A Four-Wheel-Drive Fully Electric Vehicle Layout

with Two-Speed Transmissions

De Pinto S.(1, 2), Camocardi P.(1), Sorniotti A.(1), Mantriota G.(2), Perlo P.(3), Viotto F.(4)
(1)
Department of Mechanical Engineering Sciences. University of Surrey. Guildford, United Kingdom.
(2)
Dipartimento di Meccanica, Matematica e Management. Politecnico di Bari. Bari, Italy.
(3)
Interactive Fully Electrical Vehicles (IFEVS). Torino e-District. Torino, Italy.
(4)
EV & HEV Transmissions – Automotive Applications. Oerlikon Graziano SpA. Torino, Italy.

Abstract—This paper presents a novel fully electric vehicle , : primary shaft, secondary shaft
layout, consisting of two drivetrains, each of them including a : reference
two-speed transmission, for improving vehicle acceleration and
gradeability performance. The adoption of two-speed
: selected gear ratio (first, second or neutral)
transmissions allows eight different gear state combinations, : torque-fill enabled
increasing the possibility of selecting a high-efficiency state for : wheel
each operating condition. A torque-fill controller is developed for & : windage and friction
the compensation of the torque gap during gearshift through the
variation of the torque on the other axle. Finally, a simulation- II. INTRODUCTION
based analysis of the acceleration, gradeability and gearshift
performance of this vehicle layout is discussed, in comparison With the rising prices of non-renewable energy sources and
with alternative fully electric vehicle configurations. increased pressure for high-efficiency vehicles, hybrid electric
vehicles (HEVs) and fully electric vehicles (FEVs) are
Keywords—Two-speed transmission; four-wheel-drive fully emerging as feasible solutions for mobility. Electric motors
electric vehicle; seamless gearshift; torque-fill. (EMs) usually have an operating region with high maximum
I. LIST OF SYMBOLS torque availability at low speeds. At higher speeds their
operation is limited to a constant power region, sometimes
: longitudinal acceleration followed by a region with decreasing power as a function of
: transmission gear ratio speed [1-4]. Due to their flexibility in terms of layout and
: mass moment of inertia packaging, and reduced amount of required auxiliary systems
: torsional stiffness in comparison with internal combustion engines (ICEs),
: Laplace operator electric motors are suitable for installation in different
: torque powertrain configurations [5-6].
: time Hybrid electric powertrains are designed as a combination
: gearbox actuator position of an ICE and one or more EMs. The EMs can be directly
: non-dimensional factor for the computation of the reference integrated into the transmission system without major
motor speed during gearshift modifications, or coupled to the ICE through power split
: torsional damping coefficient devices, e.g., planetary gear sets [7-9]. Similarly to HEVs,
: efficiency FEVs can be developed according to a significant variety of
, , : angular position, speed, acceleration layouts. The most common solution is a central electric motor
: time constant or pure time delay with a single-speed transmission and a differential, in order to
reduce manufacturing costs and weight. Although existing
The following lines report the subscripts used in the paper. FEVs usually adopt single-speed transmissions, this
configuration constrains their performance, especially in case
: gearbox actuator
of electric motors characterized by a limited speed range. In
: delay fact, the single gear ratio has to be selected as a trade-off
: desired between gradeability, requiring a high value of the gear ratio,
: differential and top speed, requiring a low value of the gear ratio. In a two-
: electric motor speed electric drivetrain, the first gear ratio is selected for
: energy management system providing the required longitudinal acceleration and
gradeability performance, while the second gear ratio can be
: equivalent
designed to provide the specified top speed. Moreover, as the
, , , : front, right, left, rear efficiency of an electric drivetrain is a function of torque and
, 1, 2, : gearbox, gear 1, gear 2, disengaged gear speed, a two-speed transmission system allows increased
: half-shaft flexibility in the selection of the operating region of the electric
, , : initial, final, inertia phase drivetrain, thus bringing potential energy efficiency benefits.
E-mail of the corresponding author: a.sorniotti@surrey.ac.uk
The research leading to these results has received funding from the
European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013 (PLUS-
MOBY) under grant agreement n° 605502.

