resources

Article
Energy Saving Estimation of Athens Trolleybuses
Considering Regenerative Braking and Improved
Control Scheme
Nena Apostolidou and Nick Papanikolaou * ID

Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, 67132 Xanthi, Greece;
paposto@ee.duth.gr
* Correspondence: npapanik@ee.duth.gr; Tel.: +30-25410-79921




Received: 23 June 2018; Accepted: 19 July 2018; Published: 22 July 2018


Abstract: In this work, the electromechanical system of the 8000-series of Athens trolleybuses, based
on data provided by OSY S.A., is analyzed. Those data were used to develop a valid model in order
to estimate the total energy consumption of the vehicle under any possible operating conditions.
In addition, an effort is made to estimate the energy saving potential if the wasted energy—in the form
of heat—during braking or downhill courses is recovered (regenerative braking) and retrofitted during
normal operation. This process requires the installation of appropriate electrical apparatus to recover
and temporarily store this energy amount. Moreover, due to the fact that the main engine of the
system is an asynchronous electric machine, its driving scheme is also of interest. This study assumes
the current driving scheme, that is the direct vector control (DVC), and proposes an alternative control
method, the direct torque control (DTC). Energy consumption/saving calculations highlight the
effectiveness of incorporating regenerative braking infrastructure in trolleybuses transportation
systems. Finally, a sustainable hybrid energy storage unit that supports regenerative braking
is proposed.

Keywords: asynchronous machine; direct vector control; direct torque control; hybrid energy storage
systems; regenerative braking; trolleybus energy consumption

1. Introduction
Athens trolleybuses are a particularly widespread electric vehicle for mass transportation
in Greece. OSY S.A. owns 91 single buses and 51 articulated buses, covering 25 route-lines in
Athens center [1]. The main traction motor of the 8000-series single trolleybuses under study is
an asynchronous machine of 210 kW rated power; from the perspective of limiting the trolleybus
electric energy consumption, the focus is on investigating the regenerative energy saving potential and
the efficiency of the machine driving scheme [1].
Although regenerative braking energy recovery has been widely used in hybrid electric
vehicles [2–6], as well as in some public means of electrical transportation, such as metros and
trains [7,8], it has not been studied and incorporated in the case of trolleybuses, in any east-European
country and other countries world-wide. The reason for this is some technical restrictions in the
electric system of those vehicles, which are being discussed in this study. Hence, under this frame,
the main contribution of the current work is the comprehensive study of regenerative braking energy
recovery application in trolleybuses. In addition, a hybrid energy storage system is proposed, in order
to improve the energy efficiency of the regenerative braking scheme.
Regarding the regenerative braking, the amount of energy that can be saved from the existing
trolleybuses under real operating conditions (e.g., during speed reduction intervals or downhill

Resources 2018, 7, 43; doi:10.3390/resources7030043 www.mdpi.com/journal/resources

Resources 2018, 7, 43 2 of 18

Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 19

traveling) is estimated [1]. However, this energy saving scheme cannot be directly applied to the
traveling)
existing power is estimated
supply [1]. of
system However,
those this energy saving
trolleybuses scheme there
because cannot is
be not
directly
anyapplied
energyto the
storage unit
existing power supply system of those trolleybuses because there is not any energy storage unit
available, as shown in Figure 1. However, modern power electronic technologies of energy storage
available, as shown in Figure 1. However, modern power electronic technologies of energy storage
and retrofitand
that havethat
retrofit been proposed
have in recent
been proposed literature
in recent [9–11]
literature can
[9–11] bebeused
can used(under appropriate scaling)
(under appropriate
in order toscaling)
implement regenerative braking recovery, as proposed in Figure 1.
in order to implement regenerative braking recovery, as proposed in Figure 1.

Overhead Line
Electric Energy Current Electric
Input Apparatus
Inverter

Storage
Device

Necessary Electric
~
AC Current

Apparatus Electric Energy Motor

(Asynchronous M
Machine)

Kinetic Energy

Figure 1. Electric energy management in 8000-series of Athens trolleybuses. The energy flows strictly
Figure 1. Electric energyfrom
unidirectionally management inpower
the overhead 8000-series
line to of
theAthens trolleybuses.
trolleybus The energy
electric apparatus. flows strictly
DC—direct
unidirectionally
current;from the overhead
AC—alternating power line to the trolleybus electric apparatus. DC—direct current;
current.
AC—alternating current.
In addition, besides implementing the existing direct vector control (DVC) scheme of the
trolleybus asynchronous machine, the direct torque control (DTC), which is widely used for the
In addition,
dynamicbesidescontrol implementing the existing
of electric alternating directmachines
current (AC) vector control (DVC)
[12,13], is scheme ofBoth
also considered. the trolleybus
methods
asynchronous rely on the
machine, thedynamic model ofcontrol
direct torque the machine,
(DTC),though
whichtheyisimplement different
widely used for control logic
the dynamic control
[14]. These driving schemes are applied to the electric trolleybuses of interest in order to highlight
of electric alternating current (AC) machines [12,13], is also considered. Both methods rely on the
the performance of each one across the total operating range for this particular application.
dynamic model In theof the machine,
present study, anthough theybehavioral
appropriate implement different
model control logic
of the trolleybus [14]. These driving
electromechanical
schemes are applied
system to the including
is developed, electric trolleybuses of interest
the machine driving scheme. in order tosimulations
Exhaustive highlightbased
the on
performance
this of
model are
each one across theperformed in Matlab/Simulink
total operating environment,
range for this particularcovering the total operating range of the
application.
trolleybus; the results lead to an analytical functional model of the energy consumption estimation,
In the present study, an appropriate behavioral model of the trolleybus electromechanical system
as well as of the regenerative energy recovery potential; energy consumption/saving calculations are
is developed,
basedincluding
on realisticthe machine driving
transportation scheme.
conditions. Finally, Exhaustive
sustainability simulations based on
estimations regarding thethis model
are performed in Matlab/Simulink
necessary environment,
energy recovery apparatus covering
are presented [15]. the total operating range of the trolleybus;
the results lead It istonoted that the current
an analytical work focuses
functional on theof
model 8000-series
the energy of single trolleybuses owned
consumption by OSY as well as
estimation,
S.A. Nevertheless, the proposed modelling and energy saving analysis is valid for any type of
of the regenerative energy recovery potential; energy consumption/saving calculations are based on
trolleybus.
realistic transportation conditions. Finally, sustainability estimations regarding the necessary energy
2. Existing and
recovery apparatus areProposed
presentedDriving
[15].Scheme
It is noted that the current work focuses on the 8000-series of single trolleybuses owned by
2.1. Existing Driving Scheme—Direct Vector Control
OSY S.A. Nevertheless, the proposed modelling and energy saving analysis is valid for any type
The block diagram of the DVC that is currently used in the trolleybuses under study is depicted
of trolleybus.
in Figure 2 [1]. The dynamic equivalent model of the asynchronous machine applied to the stator
reference frame is used for the calculation of the torque and flux producing currents. Specifically, two
2. Existingstator
andphase
Proposed Driving
currents Scheme
and rotor speed feedback serve as inputs to the rotor flux, electromagnetic
torque, and rotor field angle estimator unit, based on the dynamic model of the machine. The
2.1. Existing Driving
estimated Scheme—Direct
values are compared toVector Control
the reference values to produce the PWM signals that drive the six-

The block diagram of the DVC that is currently used in the trolleybuses under study is depicted
in Figure 2 [1]. The dynamic equivalent model of the asynchronous machine applied to the stator
reference frame is used for the calculation of the torque and flux producing currents. Specifically,
two stator phase currents and rotor speed feedback serve as inputs to the rotor flux, electromagnetic
torque, and rotor field angle estimator unit, based on the dynamic model of the machine. The estimated
values are compared to the reference values to produce the PWM signals that drive the six-pulse
inverter. Park transformation is used to turn the time-variable (sinusoidal) quantities of the machine
Resources 2018, 7, 43 3 of 18
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 19

pulse
(current, inverter.flux,
voltages, Parketc.)
transformation is used to turnones
into time-invariable the time-variable
(direct current(sinusoidal) quantities of to
(DC) quantities), thebe used
by errormachine (current,
controllers. voltages,
The flux, etc.) intoof
implementation time-invariable
closed loopones (direct
control current and
(torque (DC) flux
quantities), to be of the
controller)
used by error controllers. The implementation of closed loop control (torque and flux controller) of
appropriate estimated DC quantities approximates the control of the separately excited DC machines;
the appropriate estimated DC quantities approximates the control of the separately excited DC
as a result, fast dynamic
machines; response
as a result, andresponse
fast dynamic accuracy ofaccuracy
and the control
of thesystem
control is achieved
system [16,17].
is achieved [16,17].

