power requirements for vehicle house
keeping, power steering, etc. The auxiliary loads for HVAC
Moment of Inertia (kg m2) 10 10
(heating, ventilation and air conditioning) can be relatively
Number of Poles 4 4 high as significant thermal management is required for
Power Factor 0.9 0.89 battery heating and cooling, vehicle operational requirements
Auxiliary Load (kWh) 0.2 0.2 such as defrosting, and consumer comforts such as air
Lifetime Battery conditioning and heating. The analysis suggests that 6 kW is
80% 80%
Degradation a reasonable estimate of the Leaf HVAC power. A lower
Estimated power of 4 kW is assumed for the Tesla Roadster [9].
Cross sectional area (m2) 2.29 1.9 The model parameters can be input into EXCEL or a
mathematical software and used with given drive cycle
Base Speed (mph) 24.1 47.1
conditions to generate the drive-cycle energy consumption.
Machine Constant (Nm/A) 0.407 0.237 The vehicle mechanical energy flows are simplistically
Coefficient of rolling
0.007 0.0055 modeled as drag and rolling resistance. Vehicle acceleration
resistance and braking profiles are generated based on the given speed
HVAC (kW) 6 4 vs. time information provided for the various drive cycles.
 ηchg VBP , RBP Paux ηinv PFm , ηm , pole pairs T JA Cd
Stator\Rotor\CFW ω CRR
Battery Pack DC-AC Inverter
M
A
Utility r
L Gear
Auxilary Three-
V
ac AC-DC & Tire
phase
Charger Accessory AC Motor Drive
N
Loads Axle
E

R, L
Vdc V ph k
I BP PHVAC I ph TCFW
Fig. 1. Electric vehicle system block diagram

III. DRIVE CYCLES AND SIMULATION OUTPUTS
There are many types of standardized drive cycles used
around the world. The US EPA uses a combined five-cycle
test [3] based on dynamometer testing. There are four basic
cycles: FTP, HFET, US06 and SC03. The fuel economy is
based on testing under various temperature conditions. The
FTP cycle is a longer variation of the LA4 drive cycle quoted
by Nissan in their literature. The FTP drive cycle is as shown
in Fig. 2.
60
50
Speed (mph)
dynamometer effects. An additional assumption of an
adjustment of 20 % for battery degradation is also made by
the authors. A feature of the Nissan Leaf is that the long-life
mode can be enabled in order to set the maximum state of
charge at 80 % and so extend battery life [12].
The model is used to generate the mileage available using
the specified battery energy. The energies required for
traction and braking are easily calculated. Using regenerative
braking, a certain proportion of the braking energy is
regenerated. As mentioned, the calculation of the five-cycle
fuel economy is dependent on various temperatures, starting,
soak, and running conditions. The authors in this study
neglect the effects of starting and the calculation of the rating
is purely based on the running fuel economy. These

40
Speed
assumptions are reasonable for an EV.
30 mph The mileage and fuel economy ratings for the city,
20
highway, and combined five-cycle tests are simplified in this
study from those presented in [3] and are as follows:
10
1
0 City FE = 0.905× (1)
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Running FC
Time (s) where the factor 0.905 represents the adjustment factor due to
Fig. 2. EPA FTP drive cycle real road conditions, FC is the fuel consumption in kWh/mile,
and FE is the fuel economy in mile/kWh or range in miles for
The five-cycle tests are based on the internal combustion a given battery pack size. The city Running FC is given by
engine and many of the variations on the testing do not ⎛ 0.89 0.11 ⎞ 0.18
Running FC = 0.82× ⎜ + ⎟+
appear directly applicable to EVs. The authors of this paper ⎝ FTP US06 ⎠ FTP
(2)
are calculating the EPA range based on slight modifications ⎛ 1 1 ⎞
of the procedures described in Section III of [3]. The +0.133×1.083 ⎜ - ⎟
⎝ SC03 FTP ⎠
formulae from [3] are used to generate a range or fuel
where FTP, US06, HFET, and SC03 represent the fuel
consumption and are as outlined below. The formulae
consumption in kWh/mile for the related drive cycle.
include an adjustment factor of 9.5 % to allow for non-
 Similarly, the Highway mileage range and fuel economy The graph also shows the range for the LA4 and EPA drive
ratings are developed as follows: cycles at their respective average speeds. The LA4 range of
1 about 100 miles for the Leaf can drop to about 44 miles with
Highway FE = 0.905× (3)
Running FC full HVAC and close to 35 miles with battery degradation or
The Highway Running FC is given by long-life mode.
⎛ 0.79 0.21 ⎞
Running FC =1.007× ⎜ + ⎟
200
Const Speed
⎝ US06 HFET ⎠
(4)
⎛ 1 1 ⎞ Const Speed
150 +HVAC
+0.133×0.377 ⎜ - ⎟
⎝ SC03 FTP ⎠ Const Speed
+HVAC,80%