978-1-4799-6782-7/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE

Typically, the region of maximum efficiency of an electric synchronizer actuation, since the synchronization is electrically
motor is in the mid-range of torque and speed. However, a controlled through the electric motor drive.
detailed and experimentally validated analysis of the variation
of electric drivetrain efficiency and the energy consumption As shown in Table I, this configuration allows a total
benefits of multiple-speed electric drivetrains is still missing in number of eight gear states. This increases the availability of
the literature. efficient drivetrain conditions for given vehicle speed and
wheel torque demand (look at the regions in the table and in
[10-12] suggest that two-speed transmission systems are Fig.2). Moreover, the presence of two concurrently active
the most suitable solution for increasing the performance and traction axles reduces the torque gap during gearshifts (if
efficiency of FEVs. [13] proposes a two-speed transmission actuated on a single transmission at a time) even without the
consisting of an electric motor and a planetary gear set. [14] implementation of any specific controller, thus improving
describes a two-speed transmission combining a planetary gear comfort. Fig. 2 reports the theoretical wheel torque
set with a dual clutch, used for alternatively connecting the characteristic as a function of vehicle speed, obtained by
output shaft with the sun gear or the planet carrier. [15-17] referring the front and rear peak motor torques to the wheels
present comparison studies between FEVs with two electric through the transmission gear ratios. Transmission efficiencies
motors, one per each axle, and other FEV configurations, from and inertial effects are neglected in this preliminary calculation.
the viewpoint of safety and operational performance. Fig. 2 also reports the required wheel torque to maintain
According to [15] and [16], the single-speed four-wheel-drive constant speed at 0% road gradient. Interestingly, the top speed
(4WD) layout with two motors (one per axle) has various of the vehicle is limited by motor speed and not by motor
advantages, such as: i) failsafe function even if one of the two power.
motors fails; and ii) the possibility of distributing driving and TABLE I. AVAILABLE GEAR STATE COMBINATIONS.
braking torques according to the different operating conditions.
State Front Transmission Rear Transmission Regions
1 1st gear 1st gear I to VI
2 1st gear 2nd gear II to VI
Electric
3 2nd gear 1st gear II to VI
Motor ~ PM 4 2nd gear 2nd gear IV to VIII
Rear
5 Neutral 1st gear III to V
2nd Gear 6 Neutral 2nd gear V and VII
7 1st gear Neutral III to V
8 2nd gear Neutral V and VII
Dog Clutch
The proposed vehicle layout allows further torque gap
Front
1st Gear reduction during gearshifts through specific control functions.
PM ~
Diff. While a transmission is shifting, hence originating a torque gap
on the respective axle, the other drivetrain compensates the
torque gap through an increase of its torque demand. This
Fig. 1. Powertrain layout of the two-speed 4WD vehicle. operation results in potentially seamless gearshifts in most
operating conditions, through a very simple transmission
Section III of this paper presents a novel and flexible FEV architecture. However, when the motors are already operating
layout. The configuration, shown in Fig. 1, consists of two close to their maximum peak power level, the system will only
drivetrains, one per axle, both of them with a two-speed provide partial torque-fill.
transmission. A specific control function for torque-fill during
1500
upshift and downshift is developed and discussed in section V, Max wheel torque
based on the simulation model dealt with in section IV. Finally, st
State 1: 1 front gear - 1 rear gear
st

a simulation-based analysis of the acceleration, gradeability 1250

State 2: 2nd front gear - 1st rear gear
st nd
and gearshift performance is presented in section VI, including State 3: 1 front gear - 2 rear gear
nd nd
State 4: 2 front gear - 2 rear gear
a comparison with more conventional drivetrain architectures. I
State 5: 1st front gear - Neutral rear gear
1000 st
Wheel torque [Nm]

