Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmachtheory

Optimization design and performance comparison of different

powertrains of electric vehicles
Wei Du, Shengdun Zhao∗, Liying Jin, Jingzhou Gao, Zhenhao Zheng
School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In order to improve the economy of electric vehicles, three dual-motor coupling power-
Received 8 May 2020 trains are proposed: dual-motor multi-mode coupling powertrain (DMMCP), dual-motor
Revised 9 October 2020
torque coupling powertrain (DMTCP), dual-motor speed coupling powertrain (DMSCP).
Accepted 10 October 2020
Among them, DMMCP has two coupling modes of speed and torque, DMTCP can only re-
alize torque coupling, DMSCP can only realize speed coupling. In order to evaluate their
Keywords: performance, they are compared with the traditional single-motor one-speed transmission
Electric vehicle powertrain (SMOSP) and single-motor two-speed transmission powertrain (SMTSP). The
Dual motor coupling powertrain performance of a powertrain is not only related to its topology, but also greatly influenced
Planetary gear by the selection of structural parameters. So this paper proposes a method of parameter
Dynamic programming optimization and optimal performance evaluation, which can obtain the optimal structural
Optimization design
parameters while evaluating the performance of a powertrain. The results show that the
dual-motor coupling powertrains are better than the traditional single-motor powertrains
in the economic performance, and have a broad application prospect.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Global warming, increased urban air pollution and excessive consumption of petroleum resources have seriously affected
the living environment and sustainable development of human society. One of the main reasons for the above-mentioned
problems is the large number of traditional diesel locomotives [1]. On the one hand, the sharp increase of car ownership
accelerates oil consumption; on the other hand, automobile exhaust is also one of the sources of urban air pollution. There-
fore, the research and development of energy-saving and environmental protection vehicles has become an important issue
for governments and automobile companies in various countries [2].
Pure electric vehicles have the advantages of zero emissions, low noise, and no fuel consumption, which are a new energy
vehicle with huge development potential [3–5]. For electric vehicles, driving range is one of the most important parameters.
There are two main ways to increase the driving range of electric vehicles. One is to increase battery capacity, and the
other one is to improve energy utilization rate. When the bottleneck of battery technology has not been broken, improving
energy utilization has become an effective way to extend the driving range of electric vehicles. The energy utilization rate of

Abbreviations: BR, brake; C, planet carrier; CL, clutch; DMMCP, dual-motor multi-mode coupling powertrain; DMSCP, dual-motor speed coupling power-
train; DMTCP, dual-motor torque coupling powertrain; DP, dynamic programming; HEV, hybrid electric vehicle; M, motor; NSGA-II, the second generation
non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm; S, sun gear; SMOSP, single-motor one-speed transmission powertrain; SMTSP, single-motor two-speed transmis-
sion powertrain; SOC, state of charge of battery.
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: du841652137@stu.xjtu.edu.cn (W. Du), sdzhao@mail.xjtu.edu.cn (S. Zhao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.104143
0094-114X/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

electric vehicles mainly depends on the energy transmission efficiency of the powertrains, so the development of efficient
powertrains is of great significance for improving the driving range of electric vehicles [6–7].