The 5-cycle fuel economy and range is then simply the 100 LA4

Range (miles)
addition of the City and Highway driving ranges. LA4+HVAC
5 − cycle FE = 0.43 × City FE + 0.57 × Highway FE (5)
50 LA4+HVAC,80%
The following table calculates the consumption and
mileage based on regenerating 30 % of the braking energy. EPA

0
The SC03 drive cycle is calculated using continuous full 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 VUT

HVAC power. Speed (mph)

TABLE III Fig. 3. Nissan Leaf range

CONSUMPTION AND RANGE FOR THE NISSAN LEAF On-going tests with a Nissan Leaf have resulted in a range
Cycle kWh/mile Range Range, 80% of 97 miles. This data point correlates well with the nominal
LA4 0.24 101 81 100 mile range. This point is shown on the graph of Fig. 3
and Table III as VUT for vehicle under test.
FTP 0.24 100 80 IV. EXPERIMENTAL DATA AND THE NISSAN LEAF
HFET 0.22 110 88
US06 0.32 74 59 In this section, a model of the Nissan Leaf is created and
SC03 0.53 45 36 compared with test results from on-going road tests. The test
route daily taken by the driver is approximately 60 km
City 0.24 99 79
roundtrip on roads with some steep slopes and a mix of urban
and suburban driving. Google Maps and Google Earth were
Highway 0.27 88 70
found to be very useful tools in estimating the vehicle power
5-cycle 0.26 93 74
consumption. A GPS-based mobile app, View Ranger, is also
VUT 0.25 97
used to track the location, elevation, and speed. A plot of
elevations is shown in Fig. 4.
The results presented in Table III shown an excellent
correlation with the published data. For 30 % regeneration of
braking energy, the model predicts a range of 101 miles
correlating well to the Nissan prediction of 100 miles. A
range of 74 miles is the model prediction for the EPA 5-cycle
range. Allowing for a battery degradation to 80%, this
correlates well to the EPA sticker range of 73 miles. The
SC03 test under full HVAC indicates that a range less than 40
miles is likely with a degraded or long-life-mode battery and
full HVAC at extreme temperatures.
Based on the model developed above, graphs of range
versus speed are generated for the Nissan Leaf as shown in
Fig. 3. Fig. 4. Google Earth elevations
The curves show the ideal vehicle range for a fixed speed The route drive cycle was generated, factoring in
as the upper curve, the middle curve assumes a significant elevations, and the mild weather driving was estimated to
HVAC load of 6 kW for the Leaf for extreme temperature have a fuel consumption of 0.16 kWh/mile. This correlates
conditions. There is a significant reduction in vehicle range as well with the 0.155 kWh/mile recorded by the Nissan Leaf
has been suggested in the Nissan Leaf literature. The lower for a vehicle range of just less than 100 miles. An
curve reduces the extreme temperature range to 80 % to allow independent measurement of the supplied grid energy
for battery degradation with time or long-life mode. As can resulted in an energy consumption of 0.175 kWh(AC)/mile.
be seen, the HVAC can have a very significant impact on the Further testing is required to determine the effects of
achievable range. Overall range will reduce with time due to elevation and HVAC on the fuel consumption.
battery degradation.
 V. TESLA ROADSTER 50 % is assumed for the Tesla with 4 kW HVAC for the
Tesla Motor Company has published various data and SC03 test. Plots of range versus speed are shown in Fig. 7.
information on the range of their vehicles. The following fuel The vehicle under test has similar range to the US06 drive
consumption and range curves are presented in [10]. cycle, as shown in the bottom row of Table IV.
Wh/mile vs. Speed 450
Const Speed
700 400
650
350 Const Speed
600 +HVAC
300
550
Const Speed
+HVAC,80%
500 250
450 LA4
200