State 7: Neutral front gear - 1 rear gear

III. THE TWO-SPEED FOUR-WHEEL-DRIVE VEHICLE nd
State 6: 2 front gear - Neutral rear gear
nd
CONFIGURATION State 8: Neutral front gear - 2 rear gear
II Wheel torque requirement at 0% road gradient
750
The case-study vehicle is an urban passenger car,
implemented (in the form of a physical prototype) within the III

European Union FP7 Project PLUS-MOBY, with a total mass 500

of 870 kg. In the specific implementation of this paper, each IV VI

axle is powered by a 14 kW peak power permanent magnet

(PM) electric motor. The FEV configuration consists of two 250
VIII
independent drivetrains, with a newly developed two-speed V vmax 1st gear
transmission system on each axle, proposed by VOCIS and VII v max 2nd gear

Oerlikon Graziano in 2012. The design is a simplification of an 0

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

original two-speed drivetrain for two-wheel-drive (2WD) Vehicle speed [km/h]

vehicles [12], by excluding the use of friction and sprag Fig. 2. Theoretical wheel torque characteristics for the eight gear states, as
clutches. Gearshifts can be carried out without clutch and functions of vehicle speed.
 IV. ELECTRIC VEHICLE DYNAMIC MODEL 1
, , , , ,
The front and rear transmissions can either work with: i) an ,

engaged gear on one primary shaft (on the front or rear
transmission) and no engaged gear on the other primary shaft;
or ii) two engaged gears, one per each primary shaft. Since
plays and internal torsion deformations of the transmission
system (consisting of gearbox and differential) are second-
approximation effects, they are neglected in the following
modelling and gearshift control analysis. In order to evaluate
vehicle performance and gearshift quality, both transmissions
have been coupled with a simulation model of the vehicle
longitudinal dynamics (Fig. 3). If a gear is engaged, the first-
order dynamics of the drivetrain have been modeled
considering the system as an equivalent inertia, from the
electric motor to the differential. This inertia is connected to
the wheel inertia through half-shafts, modeled as torsion
springs and dampers. Tires are simulated through the Pacejka
magic formula model with relaxation length [18].
Front electric motor Front dog clutch
Front primary shaft
, , (1)
, , , ,
, , , , , ,
The internal dynamics of the mechanical differential are
neglected in this paper for simplicity. , is calculated
starting from the motor torque demand, through a transfer
function. The efficiency in the formula, including the losses in
the first gear and differential, can be reversed depending on the
direction of the power flow through the coupling. Transmission
efficiency is expressed through a look-up table (supplied by the
transmission system manufacturer), as a function of the input
torque, speed and operating temperature. The equivalent
moment of inertia of the drivetrain considers the contributions
of the half-shafts, differential, motor, primary and secondary
shafts, and first and second gears. In first gear it is:
,
0.5 , , ,

~ PM
Vehicle , , , , (2)
direction
Front secondary shaft , , , , , ,

B. Engaged second gear

In this condition the system dynamics are expressed by an
Front left Front Front right equation similar to (1), apart from the value of the gear ratio,
wheel differential wheel while the equivalent moment of inertia of the drivetrain is:
Vehicle
0.5 ,
Model , , ,

Rear left Rear Rear right

wheel differential wheel , , , , (3)

, , , , , ,

C. Disengaged gear
Rear secondary shaft
In this condition the primary and secondary shafts are
~ PM
decoupled. The system is characterized by two degrees of
Rear primary shaft
freedom: i) the first one for the rotating parts of the electric
motor and the transmission system components rigidly
Rear electric motor Rear dog clutch
connected to the primary shaft; and ii) the second one for the
Fig. 3. Layout of the two-speed 4WD vehicle model. transmission parts rotating together with the differential. In
formulas:
The transmissions can work in three conditions, each of
, & ,
them governed by different equations: A. Engaged first gear: in ,
this condition the primary and secondary shafts rotate , ,
according to the first gear ratio; B. Engaged second gear: the
dog clutch is engaged such that the kinematic ratio between the , , , , , , ,
(4)
primary and secondary shafts is the second gear ratio; and C.
Disengaged gear: in this condition the drivetrain is 1
characterized by two degrees of freedom, as the electric motor , , , , , ,
,
dynamics are decoupled from the transmission output shaft where
dynamics.
,
0.5 , , ,
The equations are reported for the front axle only, as the (5)
rear drivetrain model is identical to the front one. , , , , , , ,