1.1. Literature review

Powertrains of pure electric vehicles can be divided into two types according to their layout: the centralized-driven
system and distributed-driven system [8,9]. The distributed-drive system mainly refers to the hub motor. The characteristic
of this powertrain is that the motor and the wheel are integrated. The mechanical structure is simplified and no transmission
parts are needed. However, it increases the unsprung mass of the vehicle and affects the comfort of the vehicle.
According to the number of motors, the centralized-driven system can be divided into the single-motor powertrain and
the multi-motor coupling powertrain [10]. The structure of a single-motor powertrain is simple. It usually consists of a motor
and a reducer. This powertrain requires that the motor can meet the power and speed requirements of the vehicle in various
road conditions. So the transmission efficiency is low, and the performance requirements of the motor are high. Replacing
the reducer with a multi-gear transmission can improve the efficiency of powertrains. Literature [11] compared the 1-speed
transmission, 2-speed dual-clutch transmission (DCT) and continuously variable transmission (CVT). The results show that
the 2-speed DCT is more likely to make electric vehicles run in the area of low energy consumption and high efficiency.
In order to study transmission shift control of electric vehicles. Reference [12] carried out simulation and experimental re-
search on the transient characteristics of electric vehicles with two-speed DCT. Literature [13] designed a 2-speed automatic
transmission (AT) for electric vehicles using two planetary gear units. The proposed 2-speed AT has higher efficiency than
the 1-speed transmission.
The multi-motor coupling powertrain is proposed to further improve the performance and energy utilization rate of
electric vehicles. This powertrain usually has multiple driving modes, which are suitable for the situation where the road
conditions change greatly. For example, when the vehicle speed is low and the required torque is small, the vehicle works
in the single-motor driving mode. This can increase the load factor of the motor to improve the efficiency of the powertrain.
When the vehicle speed is high or the required torque is large, the efficiency can be improved by changing the driving mode
to meet the requirements of road conditions. The efficiency can also be improved by adjusting the output power distribution
of the two motors. Literature [14] proposed a velocity coupling HEV system, and the simulation results show that compared
with P1 HEV, the fuel consumption can be reduced by 13.82%. Literature [15] proposed a dual-motor clutchless four-speed
powertrain. Compared with the traditional single-motor powertrain, the proposed four-speed powertrain is superior in en-
ergy consumption and performance. Literature [16] proposed a configuration that integrates the coupling mechanism and
the differential, and can realize four driving modes, which have been proved to have better performance than the original
powertrain through simulation. In references [17,18], an innovative hierarchical topological graph approach was proposed to
systematically analyze and design powertrains, which is very effective in searching the optimal topology in HEV. Refs. [19,20]
compared the dual-motor coupling powertrain with the single-motor powertrain, and the results show that the dual-motor
coupling powertrain has great energy saving potential.
In the dual-motor coupling powertrain, there are mainly two types of motor coupling method: speed coupling and torque
coupling. This paper proposes three novel dual-motor coupling powertrains based on different coupling methods: dual-
motor torque coupling powertrain (DMTCP); dual-motor speed coupling powertrain (DMSCP); dual-motor multi-mode
coupling powertrain (DMMCP). In order to evaluate the performance of the three powertrains, they were compared with
single-motor powertrains. However, the performance of the vehicle depends not only on the topology of the powertrain,
but also on the control strategies and structural parameters of the powertrain components [21,22]. Therefore, determining
a reasonable control strategy and powertrain component parameters is the premise of a fair comparison. The control strat-
egy based on dynamic programming (DP) requires the road information to be known in advance, which cannot be used for
real-time control, but can be used to evaluate the optimal performance of the vehicle [23,24]. Therefore, this paper uses a
control strategy based on dynamic programming. On the other hand, the component parameters of the powertrain also have
a great influence on the driving performance of the vehicle. Therefore, when comparing the performance of different pow-
ertrains, in order to make a fair comparison, it should be ensured that the parameters of each component of the powertrain
are the optimal values under specific road conditions [25]. Different powertrains have different preferences for component
parameters. In this paper, The second generation non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA_Ⅱ) is used to find the
optimal structural parameters. By combining the dynamic programming algorithm with NSGA_Ⅱ, the optimal performance
of the powertrain under the optimal component parameters is obtained. On this basis, the economy of different powertrains
can be compared.

1.2. Main contributions of this paper

The main contributions of this paper are as follows:

(1) Three dual-motor coupling powertrains based on planetary gear units are proposed, which are dual-motor speed-
coupling powertrain, dual-motor torque-coupling powertrain and dual-motor multi-mode coupling powertrain.
(2) An integrated optimization algorithm combining NSGA_ II and dynamic programming algorithm is proposed, which
is used to search the optimal structural parameters of the powertrain under certain road condition, and the optimal
economy of the powertrain can be obtained at the same time.

2
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. 1. Single-motor powertrains: (a)SMOSP; (b)SMTSP.

(3) The economy of two single-motor powertrains and three dual-motor coupling powertrains under different road condi-
tions is compared. The results show that the dual-motor coupling powertrains can significantly improve the economy
of the electric vehicles and extend the driving range of the vehicles.

1.3. Article structure

The following part of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 introduces different powertrains of electric vehicles;
Section 3 establishes dynamic models of the whole vehicle and different powertrains; Section 4 introduces the control strat-
egy used in the simulation; Section 5 introduces the principles and procedures of optimized design and optimal performance
evaluation method; Section 6 analyzes the simulation results; Section 7 is the main conclusions of this article.

2. Classification of powertrains for electric vehicles

This section introduces five different powertrains of electric vehicles studied in this paper, including single-motor pow-
ertrains and dual-motor coupling powertrains.