600 VDC
ACCELERATION &
BRAKING PEDAL Rbraking

REFERENCE T_REF TORQUE &

PWM 6 PULSE IGBT
VALUES FOR F_REF FLUX Asynchronous
TORQUE & FLUX CONTROLLER INVERTER Machine

T F Ω SPEED
ESTIMATOR
MOTOR MODELING ia
FLUX, TORQUE & FIELD ib
ANGLE ESTIMATOR STATOR CURRENTS

Figure 2. Block-diagram of 8000-series Athens trolleybuses traction system [13]. VDC: DC voltage
supply, Rbraking : Breaking Resistance.
Figure 2. Block-diagram of 8000-series Athens trolleybuses traction system [13]. VDC: DC voltage
supply, Rbraking: Breaking Resistance.
2.2. Proposed Control Scheme—Direct Torque Control
2.2. Proposed Control Scheme—Direct Torque Control
The main difference of DTC with respect to DVC is that transformation from the static reference
frame to theThe main difference of DTC with respect to DVC is that transformation from the static reference
synchronously rotating reference frame is not necessary [14]. Because of the fact that
frame to the synchronously rotating reference frame is not necessary [14]. Because of the fact that this
this technique involves error limitation within a hysteresis zone, there is no need for handling DC
technique involves error limitation within a hysteresis zone, there is no need for handling DC
quantities, which simplifies
quantities, which the the
simplifies control scheme.
control scheme.In
In addition, there
addition, there is no
is no need
need for afor a speed
speed sensor.sensor.
Figure Figure
3 depicts the DTC
3 depicts theblock
DTC diagram, wherewhere
block diagram, electromagnetic
electromagneticfluxflux
andandtorque values
torque estimated
values
estimated by
by the dynamic the dynamic
machine modelmachine model are compared
are compared to their to their reference
reference values.
values. TheThe errorsare
errors are fed
fed to two
to two
hysteresis hysteresis and
controllers controllers and the resulting
the resulting signalssignals determine
determine the inverter
the inverter pulsation, with
pulsation, with the
theuse
use of an
of an optimally operating state selection table.
optimally operating
Resources state
2018, 7, x FOR selection
PEER REVIEW table. 4 of 19

DC Supply

Flux dψs Phase A

ψss,ref Hysteresis
Comparator
Table of Optimum Inverter
Phase B
ψss Inverter Switching
Torque dTe
Phase C
Te,ref Hysteresis
Comparator
States
Te
isα isb isc
isa
Electromagnetic isb
Flux & Torque usa
Estimator usb

3-Phase
Asynchronous
Machine

Figure 3. Block diagram of direct torque control (DTC) of an asynchronous machine.

Figure 3. Block diagram of direct torque control (DTC) of an asynchronous machine.

3. Modeling of the Electromechanical System

3.1. Electric Supply Circuit

Resources 2018, 7, 43 4 of 18

3. Modeling of the Electromechanical System

3.1. Electric Supply Circuit

Figure 4 illustrates the driving unit of the trolleybuses under study; it includes the vehicle power
source (600 VDC), an LC filter, a braking resistance—combined with a unidirectional chopper—branch,
the power
Resources inverter,
2018, 7, x FOR and
PEERthe asynchronous machine (M).
REVIEW 5 of 19

B Supercapacitor
A B
Bidirectional Converter
Figure 4. Driving unit of Athens trolleybuses asynchronous machine
machine (M)
(M) [1].
[1].

3.2. Mechanical Modeling of the Trolleybus

During accelerations and constant speed vehicle courses, the energy flow is directed from the
power supply
Figure to the machine,
5 describes which operates
the mechanical part of as
thea trolleybus
motor. [1,18]. The total rolling resistance of the
During
vehicle (ΣFtr) deceleration/braking intervals (F
comprises the rolling resistance and
r) anddownhill
the wind traveling,
resistancethe(Fwasynchronous
); this force—thatmachine
is, the
operates as a generator,
vehicle transport converting
load—is the and
calculated kinetic energyto
reduced of athe trolleybus
torque valueinto
on electric energy,
the wheels (Ttrthis time
). Then,
routed
accordingfrom machine via
to the trolleybus thesystem
drive power (transmission
inverter, to the inverter
factor DCtorque
ig), this bus; this
valueenergy can, under
is reduced to the
appropriate conditions,
electric machine be (mechanical
shaft level stored and retrofitted to the electric machine (when it requests energy
load, Tm) [19,20].
supply).
The However,
mathematicalin the system of
equations under study, theremodel
the mechanical is no storage
in Figure unit available.
5 are Thus, the braking
as follows:
energy is consumed on the braking resistance, in the form of heat.
Fr =Mv  g  (fr  cosa+sina) (1)
3.2. Mechanical Modeling of the Trolleybus
Fw =Af  kair  V 2 (2)
Figure 5 describes the mechanical part of the trolleybus [1,18]. The total rolling resistance of the
m e =δ  Mv (3)
vehicle (ΣFtr ) comprises the rolling resistance (F r ) and the wind resistance (Fw ); this force—that is,
the vehicle transport load—is calculated J W and Jreduced toma torque
m m  value on the wheels (Ttr ). Then,
m  ig
2
W
ig2
according to the trolleybus driveδ=1+
system +
(transmission =1+ factor+i ), this torque value is reduced to (4)
the
rW2  M V rW2  M V MV g MV
electric machine shaft level (mechanical load, Tm ) [19,20].
The mathematical equations of the mechanical  rw2 in Figure 5 are as follows:
J ew =m emodel (5)

Fr = Mv ·g·(f r · cos J a + sin a) (1)

J e,drive = ew
2 (6)
ig
Fw = Af ·kair ·V2 (2)
where Mv is the passenger load; g is the acceleration of gravity; fr is the rolling resistance coefficient,
m = δ·M (3)
related to the type and shape of the vehicle; a isethe roadv inclination angle; Af is the area of the vehicle
face; kair is the aerodynamic coefficient; V is the linear velocity of the trolleybus; me is the equivalent
vehicle mass; δ is the vehicle mass increase resulting from the individual moments of inertia of all its
rotating masses (in this case, the rotating masses are considered to be the wheels and the electric
motor); Jw is the inertia of the wheels; Jm is the motor inertia; mw is the mass of the wheels; mm is the
motor mass; rw is the radius of the wheels; Jew is the equivalent vehicle moment of inertia; me is the
equivalent total vehicle mass; and Je,drive is the total vehicle (equivalent) inertia reduced to the motor
Resources 2018, 7, 43 5 of 18

JW Jm ·i2g mW mm ·i2g
δ = 1+ + = 1 + + (4)
r2W ·MV r2W ·MV MV MV

Jew = me ·r2w (5)

Jew
Je,drive = (6)
i2g
where Mv is the passenger load; g is the acceleration of gravity; fr is the rolling resistance coefficient,
related to the type and shape of the vehicle; a is the road inclination angle; Af is the area of the vehicle
face; kair is the aerodynamic coefficient; V is the linear velocity of the trolleybus; me is the equivalent
vehicle mass; δ is the vehicle mass increase resulting from the individual moments of inertia of all
its rotating masses (in this case, the rotating masses are considered to be the wheels and the electric
motor); Jw is the inertia of the wheels; Jm is the motor inertia; mw is the mass of the wheels; mm is the
motor mass; rw is the radius of the wheels; Jew is the equivalent vehicle moment of inertia; me is the
equivalent total vehicle mass; and Je,drive is the total vehicle (equivalent) inertia reduced to the motor
axis rotating
Resources speed.
2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

Jeq, drive , ωm ,Tm Ttr=ΣFtr rw ΣFtr=Fr(a, Mv)+Fw(V)

ωw
Wheels Trolley
Asynchronous
Machine Tm=Ttr / ig rw Μv
Jm , mm Jew , me

V
Figure 5. Model
Figure 5. Model of
of the
the trolleybus
trolleybus mechanical
mechanical part.
part.