A. Engaged first gear The efficiency of the PM electric motor drive, including the
The torque balance of the drivetrain in first gear, including windage and friction losses and the inverter efficiency, is
the electric motor, is given by: expressed through a look-up table (supplied by the electric
motor and inverter manufacturer), function of the motor torque, where , ,
is the torque demand for the front electric
speed and operating temperature. motor that would be output by the EMS if the front drivetrain
The axial position of the dog clutch located between the was already in second gear, , is the torque demand for
first and second gear is controlled though an electro-hydraulic the rear electric motor provided by the EMS in first gear, and
actuator. The actuator position is modelled through a pure time is the front electric motor torque demand actually
,
delay, , and a first order transfer function with time constant ,

provided by the TCU during the gearshift.

:
After the completion of the front motor torque roll-off
phase, the reference signal of the front dog clutch position is
(6) varied from 1 (engaged first gear) to 1.5 (disengaged gear,
1
phase B-C in Fig. 5). Once the dog clutch has been disengaged,
V. GEARSHIFT CONTROL WITH TORQUE-FILL the inertia phase ( ) starts. In this phase the electric motor
speed has to be reduced from the value corresponding to the
In this section gearshift operation is described. During first gear ratio, to the level corresponding to the second gear
gearshifts, the transmission control unit (TCU) modifies the ratio. A combination of feedforward and feedback controllers
motor torque demands provided by the energy management (Fig. 6) is used for the speed control of the front electric motor,
system (EMS). The EMS front-to-total wheel torque demand based on a reference speed profile given by:
distribution is set at 50%. Gearshift maps are used, according to
the look-up tables shown in Fig. 4. They report the , , , (8)
combinations of motor torque demands and vehicle speeds at
which the gearshifts are initiated. In order to avoid significant 2.5

Dog clutch position [-]

wheel slip, a traction controller is included. 2

1 1 1.5
Ref. position Front
1
Front torque demand [-]

Rear torque demand [-]

0.8 0.8 Actual position Front

0.5
A B C D E F
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
0.6 0.6
Time [s]

0.4 0.4 4500

Motor speed [rpm]

Ref. motor speed Front

0.2 0.2 3500 Actual motor speed Front

Upshift Upshift
Downshift Downshift
0 0 2500
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Vehicle speed [km/h] Vehicle speed [km/h] A B C D E F
1500
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Fig. 4. Front and rear gearshift maps.
Time [s]
Electric Motor Torque [Nm]

A power-on upshift from the first to the second gear on the 20

front axle is considered as example (Fig. 5), while the rear axle 10
is in first gear. Torque-fill can be achieved only if the upshifts 0
Ref. torque Front

are not concurrently executed on the two drivetrains. The -10

Actual torque Front

upshift is split into functional phases considering an initial -20

Ref. torque Rear

vehicle speed of about 35 km/h and an accelerator pedal -30 A B C D E F

Actual torque Rear

position (APP) equal to 30%. Fig. 5 shows the time histories 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
of: i) the reference and actual front dog clutch positions; ii) the Time [s]
reference and actual front EM speeds; and iii) the front and rear Fig. 5. Upshift from 1st to 2nd gear. Dynamics of the dog clutch and electric
EM torques (reference and actual values) during the maneuver. motor (torque and speed) with reference and actual values.