2.1. Single motor powertrains

Fig. 1 shows two commonly used single-motor powertrains. Single-motor one-speed transmission powertrain (SMOSP) is
the most widely used because of its simple structure. Its power is output by the motor, and then directly transmitted to the
differential through a reducer. Because there is only one gear, the working point of the motor is completely determined by
the road conditions. The performance requirements of the motor are high, so it is not an ideal solution for electric vehicles.
In order to improve the efficiency of the powertrain and reduce the performance requirements of the motor, single-
motor two-speed transmission powertrain (SMTSP) is proposed. As shown in Fig. 1(b), the power output of the motor is
transmitted to the differential through a two-speed transmission. If the transmission ratios and the corresponding control
strategy can be matched reasonably, the vehicle’s performance can be improved.

2.2. Dual motor powertrains

With the rapid development of the electric vehicles, in order to further improve the performance of the electric vehicles,
there is a coupling powertrain of the electric vehicles with two motors as the power source. According to the different
coupling modes of power, the coupling powertrains can be divided into dual-motor torque coupling powertrain (DMTCP),
dual-motor speed coupling powertrain (DMSCP) and dual-motor multi-mode coupling powertrain (DMMCP).
The structure of DMTCP is shown in Fig. 2(a), which consists of two motors, a planetary gear unit and a clutch CL. Motor
M1 is connected to the sun gear. Motor M2 is connected to the sun gear through clutch CL. The ring gear is fixed, and
the power is output through the planet carrier. By controlling the engagement state of clutch CL, the system can work in
single-motor driving mode or dual-motor torque coupling driving mode. In the torque coupling driving mode, the output
torque of the powertrain is the linear superposition of the output torque of the two motors. The two motors have the same
speed in this mode. When the demand torque of the vehicle is fixed, there are many possible combinations of the output
torque of the two motors. Because the efficiency of the motors at different working points is different, the efficiency of the
powertrain can be improved as much as possible by reasonably distributing the output torque of the two motors.
The structure of DMSCP is shown in Fig. 2(b), which is composed of two motors, two planetary gear units and one brake
BR. Motor M1 is connected to sun gear S1. Motor M2 is connected to the sun gear S2, and the power is output through
the planetary carrier C1 of the first planetary gear unit. By controlling the engagement state of brake BR, the system can
work in single-motor driving mode and dual-motor speed coupling driving mode. In the speed coupling driving mode, the
speed of the vehicle is the linear superposition of the speed of the two motors. And the output torque of the two motors
is determined by the load torque. When the required speed of the vehicle is fixed, there are many possible combinations of

3
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. 2. Dual-motor coupling powertrains: (a)DMTCP; (b)DMSCP; (c)DMMCP.

Table 1
Operation schedule of powertrains.

Modes DMTCP DMSCP DMMCP

1 2 1 3 1 2 3

M1 On On On On On On On
M2 Off On Off On Off On On
CL On Off ———— On Off On
BR1 ———— Off On Off Off On
BR2 ———— ———— On On Off

In the Table, “On” means the motor is working, clutch or brake is not engaged; “Off”
means the motor is not working, clutch or brake is engaged.”1, 2,3 represent single-
motor driving mode, dual-motor speed coupling driving mode and dual-motor torque
coupling driving mode.

Table 2
Main parameters of vehicle.

Parameter Value

Weight (Without powertrains)/kg 1500

SMOSP 100
SMTSP 110
DMTCP 115
DMSCP 125
DMMCP 130
Wheelbase/mm 2670
Drag coefficient 0.3
Windward area/m2 2
Tire radius/m 0.283
Rotation mass conversion coefficient 1.05
Rolling resistance coefficient 0.015
Final drive ratio 3.1

the speed of the two motors. By reasonably distributing the speed of the two motors, the efficiency of the powertrain can
be improved.
The structure of DMMCP is shown in Fig. 2(c), which consists of two motors, two planetary gear units, two brakes and a
clutch. The motors M1 and M2 are respectively connected to the sun gears S1 and S2. The ring gear and the planet carrier
C2 of the second planetary gear unit are respectively connected to the brakes BR1 and BR2. The sun gears S1 and S2 are
connected each other through the clutch CL. Compared with DMTCP and DMSCP, DMMCP can realize three driving modes:
single-motor mode, dual-motor speed coupling mode and dual-motor torque coupling mode. The diversification of working
modes ensures that different driving modes can be selected when road conditions change, so that the powertrain can work
efficiently under various road conditions.
The working modes and corresponding working states of the three dual-motor coupling powertrains are shown in
Table 1.