ItIt isis noted

noted that
that the
theaerodynamic
aerodynamiccoefficient
coefficientvalue,
value,kkair = 0.4,
air = 0.4, was
was calculated
calculated according
according to to data
data
given by
given by MANMAN Truck
Truck& &Bus
Bus[21],
[21],using
usingthe
thecurve
curvefitting
fittingapplication
applicationof ofMatlab
Matlabsoftware.
software. Also,
Also, for
for the
the
calculation of the rolling resistance coefficient value, f = 0.001, literature data were
calculation of the rolling resistance coefficient value, fr = 0.001, literature data were used [22].
r used [22].
Table11summarizes
Table summarizesthe themain
maintechnical
technicaldata
dataof
ofthe
thetrolleybuses
trolleybusesunder
understudy
study[1].
[1].

Table 1.
Table 1. Technical
Technicaldata
dataof
of8000-series
8000-seriesAthens
Athenstrolleybuses
trolleybuses[1].
[1].

Technical Data of 8000-Series Athens Trolleybuses

Technical Data of 8000-Series Athens Trolleybuses
ig 11.02
ig 11.02
MMv 20,000 kg (max), 14,000 kg (min)
20,000 kg (max), 14,000 kg (min)
v
AAf f 7.5
7.5 m 2m 2

rwrw 0.54
0.54 cmcm
JJe,drive
e,drive 6060 ·m2m2
kgkg·
Maximum linear velocity 65 km/h
Maximum linear velocity 65 km/h
Maximum acceleration 1.5 m/s2 2
Maximum
Maximumacceleration
deceleration 1.5 m/s
1.3 m/s2
Maximum deceleration 1.3 m/s2

3.3. Electrical Modeling of the Trolleybus

3.3. Electrical Modeling of the Trolleybus
With regard to the electrical losses of the power supply circuit and the machine itself [23],
With regard to the electrical losses of the power supply circuit and the machine itself [23], all
all technical and operational parameters of the trolleybus were taken into account [1]. In addition,
technical and operational parameters of the trolleybus were taken into account [1]. In addition, the
the switching losses of the device are estimated as a percentage of the machine rated output power and
switching losses of the device are estimated as a percentage of the machine rated output power and
modeled as a variable current source, depending on the system electromagnetic torque. The trolleybus
modeled as a variable current source, depending on the system electromagnetic torque. The
electrical losses model is shown in Figure 6.
trolleybus electrical losses model is shown in Figure 6.

Diode Rectifier / Chopper/Braking

LC Filter Resistance Total Inverter
Conduction Losses Conduction Losses Switching Conduction
Losses Losses
Ron V

VDF L R
R
 With regard to the electrical losses of the power supply circuit and the machine itself [23], all
technical and operational parameters of the trolleybus were taken into account [1]. In addition, the
switching losses of the device are estimated as a percentage of the machine rated output power and
modeled as a variable current source, depending on the system electromagnetic torque. The
Resources 2018, 7, 43 6 of 18
trolleybus electrical losses model is shown in Figure 6.

Diode Rectifier / Chopper/Braking

LC Filter Resistance Total Inverter
Conduction Losses Conduction Losses Switching Conduction
Losses Losses

Ron VF, IGBT Rbr

VDF L R

RON VF, IGBT

VF, DIODE

VF, DIODE
isw
600 V C

RFE, ab
Iron Core RFE, bc
Losses RFE, ca

Machine
Copper
Losses

Figure 6. Trolleybus total electrical losses model.

Figure 6. Trolleybus total electrical losses model.
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

In
In addition,
addition, the
the total
total energy
energy consumption
consumption is is analyzed
analyzed in in the
the individual
individual electrical
electrical losses
losses of
of the
the
line—including the diode rectifier, the LC filter, and the braking resistance branch—the
line—including the diode rectifier, the LC filter, and the braking resistance branch—the power power inverter
losses,
inverterthe asynchronous
losses, machine losses,
the asynchronous thelosses,
machine load energy (that
the load is, the (that
energy transport
is, theload, which load,
transport includes the
which
rolling resistance, the wind resistance, and the trolley passenger load), and finally the
includes the rolling resistance, the wind resistance, and the trolley passenger load), and finally the kinetic energy
stored
kineticin the rotating/moving
energy parts of the vehicle
stored in the rotating/moving parts (as shown
of the in Figure
vehicle 7). in Figure 7).
(as shown

ENERGY
KINETIC 1/2JΩ2
(kWh)

ENERGY
+
SOURCE ENERGY
(kWh/km) LOAD
(kWh/km)
LINE INVERTER MOTOR
LOSSES LOSSES LOSSES
(kWh/km) (kWh/km) (kWh/km)

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Trolleybus
Trolleybus individual energy consumption
individual energy consumption components.
components.

3.4. Matlab/Simulink
3.4. Matlab/Simulink Behavioral
Behavioral Model
Model
The energy that is currently wasted in
The energy that is currently wasted in the
the above-mentioned
above-mentioned way way can
can be
be estimated
estimated considering
considering
the vehicle
the vehicletotal
totalenergy
energy consumption,
consumption, thatthat is, electrical
is, the the electrical and mechanical
and mechanical power power losses
losses of of the
the traction
traction system, as analyzed. To achieve a valid estimation, a detailed behavioral Simulink
system, as analyzed. To achieve a valid estimation, a detailed behavioral Simulink model is developed, model is
developed, as shown
as shown in Figure 8. in Figure 8.
Simulations have
Simulations have beenbeen performed
performed in in Matlab/Simulink
Matlab/Simulink environment,
environment, basedbased on the
on the
electromechanical model of Figure 8, with sampling frequency 200 kHz; both DVC
electromechanical model of Figure 8, with sampling frequency 200 kHz; both DVC and the proposed and the proposed
DTC driving
DTC driving schemes
schemes are
are considered.
considered. The
The switching
switching frequency
frequency of
of the
the PWM
PWM unit
unit used
used in
in the
the DVC
DVC is is
22 kHz,
kHz, coinciding
coinciding with
with the
the one
one used
used in
in the
the trolleybuses
trolleybuses under
under study
study [1].
[1].

ACCELERATION &
BRAKING PEDAL

DVC/DTC
Overhead Line,
600 VDC Electric Inverter
Equipment, Rbr
Electric
traction system, as analyzed. To achieve a valid estimation, a detailed behavioral Simulink model is
developed, as shown in Figure 8.
Simulations have been performed in Matlab/Simulink environment, based on the
electromechanical model of Figure 8, with sampling frequency 200 kHz; both DVC and the proposed
DTC driving
Resources 2018, 7,schemes
43 are considered. The switching frequency of the PWM unit used in the DVC
7 ofis
18
2 kHz, coinciding with the one used in the trolleybuses under study [1].

ACCELERATION &
BRAKING PEDAL

DVC/DTC
Overhead Line,
600 VDC Electric Inverter
Equipment, Rbr
Electric
Energy Input
V
Jeq, drive , ωm ,Tm
Trolley Μv
AM
Jm , mm
Ttr=ΣFtr rw Tm=Ttr / ig
rw
ωw Jew , me
ΣFtr=Fr(a, Mv)+Fw(V)

Figure
Figure 8.
8. Athens
Athens trolleybuses
trolleybuses electromechanical
electromechanical model.
model. DVC—direct
DVC—directvector
vector control,
control, DTC—direct
DTC—direct
torque
torquecontrol.
control.