The gearshift controller initially performs a motor torque + .

roll-off phase (between points A and B in Fig. 5) on the Feedforward
drivetrain involved in the gearshift (the front one in this case).
As the rear motor is working at about 15% of its maximum x
torque at the beginning of the maneuver (according to the P
I
+
implemented drivability maps), the rear motor can fully D
compensate the torque gap produced by the front motor torque
reduction. During torque-fill, the rear EM torque demand is Fig. 6. Schematic of the feedforward and feedback controllers of the EM speed
given by: during the inertia phase of an upshift sequence.
1 The non-dimensional factor is a normalization
, , , , ,
, , (7) parameter defining the reference speed profile, and is the
output of a counter, which is activated by the TCU at the
, , , , , , ,
beginning of the inertia phase. The initial value of y is 1, so that
(8) provides an initial value of the reference motor speed equal
to the actual speed at the beginning of the inertia phase. The
final value of y is , / , , so that the final value of the
reference motor speed is equal to that required for
synchronization.
The feedforward controller contribution is based on the
torque balance equation of the drivetrain components rotating
together with the front electric motor shaft:
, , , , & , (9)
The feedback contribution is based on a proportional
integral derivative (PID) controller, with the gains calculated
according to the conventional methods in the frequency domain
(gain and phase margins, and tracking bandwidth). When the
difference between the actual motor speed and the reference
motor speed in the new gear is within an assigned threshold for
a sufficient amount of time (e.g., 200 ms in this example), the
corresponding double-powered vehicle in most operating
conditions during urban operation, i.e., low speed driving with
frequent accelerations. The additional mass (34 kg for the case
study vehicle) and rotating inertia slightly penalize the novel
4WD vehicle architecture in comparison with the two-speed
2WD vehicle of the same total power. For example, Table II
shows a 10% acceleration time difference in the 0-50 km/h test
between the two FEV configurations, whilst Table III reports a
maximum gradient increment of 4.2% at 0 km/h, 4.9% at 40
km/h and 5.8% at 80 km/h (with respect to the two-speed 2WD
vehicle). Overall, this marginal performance penalty of the
novel vehicle architecture is acceptable for the specific
application, when considering the enhanced gearshift quality
(discussed in the next section) and flexibility in the gear state
selection.
60
APP 50% - 2WD
55 APP 50% - 4WD

Vehicle speed [km/h]

reference signal to the dog clutch is set to the second gear value APP 50% - Torque-fill - 4WD
APP 80% - 2WD
(point D in Fig. 5). Once the actuator has reached the final 50 APP 80% - 4WD

reference position, the second gear is considered to be engaged 45

APP 80% - Torque-fill - 4WD

(point E in Fig. 5), and the front motor torque demand is

ramped up to the value specified by the EMS (point F). 40

35
VI. RESULTS
The non-linear forward facing vehicle model is 30
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
implemented in the Matlab/Simulink environment for Time [s]
evaluating: i) the acceleration and gradeability performance of
the two-speed 4WD layout; and ii) its gearshift dynamics. The
Vehicle acceleration [m/s 2]

APP 50% - 2WD

3
results are compared to those of other possible architectures of APP 50% - 4WD
APP 50% - Torque-fill - 4WD
the same vehicle application, 2WD or 4WD, with single-speed APP 80% - 2WD