Range
400
Wh/mil

150 LA4+HVAC
350

300 100
250
LA4+HVAC,80%
50
200
0 EPA
150
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
100 Speed (mph)
50
Fig. 7. Tesla Roadster range
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

mph VI. CONCLUSIONS

Fig. 5. Tesla Roadster fuel economy [10] In this paper, simplified EV power train models are
Range vs. Speed developed for various new and existing production vehicles.
450
The models are developed based on published vehicle
425 parameters and range information for the Nissan Leaf and
400

375 Tesla Roadster. The models are compared with published

350

325
manufacturer specifications for range under various route and
300 driving conditions, and for various drive cycles. The test
275

250
route topography is modeled using Google Earth and a GPS-
miles

225 based mobile app. Excellent correlations are demonstrated

between the experimental results, manufacturer data and the
200

175

150
model predictions. Impacts of battery degradation with time
125

100 and vehicle HVAC loads are considered in the study.

75

50 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
25

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 The authors wish to thank Prof. Gerry Wrixon for the
mph
Nissan Leaf road testing, and Peter Harte and Celine
Fig. 6. Tesla Roadster Range [10] McInerney for the Tesla Roadster testing.
TABLE IV REFERENCES
CONSUMPTION AND RANGE FOR THE TESLA ROADSTER
[1] Nissan Motor Corporation website, www.nissanusa.com
Cycle kWh/mile Range Range, 80% [2] Environmental Protection Agency website, www.epa.gov
LA4 0.22 242 194 [3] US EPA, “Fuel Economy of Motor vehicle Revisions to Improve
Calculation of Fuel Economy Estimates,” December 2006.
[4] http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml
FTP 0.22 243 194 [5] C. Park, A.K. Jaura, “Dynamic Thermal Model of Li-Ion Battery for
HFET 0.22 245 196 Predictive Behavior in Hybrid and Fuel Cell Vehicles,” SAE 2003-01-
2286.
US06 0.30 175 140
[6] C. Mi, L. Ben, D. Buck, N. Ota, “Advanced Electro-Thermal Modeling
SC03 0.41 129 103 of Lithium-Ion Battery System for Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Applications,” IEEE VPPC 2007.
[7] M. Ehsani, Y. Gao, A. Emadi, Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric and
City 0.22 243 195 Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals, Theory, and Design, 2nd Edition,
Highway 0.26 204 164 CRC Press, 2009.
[8] AVL, www.avl.com
5-cycle 0.24 221 177
[9] B. Randall, “Blowing hot and cold,”
VUT 0.32 166 www.teslamotors.com/blog/blowing-hot-and-cold. Dec. 2006.
A Tesla model is generated to correlate to the above graphs [10] J.B. Staubel, CTO, “Roadster efficiency and range,”
www.teslamotors.com/blog/roadster-efficiency-and-range, Dec. 2008.
and the parameters are input to the drive cycles similar to the [11] E.D Tate, M.O. Harpster, P.J. Savagian, “The electrification of the
Nissan Leaf above. The predictions for fuel consumption and automobile: from conventional hybrid to plug-in hybrids, and extended-
range are shown in Table IV. A higher regeneration level of range electric vehicles,” SAE 2008-01-0458.
[12] 2011 Nissan Leaf Owner’s Manual.