4.4.Energy
EnergyConsumption
ConsumptionEstimations
EstimationsUsing
UsingDVC
DVCand
andDTC—Comparison
DTC—Comparisonof
ofResults
Results

4.1.
4.1.Trolleybus
Trolleybus Traveling
Traveling Conditions under Study
The total energy consumption, as well as the amount of energy consumed on the dynamic braking
resistance (which represents the percentage of the energy that can be recovered) are estimated under
various operating conditions. These operating conditions are summarized below:

• Minimum (Mv = 14,000 kg) and maximum (Mv = 20,000 kg) passenger load.
• Accelerating from zero to different speeds—up to 65 km/h—assuming zero-inclined road.
• Acceleration at intermediate speeds, assuming zero-inclined road.
• Decelerating from maximum trolley speed (65 km/h) [1] to various speeds, assuming
zero-inclined road.
• Decelerations from intermediate speeds, assuming zero-inclined road.
• Steady-speed courses (10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 km/h), assuming 0%, 1%, 5%, −1% and, −5% road
inclination, respectively.
• DVC and DTC driving schemes.
• In DVC case, asynchronous machine slip is 1%.

In all cases of acceleration, the maximum torque is constant and equal to 1708.1 Nm—achieved
with a suitable torque limiter—resulting in the vehicle maximum acceleration limit (1.5 m/s2 ). Similarly,
in all deceleration conditions, the maximum torque is constant at −1480.6 Nm, resulting in the trolley
maximum deceleration limit (1.3 m/s2 ), according to data provided by OSY. S.A.

4.2. Energy Consumption Estimations—Constant Speed Course

Figure 9 depicts the trolleybus total energy consumption during constant-speed courses, as a
function of vehicle speed, in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load,
assuming 0%, 1%, and 5% road inclination; both DVC and DTC schemes are considered. As derived
from Figure 9, in all examined cases, energy consumption is almost the same for DVC and DTC
schemes (noted deviations are within the simulation accuracy limits).
 4.2. Energy Consumption Estimations—Constant Speed Course
Figure 9 depicts the trolleybus total energy consumption during constant-speed courses, as a
function of vehicle speed, in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load,
assuming 0%, 1%, and 5% road inclination; both DVC and DTC schemes are considered. As derived
from
Resources Figure
2018, 7, 43 9, in all examined cases, energy consumption is almost the same for DVC and DTC8 of 18
schemes (noted deviations are within the simulation accuracy limits).

Figure
Figure 9. Trolleybus
9. Trolleybus totalenergy
total energyconsumption
consumption as as aa function
functionofofspeed, for for
speed, various conditions
various of
conditions of
passenger
passenger loadload (EMPTY,
(EMPTY, FULL),
FULL), roadinclination
road inclination (0%,
(0%, 1%,
1%, 5%)
5%)and
anddriving
drivingscheme
scheme(DVC, DTC).
(DVC, DTC).

An interesting outcome is that, in all cases except the one of DVC on 5% road inclination with
An interesting
maximum outcome
passenger is that,higher
load (FULL), in all cases
energyexcept the one
consumption of DVC on
is observed 5% speeds.
at low road inclination
This could with
maximum passenger load (FULL), higher energy consumption is observed at
be explained by the fact that at low speeds, the machine operates with under high electromagnetic low speeds. This could
be explained
flux values, whereas over nominal speed—that is, 28 km/h—the electromagnetic flux reference value flux
by the fact that at low speeds, the machine operates with under high electromagnetic
values, whereas
is reduced over nominal
inversely to speedspeed—that
(field weakeningis, 28 km/h—the
technique). Also,electromagnetic
at low speeds, theflux reference
machine value is
operates
withinversely
reduced small amplitude
to speed modulation ratio compared
(field weakening with thatAlso,
technique). at high speedspeeds,
at low operation,the which
machineleads to
operates
with machine low powermodulation
small amplitude factor and high stator
ratio rms current
compared withvalues.
that at high speed operation, which leads to
Figures 10–12 depict the trolleybus total energy consumption allocation, according to Figure 7,
machine low power factor and high stator rms current values.
in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger loads, 0%, 1%, and 5% road
Figures 10–12 depict the trolleybus total energy consumption allocation, according to Figure 7,
inclination, with DVC and DTC implementation.
in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger loads, 0%, 1%, and 5% road inclination,
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 19
with DVC and DTC implementation.
InInparticular,
particular, Figure
Figure 10 10depicts
depictsthe the motor
motor energy
energy consumption
consumption as a function
as a function of speed,
of speed, under under
various
variousoperating/control conditions.
operating/control conditions.

Figure 10. Motor energy consumption as a function of speed, for various conditions of passenger load
Figure 10. Motor energy consumption as a function of speed, for various conditions of passenger load
(EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and DTC implementation.
(EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and DTC implementation.
From Figure 10, it appears that, in the case of 0% road inclination, motor energy consumption
Fromthe
receives Figure 10,portion
highest it appears
of thethat,
total in the case
energy of 0% road
consumption inclination,
across motorHowever,
the speed range. energy consumption
in the
case of the
receives 1% road
highestinclination,
portion this portion
of the totalisenergy
significantly decreased,across
consumption whereas
theinspeed
case ofrange.
5% road
However,
inclination, it is drastically restricted.
in the case of 1% road inclination, this portion is significantly decreased, whereas in case of 5% road
Figureit11
inclination, isdepicts the mechanical–transport–load
drastically restricted. energy consumption as a function of speed for
various operating/control conditions under study.
Figure 11 depicts the mechanical–transport–load energy consumption as a function of speed for
various operating/control conditions under study.
 (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and DTC implementation.

From Figure 10, it appears that, in the case of 0% road inclination, motor energy consumption
receives the highest portion of the total energy consumption across the speed range. However, in the
case of 1% road inclination, this portion is significantly decreased, whereas in case of 5% road
inclination, it is drastically restricted.
Resources 2018,Figure
7, 43 11 depicts the mechanical–transport–load energy consumption as a function of speed for 9 of 18
various operating/control conditions under study.

Figure 11. Mechanical–transport–load energy consumption as a function of speed, for various

11. Mechanical–transport–load
Figure conditions energy
of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL) consumption
and road inclination (0%,as
1%,a5%),
function ofand
with DVC speed,
DTC for various
conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and
implementation.
DTC implementation.
Figure 11 shows that in the case of 0% road inclination, the mechanical load consumption a
receives limited portion of the total energy consumption at low speeds, which increases with speed.
Figure 11 shows
In the case that
of 1% road in the case
inclination, of 0%increases
this portion road inclination, the mechanical
significantly, whereas in the case ofload consumption a
5% road
receivesinclination, the increase
limited portion ofbecomes
the totalsignificant.
energy consumption at low speeds, which increases with speed.
Figure 12 depicts the inverter energy consumption as a function of speed, for various
In the case of 1% road inclination, this portion increases significantly, whereas in the case of 5% road
operating/control conditions under study.
inclination, the increase becomes significant.
Figure 12 depicts the inverter energy consumption as a function of speed, for various
operating/control conditions
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR under study.
PEER REVIEW 10 of 19

Figure 12. Inverter energy consumption as a function of speed, for different conditions of passenger
Figure 12. Inverter energy consumption as a function of speed, for different conditions of passenger
load (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and DTC implementation.
load (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (0%, 1%, 5%), with DVC and DTC implementation.
Figure 12 shows that the inverter energy consumption receives a limited portion of the total
energy
Figureconsumption
12 shows across the inverter
that the speed range, whichconsumption
energy is drastically decreased
receives with road inclination.
a limited portionInof the total
addition, it decreases moderately with speed rise.
energy consumption across the speed range, which is drastically decreased with road inclination.
Figures 10–12 suggest that the allocation of individual system losses is mainly affected by road
In addition, it decreases
inclination—which is moderately with speed
the main parameter rise.transport load increase—while trolleybus
of total
Figures 10–12
passenger suggest
load has limited that theonallocation
effects ofnoted
it. Also, it is individual system
that in all cases, losses is mainly
line losses receive affected
a low, by road
inclination—which is the2%)
almost constant (under main parameter
portion of totalconsumption.
of total energy transport load increase—while trolleybus passenger
load has limited effects on it. Also, it is noted that in all cases, line losses receive a low, almost constant
(under 2%) portion of total energy consumption.