or two-speed transmissions. The vehicles are characterized by 2 APP 80% - 4WD

APP 80% - Torque-fill - 4WD
two values (14 kW and 28 kW) of the total installed electric
motor power (peak value), capable of providing the same top 1
speed of about 125 km/h, limited by the maximum speed of the
motor (and not by the installed power). Permanent magnet 0
motors with the same base speed (2,500 rpm) and top speed
(6,500 rpm) values are considered in the comparative analysis, 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
and a rear drive is assumed for the 2WD configurations. The Time [s]
gear ratio of the single-speed transmissions is the same as the Fig. 7. Vehicle speed and acceleration for two different upshifts, with APP at
second gear ratio of the two-speed transmissions. The first gear 50% and 80%, with and without torque-fill.
ratio is 2.724, the second gear ratio is 1.251, and the final
reduction ratio is 4.476. Table II reports the mass implications TABLE II. MASS AND ACCELERATION TIMES: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT
VEHICLES ARCHITECTURES
(caused by the variation of the size and number of components)
deriving from the adoption of the different drivetrain Mass Acceleration time
Vehicle
[kg] 0-50 [km/h] 0-100 [km/h]
configurations. The gearshift dynamics are evaluated at
Single-speed 2WD (28 kW) 824 6.1 17.7
different APPs, with the aim of showing the benefits of a Single-speed 2WD (14 kW) 819 12.6 45
gearshift with torque-fill, in terms of acceleration profile. Two-speed 2WD (28 kW) 836 4.0 16.5
Two-speed 2WD (14 kW) 831 8.1 42.3
A. Acceleration and gradeability performance Single-speed 4WD (28 kW) 846 6.2 18.2
Simulations of vehicle performance have been carried out Two-speed 4WD (28 kW) 870 4.5 17.2
for the comparison of the novel FEV vehicle architecture with
five different layouts. The results are expressed in terms of: i) TABLE III. MAXIMUM ROAD GRADIENT AS A FUNCTION OF VEHICLE SPEED:
COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT VEHICLE ARCHITECTURES
0-50 km/h and 0-100 km/h acceleration times, reported in
Table II; and ii) maximum achievable road gradient at different Maximum road gradient [%]
Vehicle
speeds, reported in Table III. The factors determining vehicle 0 [km/h] 40 [km/h] 80 [km/h]
performance are, in order of significance: i) installed motor Single-speed 2WD (28 kW) 32.2 31.3 15.5
power; ii) number of gear ratios; and iii) vehicle mass. Single-speed 2WD (14 kW) 15.3 14.6 6
Two-speed 2WD (28 kW) 74 36.4 15.3
In particular, a two-speed transmission system is very Two-speed 2WD (14 kW) 34.9 16.9 5.8
effective in improving performance, especially at low speed, Single-speed 4WD (28 kW) 31.3 30.4 15.1
allowing a low-power FEV to achieve comparable results to the Two-speed 4WD (28 kW) 70.9 34.6 14.4
B. Gearshift performance
Fig. 7 reports the comparison of the speed and acceleration
profiles during two different upshifts in power-on (with APP of
50% and 80%) actuated on: i) the front drivetrain of the 4WD
vehicle, with and without the torque-fill controller; ii) the 2WD
28 kW vehicle configuration with the same transmission layout
(automated manual transmission without friction clutches) as
the 4WD vehicle. The front-to-total wheel torque distribution
imposed by the EMS of the 4WD vehicle is 50%. At 50% APP
the torque-fill controller of the 4WD vehicle allows seamless
gearshift actuation, which is not possible at 80% APP. The
benefit of the torque-fill controller is progressively reduced at
increasing values of APP, with no control-related torque-fill at
100% APP. The torque gap is evident in any condition for the
2WD vehicle (also with respect to the 4WD vehicle without
torque-fill), as the acceleration is negative during the inertia
phase of the upshift.
In order to objectively assess the gearshift performance, and
hence passenger comfort, three different indicators, called
peak-to-peak acceleration (PTPA), area ratio (AR) and integral
of the acceleration error (IAE), are used. PTPA represents the
difference (which should be as low as possible) between the
maximum and minimum longitudinal acceleration values
during a gearshift. As shown in Fig. 8, the indicators AR and
IAE are functions of the deviation between the actual (a) and
the ideal (ades) accelerations during the gearshift. In formulas:
/2
| |
From (10) and (11) it follows that the best gearshift
performance is reached when IAE is close to zero, and AR is
close to one. The results in Table IV confirm the significant
benefit in driving comfort provided by the 4WD vehicle with