4.3. Energy Consumption Estimations—Acceleration

Figure 13 depicts the trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration from zero to
different speeds, as a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in the case of maximum (FULL)
and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and DTC implementation.
 Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19

4.3. Energy Consumption

4.3. Energy Estimations—Acceleration
Consumption Estimations—Acceleration
FigureFigure
13 depicts the the
13 depicts trolleybus total
trolleybus totalenergy
energyconsumption duringacceleration
consumption during acceleration from
from zerozero
to to
Resources 7,
different speeds, as a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in the case of maximum 10 of 18
2018, 43
different speeds, as a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in the case of maximum
(FULL)(FULL) and minimum
and minimum (EMPTY)
(EMPTY) passenger
passenger load,with
load, withDVC
DVC and
andDTC
DTCimplementation.
implementation.

Figure 13. Trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration from zero to a final speed, as a
Figure 13. Trolleybus
function total
of the final energy
speed, consumption
for various during
conditions of acceleration
passenger load (EMPTY,from zero
FULL), withtoDVC
a final
and speed, as a
function of the
FigureDTC
13. final speed,
implementation.
Trolleybus for various
total energy conditions
consumption duringof passenger
accelerationload
from(EMPTY,
zero to a FULL), with
final speed, asDVC
a and
DTC implementation.
function of the final speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and
Figure 13 suggests that during acceleration from zero to final speed, lower total consumption is
DTC implementation.
observed with DTC.
Figure 13 suggests
Figure thattheduring
14 depicts acceleration
trolleybus total energy from zero toduring
consumption final acceleration
speed, lower total consumption
at intermediate is
Figure 13onsuggests
speeds, 0% road that duringinacceleration
inclination, case of from(FULL)
maximum zero toand
final speed, (EMPTY)
minimum lower total consumption
passenger load, is
observed with DTC.
observed with DTC.
with DVC and DTC implementation.
Figure 14 depicts the trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration at intermediate
Figure 14 depicts the trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration at intermediate
speeds,
speeds, on 0%road
on 0% roadinclination, incase
inclination, in caseofof maximum
maximum (FULL)
(FULL) and and minimum
minimum (EMPTY)
(EMPTY) passenger
passenger load, load,
with DVC
with DVC and
andDTC
DTCimplementation.
implementation.

Figure 14. Trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration from an initial to a final speed,
as a function of speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and DTC
implementation.

From Figure 14, it seems that during acceleration intervals from an initial to a final speed, lower
total consumption is observed with DTC, whereas the lower the machine slip in DVC, the lower the
Figure 14. Trolleybus total energy consumption during acceleration from an initial to a final speed,
Figure
total14. Trolleybus
energy total becomes.
consumption energy consumption during acceleration from an initial to a final speed,
as a function of speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and DTC
as a function of speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and
implementation.
DTC implementation.
From Figure 14, it seems that during acceleration intervals from an initial to a final speed, lower
total consumption
From Figure 14,is itobserved withduring
seems that DTC, whereas the lower
acceleration the machine
intervals slipinitial
from an in DVC,to athe lower
final the lower
speed,
total energy consumption becomes.
total consumption is observed with DTC, whereas the lower the machine slip in DVC, the lower the
total energy consumption becomes.
All cases of acceleration under study suggest that, in the specific machine operation point (that
is, 1708.1 Nm), DTC proves more effective, contrary to DVC. This is due to the fact that DTC is more
efficient at high-torque transient operating conditions [14].

4.4. Energy Recovery Estimations—Deceleration

Figure 15 depicts the energy recovery potential during deceleration from 65 km/h to a final
vehicle speed, as a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in case of maximum (FULL) and
minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and DTC implementation.
 efficient at high-torque
All cases transient
of acceleration under operating conditions
study suggest that, in[14].
the specific machine operation point (that
is, 1708.1 Nm), DTC proves more effective, contrary to DVC. This is due to the fact that DTC is more
4.4. Energy Recovery Estimations—Deceleration
efficient at high-torque transient operating conditions [14].
Figure 15 depicts the energy recovery potential during deceleration from 65 km/h to a final
4.4.vehicle
Energy
Resources Recovery
43 as Estimations—Deceleration
speed,
2018, 7, a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in case of maximum (FULL) and 11 of 18
minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and DTC implementation.
Figure 15 depicts the energy recovery potential during deceleration from 65 km/h to a final
vehicle speed, as a function of vehicle speed, on 0% road inclination, in case of maximum (FULL) and
minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and DTC implementation.

Figure 15. Energy consumed on braking resistance (energy recovery potential) during deceleration
Figure Energy consumed
15. maximum
from speed (65 on braking
km/h) resistance
to different (energy
speeds, recovery
as a function potential)
of the during
final speed, for deceleration
different
from conditions
maximumofspeed (65 km/h) to different speeds, as a function
passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and DTC implementation. of the final speed, for different
Figure 15. Energy consumed on braking resistance (energy recovery potential) during deceleration
conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and DTC implementation.
from maximum speed (65 km/h) to different speeds, as a function of the final speed, for different
From Figure 15, it seems that during deceleration from 65 km/h to final speed, higher energy
conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC and DTC implementation.
recovery is observed with DTC. This result indicates that at the maximum deceleration working point
From Figure 15, it seems that during deceleration from 65 km/h to final speed, higher energy
(that
From is, Figure
−1480.615,
Nm), DTC that
it seems is proven
during to be more efficient than DVC.to This
final is in agreement with the
recovery is observed with DTC. This resultdeceleration fromat65
indicates that thekm/h
maximum speed, higher working
deceleration energy point
results
recovery in Section
is observed 4.3,
with where
DTC. high-torque
This result transient
indicates conditions
that are
at the maximum also present.
decelerationMoreover,
working Figure
point 16
(that is, −
depicts
1480.6 Nm),
the energy
DTC is proven to be more efficient than DVC. This is in agreement with the
(that is, −1480.6 Nm), recovery potential
DTC is proven to during
be moredeceleration from
efficient than an initial
DVC. This istoin
a final speed, with
agreement on 0%the road
results in Section
inclination, in 4.3,
case where high-torque transient conditions are also present. Moreover, Figure
DTC 16
results in Section 4.3, of maximum
where (FULL)transient
high-torque and minimum (EMPTY)
conditions passenger
are also present.load, with
Moreover, DVC and16
Figure
depicts the energy recovery potential during deceleration from an initial to a final speed, on 0% road
implementation.
depicts the energy recovery potential during deceleration from an initial to a final speed, on 0% road
inclination, in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and
inclination, in case of maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, with DVC and DTC
DTC implementation.
implementation.

Figure 16. Energy consumed on braking resistance (energy recovery potential) during deceleration
from an initial to a final speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC
and DTC implementation.
Figure 16. Energy consumed on braking resistance (energy recovery potential) during deceleration
Figure 16. Energy consumed on braking resistance (energy recovery potential) during deceleration
from an initial to a final speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC
from an initial to a final speed, for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL), with DVC
and DTC implementation.
and DTC implementation.

Similar to Sections 4.3 and 4.4, higher energy recovery is observed with DTC during deceleration
at intermediate speeds. Moreover, the higher energy recovery is observed in the region of high speeds,
because of the higher kinetic energy of the system.
According to the results in Figures 15 and 16 and the technical data in Table 1, the energy
recovery efficiency in all cases of speed reduction ranges from roughly 66% to 73%. These results
are in accordance with results found in literature regarding energy recovery efficiency of public
means of electrical transportation (trains and metros) [24–26], which reinforces the reliability of the
proposed modeling.
 According to the results in Figures 15 and 16 and the technical data in Table 1, the energy
recovery efficiency in all cases of speed reduction ranges from roughly 66% to 73%. These results are
in accordance with results found in literature regarding energy recovery efficiency of public means
of electrical transportation (trains and metros) [24–26], which reinforces the reliability of the proposed
modeling.
Resources 2018, 7, 43 12 of 18

4.5. Energy Recovery Estimations—Downhill

4.5. Energy Recovery
Figure Estimations—Downhill
17 depicts the energy recovery potential as a function of vehicle speed, in the case of
maximum (FULL) and minimum (EMPTY) passenger load, during constant speed course on road
Figure 17 depicts the energy recovery potential as a function of vehicle speed, in the case of
with −1% and −5% road inclination, with DVC and DTC implementation.
maximumIt (FULL)
is noted and
that minimum (EMPTY)for
the energy recovery passenger
the emptyload, during
trolleybus constant
course on a speed course
downhill slopeon
of road
−1% with
−1%isand −5% road
negligible, thusinclination, with
this case is not DVC and
mentioned DTC implementation.
in Figure 17.

Figure
Figure 17. Energy
17. Energy consumed
consumed ononbraking
braking resistance
resistance (energy
(energyrecovery potential)
recovery as aas
potential) function of speed,
a function of speed,
for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (−1%, −5%), with DVC
for various conditions of passenger load (EMPTY, FULL) and road inclination (−1%, −5%), with DVC
and DTC implementation.
and DTC implementation.
Figure 17 suggests that, during downhill courses, in the case of −1% road inclination, higher
It is noted
energy that the
recovery energy recovery
is observed forHowever,
with DVC. the emptyintrolleybus
the case ofcourse on ainclination,
−5% road downhill slope of −1% is
over 30–35
km/h, thus
negligible, higherthis
energy
case isrecovery is observed
not mentioned with DTC.
in Figure 17. Those results are also justified by the
corresponding torquethat,
Figure 17 suggests conditions.
duringOnce more, passenger
downhill load
courses, in thehas insignificant
case of −1% roadeffectinclination,
on trolleybus
higher
energy behavior.
energy recovery is observed with DVC. However, in the case of −5% road inclination, over 30–35 km/h,
higher energy recovery is observed with DTC. Those results are also justified by the corresponding
4.6. Energy Consumption/Recovery Overall Conclusions
torque conditions. Once more, passenger load has insignificant effect on trolleybus energy behavior.
In summary, the most important conclusions drawn from the energy consumption estimations
are the Consumption/Recovery
4.6. Energy following: Overall Conclusions
•In summary,
In constant-speed
the mostcourses, energy
important consumption
conclusions is significantly
drawn increased
from the energy by increasing
consumption road
estimations
inclination, whereas the increase in the trolleybus passenger load, for the same road inclination,
are the following:
has limited effects. Also, the greater the downhill inclination, the greater the regenerated energy
• amount.
In constant-speed courses, energy consumption is significantly increased by increasing road
•inclination,
Correspondingly,
whereas the theenergy
increaseconsumption allocation
in the trolleybus (see Figure
passenger 7) is significantly
load, for the sameinfluenced by
road inclination,
road inclination, whereas the trolleybus passenger load has limited effects on it. Also, it appears
has limited effects. Also, the greater the downhill inclination, the greater the regenerated
that as speed increases and load torque approaches the machine nominal value (1355 Nm), the
energy amount.
electrical losses of the machine become less relative to the mechanical ones. Therefore, the system
• Correspondingly,
performance is the energy
higher consumption
in this allocation (see Figure 7) is significantly influenced by
operating range.
road inclination, whereas the trolleybus passenger load has limited effects on it. Also, it appears
that as speed increases and load torque approaches the machine nominal value (1355 Nm),
the electrical losses of the machine become less relative to the mechanical ones. Therefore,
the system performance is higher in this operating range.
• During constant speed courses, in the case of zero road inclination, the system mechanical load
(for both empty and full trolleybus) ranges from about 10 Nm (0.66% of the nominal torque
value) to 40 Nm (3% of the nominal load). These values are much lower than the machine
nominal torque value (1355 Nm). In the case of 1% road inclination, the machine mechanical
load ranges from about 130 Nm (9.6% of the nominal torque value) to 212 Nm (15.6% of the
nominal torque value), whereas for 5% road inclination, the machine load ranges from about
619 Nm (45.62% of the nominal torque value) to 895 Nm (65.97% of the nominal torque value).
This wide load torque deviation justifies the fact that DVC and DTC are more effective under
different operating conditions.
 Resources 2018, 7, 43 13 of 18

• During deceleration at intermediate speeds, a greater amount of energy recovery is achieved in

the area of higher initial speeds (i.e., 40, 50, 60 km/h), as a result of the higher kinetic energy of
the electromechanical system.
• For constant-speed courses at low speeds (i.e., at 10 km/h), trolleybus consumption is greater
than the energy consumption at higher speeds. This is due to the high electromagnetic flux and
the small amplitude modulation ratio of the inverter.
• During accelerations with the maximum permitted rate—it corresponds to a torque equal to
125% of the machine nominal torque value—DTC seems to outperform DVC in terms of energy
consumption (as it has been already discussed).
• Similarly, during decelerations with the maximum permitted rate—it corresponds to a braking
torque equal to −109% of the machine nominal torque value—DTC seems to outperform DVC in
terms of the brake energy recovery amount.
• Finally, it appears that there is a possibility of recovering a significant amount of energy both
during decelerations of the trolleybus, as well as during its downhill courses. In the latter case,
the energy recovery is higher than in the first one. However, the first case is more frequent on
actual trolleybus runs.

These results suggest that each driving method (DVC and DTC) is more efficient—from an energy
consumption point of view—at different machine operating points, for the given control parameters
(DVC error controller gains, DTC hysteresis loop bands). Considering the energy consumption
estimations, it seems that a diagram of machine working points (as a combination of machine speed
and torque values) can be defined, for the various trolleybus drive scenarios under study. In this
context, Figure 18 depicts the machine operating range map, where the area of DTC outperformance
(lower energy consumption) is marked in blue color, whereas the pink colored area stands for the
DVC outperformance. In the hatched area, the performance of these two driving methods is almost
Resources 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW
the same. 15 of 19

Tm (Nm) Fluxnom Flux<Fluxnom

125%
Nominal
Working
100% Point
Consumption
(kWh/km)

DTC
Energy

64%

DVC
11%
69% 100% 138% 155% 172% 224% ωm (rad/sec)
-13%
(kWh/km)
Recovery
Energy

-44%
-59%

-109%

Figure 18. 18.

Figure Operating
Operatingarea
areaofofthe
thetrolleybus asynchronousmachine.
trolleybus asynchronous machine.In In
thethe blue
blue area,
area, DTCDTC is more
is more
efficient, whereas in the pink area, DVC is more efficient. In the hatched area, the performance
efficient, whereas in the pink area, DVC is more efficient. In the hatched area, the performance of these of
these two
two driving
driving methods
methods is almost
is almost the same.
the same.

Last, but not least, the optimum operating mode map in Figure 18 can be exploited by the owner
company of the trolleybuses in a future upgrade of the driving scheme.

5. Energy Consumption/Saving Potential Estimations for a Typical Trolley Course

 Figure 18. Operating area of the trolleybus asynchronous machine. In the blue area, DTC is more
efficient, whereas in the pink area, DVC is more efficient. In the hatched area, the performance of
Resources 2018, 7, 43 14 of 18
these two driving methods is almost the same.

Last, but not least, the optimum operating mode map in Figure 18 can be exploited by the owner
Last, but not least, the optimum operating mode map in Figure 18 can be exploited by the owner
company of the trolleybuses in a future upgrade of the driving scheme.
company of the trolleybuses in a future upgrade of the driving scheme.
5.
5. Energy
Energy Consumption/Saving
Consumption/Saving Potential
Potential Estimations for aa Typical
Estimations for Typical Trolley
TrolleyCourse
Course
Considering
Considering the
thedeveloped
developedenergy
energyconsumption
consumption profile (based
profile onon
(based exhaustive simulations)
exhaustive of the
simulations) of
trolleybus, we may
the trolleybus, proceed
we may with calculations
proceed regarding
with calculations the total
regarding theenergy consumption
total energy of the vehicle
consumption of the
and theand
vehicle corresponding energy
the corresponding recovery
energy potential
recovery for for
potential a typical course
a typical scenario,
course scenario,including
includingall
all the
the
previously-mentioned road/travelling conditions. Figure 19 depicts the course under
previously-mentioned road/travelling conditions. Figure 19 depicts the course under study. study.