the torque-fill controller (indicated by TF in the table), with
respect to the other two vehicle configurations (4WD without
torque-fill and two-speed 2WD).
Fig. 8. Desired and actual acceleration areas during a gearshift.
TABLE IV. GEARSHIFTHIFT QUALITY INDICATORS.
Vehicle Two-speed 4WD Two-speed 2WD
APP [%] 50 50 TF 80 80 TF 50
PTPA [m/s2 ] 0.37 0.14 0.81 0.33 0.58
AR [-] 0.51 0.98 0.57 0.86 0.37
IAE [m/s] 0.19 0.0065 0.47 0.15 0.36
VII. CONCLUSIONS
A novel fully electric vehicle architecture was presented,
combining the benefits of multiple-speed transmission systems
with the flexibility in the selection of the front-to-rear torque
distribution, allowed by the two electric drivetrains. The
acceleration and gradeability performance of this architecture
was compared to the one of more conventional layouts. A
torque-fill controller for reducing the wheel torque gap during
gearshifts was presented, and a set of simulation results and
gearshift indicators demonstrated its significant benefits.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Ehsani, Y. Gao, and A. Emadi, Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and
Fuel Cell Vehicles, Routledge: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group,
2010.
[2] I. Husain, Electric and Hybrid Vehicles: Design Fundementals,
Routledge: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group, 2005.
[3] J. Miller, Propulsion systems for hybrid vehicles, IET Power and Energy
Series, vol. 45, 2004.
[4] Q. Ren, D. Crolla, and A. Morris, “Effect of transmission design on
electric vehicle (EV) performance,” IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion
Conference, VPPC '09. Dearborn, September 2009.
[5] S. Riderknecht and T. Meier, “Electric power train configurations and
their transmissions systems,” International Symposium on Power
Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and Motion (SPEEDAM’10).
Pisa, June 2010.
[6] T. Meier, S. Riderknecht, and R. Fietzek, “Electric power train
configurations with appropriate transmissions systems,” SAE 2011
World Congress & Exhibition. Detroit, June 2011.
[7] C. Cheng, A. Mc Gordon, and P. Jennings, “Development of a
comprehensive and flexible forward dynamic powertrain simulation tool
for various hybrid electric vehicle architectures,” IMechE Part D:
Journal of Automobile Engineering, vol. 226, pp. 385-398, 2012.
[8] S. De Pinto and G. Mantriota, “A simple model for compound split
transmissions,” IMechE Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, vol.
(10) 228, Issue 5, pp. 547-562, 2014.
[9] F. Bottiglione, S. De Pinto, and G. Mantriota, “Infinitely variable
transmissions in neutral gear: torque ratio and power re-circulation,”
(11) Mechanism and Machine Theory, vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 285-298, 2014.
[10] X. Zhou, P. Walker, and N. Zhang, “Performance improvement of a two
speed EV through combined gear ratio and shift schedule optimization,”
SAE 2013 World Congress & Exhibition. Detroit, April 2013.
[11] G. Wu, X. Zhang, and Z. Dong, “Impacts of two-speed gearbox on
electric vehicle’s fuel economy and performance,” SAE 2013 World
Congress & Exhibition. Detroit, April 2013.
[12] A. Sorniotti et al., “Analysis and simulation of the gearshift
methodology for a novel two-speed transmission system for electric
powertrains with a central motor,” IMechE Part D: Journal of
Automobile Engineering, vol. 226, no. 7, pp. 915-929, 2012.
[13] R. Wang, L. Zhang, C. Yu, and C. Shi, “A new powertrain of two speeds
for pure electric vehicle,” Fourth International Conference on Digital
Manufacturing & Automation (ICDMA’13). Qingdao, June 2013.
[14] C. Yin, F. Zhu, J. Shu, and M. Zhang, Two-Speed Transmission and
Electric Vehicle, Patent WO 2013/177783 A1.
[15] N. Mutoh, R. Miyaji, and T. Yamaguchi, “Outstanding running
performance of front-and-rear-wheel-independent-drive-type electric
vehicle (FRID EV) under various transient running conditions,” 38th
Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society,
IECON’12. Montreal, October 2012.
[16] N. Mutoh, “Front-and-rear-wheel-independent-drive-type electric
vehicle (FRID EV) with compatible driving performance and safety,”
80 Electric Vehicle Symposium, EVS24. Stavanger, May 2009.
1.52
[17] H. Qian et al., “Energy management for four-wheel independent driving
0.24
vehicle,” IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
0.98 Systems. Taiwan, October 2010.
[18] H. Pacejka, Tyre and vehicle dynamics, 2nd edition. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.