Deceleration Acceleration
500m
(Vinitial/ Vfinal =30/20, (Vinitia l/ Vfinal=20/30,
(Speed, 20,
40/30, 50/40 km/h) 30/40, 40/50 km/h)
30, 40, 50
0% km/h)
Acceleration
(Vintial= 0,
Vfinal= 20,
30, 40, 50
km/h)

19. Diagram
Figure 19. Diagramofofconsidered trolleybus
considered course,
trolleybus including
course, road/travelling
including conditions
road/travelling under under
conditions study.
study.
The travelling conditions of the course in Figure 19 are listed in Table 2. According to Figure 19
The travelling
and Table conditions
2, the total distanceof
ofthe
thecourse
courseinisFigure
14 km.19Inare listed inTable
addition, Table12.includes
Accordingtwotoadditional
Figure 19
and Table 2, the total distance of the course
scenarios of the route described in Figure 19. is 14 km. In addition, Table 1 includes two additional
scenarios of the route described in Figure 19.
Table2.3 summarizes
Table the energy
Energy consumption of theconsumption results for
trolleybus (considering those three
maximum alternative
passenger load, Mscenarios, as well
v = 20,000 kg)
as theinenergy
assumed recovery potential
routes, under as aheavy
low and percentage of the consumed
traffic congestion. energy.
Scenarios 1, 2, and 3.

Initial/Final Road Inclination (%)/Scenario Distance Times of Traveled Distance

Type of Course
Speed (km/h) 1/2/3 (km) (Light/Heavy Traffic)
0/20 20/60
0/30 40/120
0/40 20/60
Acceleration 0/50 0/0/0 ignored 20/60
20/30 20/60
30/40 40/120
40/50 20/60
30/20 20/60
Deceleration 40/30 0/0/0 ignored 40/120
50/40 20/60
20, 30, 40, 50 0/0/0 0.5 1
Constant Speed
20, 30, 40 1, 5, −1, −5/0, 1, −1, 0/0, 0, 0, 0 0.1 10

Table 3 summarizes the energy consumption results for those three alternative scenarios, as well
as the energy recovery potential as a percentage of the consumed energy.
As shown in Table 3, energy consumption with the implementation of DTC, in both traffic cases,
is slightly lower, whereas the energy recovery potential as a percentage of energy consumption is
slightly higher, compared with DVC. However, the deviation of the results is small.
In Scenario 2, where high road inclinations (5%, −5%) are omitted, energy consumption appears
to be significantly lower than in Scenario 1 and the percentage of the energy recovery potential is
higher. In addition, it appears that energy consumption in both scenarios is not particularly affected
by the driving method.
Resources 2018, 7, 43 15 of 18

In Scenario 3, where road inclinations are completely omitted, it appears that in both traffic
conditions, with DTC implementation, energy consumption is slightly lower and the percentage of
the energy recovery potential is higher. Compared with Scenarios 1 and 2, energy consumption in
Scenario 3 is lower (as there are no road inclinations).

Table 3. Energy consumption/recovery potential of the trolleybus (considering maximum passenger

load, Mv = 20,000 kg) in assumed routes, under low and heavy traffic congestion. Scenarios 1, 2, and 3.
DVC—direct vector control; DTC—direct torque control.

Energy Consumption (kWh/km)/Recovery Potential (%)

Control Method/Traffic Case
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
DVC, Light Traffic 2.01/8.5 1.01/9.45 0.69/14.3
DVC, Heavy Traffic 2.74/13.46 1.8/15.55 1.42/20.9
DTC, Light Traffic 1.97/8.8 1.1/9.6 0.67/18.9
DTC, Heavy Traffic 2.69/14.2 1.82/17.22 1.39/24

Considering the results of energy consumption/saving potential calculations in Table 2, it seems

that a significant percentage of the braking energy can be recovered, that is, up to 24% of daily energy
consumption (particularly under heavy traffic conditions, where the number of decelerations increases
significantly). These outcomes are in line with results regarding regenerative energy savings found in
literature [27–29].

6. Proposed Hybrid Energy Storage Apparatus

In this paragraph, an initial estimation of the sustainability of a proposed hybrid energy storage
apparatus, which is an optimal solution incorporated in many public means of electrical transportation
Resources 2018,[24,30],
worldwide 7, x FORis
PEER REVIEW this is illustrated in Figure 20.
attempted; 17 of 19

Trolley dc Bus A

Bidirectional Bidirectional
Converter 1 Converter 2

48 VDC
SUPERCAPACITORS BATTERIES

B
Figure 20. Proposed
Figure 20. Proposed hybrid energy storage
hybrid energy storage apparatus;
apparatus; points
points A,
A, B
B refer
refer to
to Figure
Figure 4.
4.

The components of the proposed apparatus of Figure 20 are the following:

The components of the proposed apparatus of Figure 20 are the following:
• A supercapacitor bank of 0.2 kWh maximum storage capability, in order to support the energy
• A supercapacitor
recovery bank of 0.2 intervals.
during deceleration kWh maximum storage
This unit capability,
will also supportin order to support
acceleration theinenergy
intervals, order
recovery
to limit the power losses of the overhead supply network. Its dimensioning is basedinon
during deceleration intervals. This unit will also support acceleration intervals, order
the
to limit the power losses of
results of Figures 15 and 16. the overhead supply network. Its dimensioning is based on the results
• of Figures bank
A battery 15 and
of 16.
3.5 kWh maximum energy capability, in order to support the energy recovery
• A battery
during bank downhill
vehicle of 3.5 kWh maximum
courses. energy capability,
Its dimensioning in order
is based toresults
on the supportofthe energy
Figure 17. recovery
• during vehicle downhill courses. Its dimensioning is based on
Two bidirectional DC/DC converters, one for each energy storage bank. the results of Figure 17.

As depicted in Figure 20, the assumed energy storage voltage level is 48 V and the selected
battery technology is Li–ion, in order to have mature commercial solutions available [31]. According
to these specifications and taking into account the current electric energy prices and the available
commercial data, it turns out that the investment payoff is estimated at 30,000 km, which leads to a
Resources 2018, 7, 43 16 of 18

• Two bidirectional DC/DC converters, one for each energy storage bank.

As depicted in Figure 20, the assumed energy storage voltage level is 48 V and the selected battery
technology is Li–ion, in order to have mature commercial solutions available [31]. According to these
specifications and taking into account the current electric energy prices and the available commercial
data, it turns out that the investment payoff is estimated at 30,000 km, which leads to a payback
period of less than two years. This result highlights the sustainability potential of the proposed energy
recovery scheme.

7. Conclusions
In this article, the behavioral model of 8000-series of Athens trolleybuses is developed, with the
use of data provided by OSY S.A., in order to achieve a reliable estimation of their energy
consumption. At the same time, the amount of kinetic energy stored in the rotating/moving parts
of the vehicle is estimated; the feasibility of saving this energy, by means of regenerative braking,
is considered. Furthermore, the employed driving methods are the existing DVC and the DTC (as an
interesting alternative).
In this context, an energy consumption functional model of the trolleybus has been developed,
based on exhaustive simulations in Matlab/Simulink environment under various travelling and
transport loading conditions (using both DVC and DTC). Next, this energy consumption model
is utilized for the energy saving potential estimation of these trolleybuses, under various realistic
operating scenarios.
The results of this study lead to the conclusion that there is a significant margin of energy saving
of Athens trolleybuses; up to 24% of daily energy consumption. Furthermore, a sustainable hybrid
energy storage apparatus is proposed and estimations regarding its payoff period suggest a less than
two year payback time interval.
Finally, the proposed energy consumption modelling and energy saving estimation procedure is
applicable for any trolleybus system of public transportation.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, N.A. and N.P.; Methodology, N.P.; Software, N.A.; Validation, N.P. and
N.A.; Formal Analysis, N.P.; Investigation, N.A.; Resources, N.A.; Data Curation, N.A.; Writing-Original Draft
Preparation, N.A.; Writing-Review & Editing, N.P.; Visualization, N.A.; Supervision, N.P.; Project Administration,
N.P.; Funding Acquisition, N.P.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: Authors would like to thank OSY S.A. and especially Ellias Kollias and Paraskevas
Kampourakis for their support and for providing the necessary data regarding the 8000-series of
Athens Trolleybuses.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Apostolidou, N.; Papanikolaou, N.; Kollias, E.; Kampourakis, P. Survey on Regenerative Energy Potential
of Athens Trolleybuses. In Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on Electrical Apparatus and
Technologies (SIELA), Burgas, Bulgaria, 3–6 June 2018.
2. Chen, Y.C.; Chang, Y.C.; Cheng, J.F.; Yu, W.C.; Lin, C.L. Regenerative Braking-Driving Control System.
In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), Wuhan,
China, 31 May–2 June 2018.
3. Neyestani, N.; Damavandi, M.Y.; Godina, R.; Catalão, J.P.S. Integrating the PEVs’ traffic pattern in parking
lots and charging stations in micro multi-energy systems. In Proceedings of the 51st International Universities
Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), Coimbra, Portugal, 6–9 September 2016.
4. Yang, Y.; He, X.; Zhang, Y.; Qin, D. Regenerative Braking Compensatory Control Strategy Considering CVT
Power Loss for Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Energies 2018, 11, 497. [CrossRef]
Resources 2018, 7, 43 17 of 18

5. Sarrafan, K.; Muttaqi, K.M.; Sutanto, D.; Town, G.E. A Real-Time Range Indicator for EVs Using Web-Based
Environmental Data and Sensorless Estimation of Regenerative Braking Power. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
2018, 67, 4743–4756. [CrossRef]
6. Liu, B.; Li, L.; Wang, X.; Cheng, S. Hybrid Electric Vehicle Downshifting Strategy Based on Stochastic
Dynamic Programming During Regenerative Braking Process. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2018, 67, 4716–4727.
[CrossRef]
7. Zhang, G.; Tian, Z.; Du, H.; Liu, Z. A Novel Hybrid DC Traction Power Supply System Integrating PV and
Reversible Converters. Energies 2018, 11, 1661. [CrossRef]
8. Bu, B.; Qin, G.; Li, L.; Li, G. An Energy Efficient Train Dispatch and Control Integrated Method in Urban Rail
Transit. Energies 2018, 11, 1248. [CrossRef]
9. Karatzaferis, I.; Tatakis, E.C.; Papanikolaou, N. Investigation of Energy Savings on Industrial Motor Drives
Using Bidirectional Converters. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 17952–17961. [CrossRef]
10. Allegre, A.-L.; Bouscayrol, A.; Delarue, P.; Barrade, P.; Chattot, E.; El-Fassi, S. Energy Storage System With
Supercapacitor for an Innovative Subway. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2010, 12, 4001–4012. [CrossRef]
11. Drabek, P.; Streit, L. The Energy Storage System with Supercapacitor for Public Transport. In Proceedings of
the IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC ‘09), Dearborn, MI, USA, 7–10 September 2009.
12. Aberkane, H.; Sakri, D.; Rahem, D. Comparative Study of Different Variants of Direct Torque Control Applied
to Induction Motor. In Proceedings of the 9th International Renewable Energy Congress (IREC), Hammamet,
Tunisia, 20–22 March 2018.
13. Ganthia, B.P.; Rana, P.K.; Pattanai, S.A. Space Vector Pulse Width Modulation Fed Direct Torque Control
of Induction Motor Drive Using Matlab-Simulink. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
on Electrical, Electronics, Engineering Trends, Communication, Optimization and Sciences (EEECOS),
Tadepalligudem, India, 1–2 June 2016.
14. Vas, P. Sensorless Vector and Direct Torque Control; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1998; pp. 263–323.
15. Conte, M.; Genovese, A.; Ortenzi, F.; Vellucci, F. Hybrid battery-supercapacitor storage for an electric forklift:
A life-cycle cost assessment. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2014, 44, 523–532. [CrossRef]
16. Mitronikas, E.; Safakas, A. An Improved Sensorless Vector Control Method for an Induction Motor Drive.
IEEE Tran. Ind. Electron. 2005, 52, 1660–1668. [CrossRef]
17. Lascu, C.; Boldea, I.; Blaabjerg, F. A Modified Direct Torque Control for Induction Motor Sensorless Drive.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2000, 36, 122–130. [CrossRef]
18. Ehsani, M.; Gao, Y.; Gay, S.E.; Emadi, A. In Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles; CRC Press:
Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005; pp. 21–43, 99–110, ISBN 0-8493-3154-4.
19. Fajri, P.; Ahmadi, R.; Ferdowsi, M. Equivalent Vehicle Rotational Inertia Used for Electric Vehicle Test Bench
Dynamic Studies. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society,
Montreal, QC, Canada, 25–28 October 2012; pp. 4115–4120.
20. Xiaohua, Z.; Haitao, M.; Xing, X.; Qingnian, W. Parameter Design for Power Train and Performance
Simulation of Electrical City Bus. In Proceedings of the IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference
(VPPC), Harbin, China, 3–5 September 2008.
21. MAN Truck & Bus Company Website. Available online: www.mantruckandbus.com (accessed on 10
June 2018).
22. Men, X.; Guo, Y.; Wu, G.; Shi, C.; Zhu, J. Implementation of a Motor Control System for Electric Bus based
on DSP. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS),
Sydney, NSW, Australia, 11–14 August 2017.
23. Karampasis, E.; Papanikolaou, N.; Voglitsis, D.; Loupis, M.; Psarras, A.; Boubaris, A.; Baros, D.;
Dimitrakopoulos, G. Active Thermoelectric Cooling Solutions for Airspace Applications: The THERMICOOL
Project. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 2288–2299. [CrossRef]
24. Adib, A.; Dhaouadi, R. Modeling and analysis of a regenerative braking system with a battery-supercapacitor
energy storage. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Modeling, Simulation, and Applied
Optimization (ICMSAO), Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, 4–6 April 2017.
25. Liu, P.; Yang, L.; Gao, Z.; Huang, Y.; Li, S.; Gao, Y. Energy-Efficient Train Timetable Optimization in the
Subway System with Energy Storage Devices. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Sys. 2018, 1–17. [CrossRef]
Resources 2018, 7, 43 18 of 18

26. Lv, C.; Zhang, J.; Li, Y.; Yuan, Y. Mechanism analysis and evaluation methodology of regenerative braking
contribution to energy efficiency improvement of electrified vehicles. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 92,
469–482. [CrossRef]
27. Liu, W.; Xu, J.; Tang, J. Study on control strategy of urban rail train with on-board regenerative braking
energy storage system. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics
(IECON), Beijing, China, 29 October–1 November 2017.
28. Khodaparastan, M.; Mohamed, A. A study on super capacitor wayside connection for energy recuperation
in electric rail systems. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Renewable Energy Research
and Applications (ICRERA), San Diego, CA, USA, 5–8 November 2017.
29. Yang, Z.; Yang, Z.; Xia, H.; Lin, F. Brake Voltage Following Control of Supercapacitor-Based Energy Storage
Systems in Metro Considering Train Operation State. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 6751–6761.
[CrossRef]
30. Ostadi, A.; Kazerani, M. A Comparative Analysis of Optimal Sizing of Battery-Only, Ultracapacitor-Only,
and Battery–Ultracapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage Systems for a City Bus. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2015, 64,
4449–4460. [CrossRef]
31. Mouser Electronics. Available online: www.mouser.com (accessed on 10 June 2018).

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).