3. Dynamic model of powertrains

In order to analyze the performance of the five powertrains, this section establishes the dynamic model of the whole
vehicle and its main parts. To make a fair comparison, it is assumed that the five powertrains drive the same vehicle, and
the vehicle parameters are shown in Table 2. Considering the different mass and size of parts in different powertrain, the
mass of different powertrain is calculated according to the mass of general motor, gear and other parts. In the simulation

4
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. 3. Battery parameters: (a) The open circuit voltage; (b) Internal resistance.

process, different powertrains adopt different vehicle mass. The driving dynamic equation of the vehicle on the road is

CD Av2 dv
Ft = f G cos a + + G sin a + δ m (1)
21.15 dt
The resistance torque on the output shaft of the powertrain is
   
CD Av2 1
Tv = Tb + G f cos α + + G sin α R (2)
21.15 fd

Where G is the total gravity of the vehicle, α is the slope angle of the road when the vehicle is driving on the ramp, f is the
rolling resistance coefficient, CD is the air resistance coefficient, v is the driving speed of the vehicle, m is the mass of the
vehicle, δ is the mass conversion coefficient, Tb is the braking force, R is the tire radius, fd is the main deceleration ratio.
The battery model adopts the equivalent circuit model. The battery model in this paper is relatively simple. Because the
main purpose of this paper is to compare the advantages and disadvantages of several different powertrains. Although the
battery model considering all energy loss is not used, the fairness of the comparison can still be guaranteed because the
battery model used in each powertrain is the same. For the research content of this paper, the appropriate simplified battery
model is acceptable.
The SOC of the battery is the ratio of the remaining capacity to the total capacity of the battery. The calculation formula
of SOC is as follows:

Q − ∫t0 ib dt
SOC = (3)
Q
Where Q is the rated capacity of the battery; ib is the charge and discharge current of the battery.
Battery charge and discharge power is

Pb = ibUb (4)

Where Pb is the charging or discharging power of the battery; Ub is the terminal voltage of the battery, which can be
obtained from the following formula

Ub = Eb (SOC ) − ib Rb (SOC ) (5)

Among them, Eb (SOC) and Rb (SOC) are the electromotive force and internal resistance of the battery which vary with the
SOC of the battery, as shown in Fig. 3.
The relation formula of battery circuit current is

Eb (SOC ) − Eb (SOC )2 − 40 0 0Rb (SOC )Pb
ib = (6)
2Rb (SOC )
In this paper, the quasi-static model is adopted for the motor, and the efficiency of the motor is obtained by interpolating
the map. For the rationality of the later performance evaluation and comparison, the total power of the motor used by the
five powertrains is the same, as shown in Table 3. Fig. 4 are the maps of the motors (The data of motor’s map is from the
motor data of Toyota Prius published in advisor 2002). For the sake of the rationality of comparison, it is assumed that the
efficiency distribution rule of the motors’ map in different powertrains is the same, but the values of the maximum speed
and torque are different.

5
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Table 3
Parameters of motors.

Parameter Value

Rated/Peak power of M1/M2(kW) 30/60

Rated/Peak speed of M1/M2 (rpm) 2700/7000
Rated/Peak torque of M1/M2 (Nm) 107/213
Rated/Peak power of M0(kW) 60/120
Rated/Peak speed of M0 (rpm) 3800/9800
Rated/Peak torque of M0 (Nm) 150/300

Fig. 4. Map of Motors: (a) M1/M2; (b) M0.

Fig. 5. Level model of dual motor coupling powertrains: (a)Single motor mode; (b)Torque coupling mode; (c)Speed coupling mode.

3.1. Dynamic model of single-motor powertrains

The dynamic equation of single-motor powertrains is

Tv
ω˙ 0 T0 + ij
ω˙ v = = Jv
(7)
ij J0 +
ij 2

Among them, ωV and ω0 are the speed of the output shaft of the powertrain and motor M0 respectively, T0 is the output
torque of motor M0, TV is the load torque of the output shaft of the powertrain, J0 and JV are the moment of inertia of motor
M0 and the output shaft of the powertrain respectively, ij is the transmission ratio (j=1 in SMOSP, j=1 or 2 in SMTSP).

3.2. Dynamic model of dual-motor coupling powertrains

The three proposed dual-motor coupling powertrains have three working modes: single-motor mode, dual-motor speed
coupling mode and dual-motor torque coupling mode. In order to facilitate the research, the dynamic model under these
three working modes is established by lever method, and the lever model is shown in Fig. 5.

6
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

3.2.1. Single-motor mode

In the single-motor driving mode, the ring gear is fixed. The first planetary gear unit and motor M1 are involved in
driving the vehicle, and the speed relationship between motor M1 and the output shaft of the powertrain is
ω1 − (1 + k1 )ωv = 0 (8)
The dynamic model is as follows.
Tv
ω˙ 1 T1 +
ω˙ v = =
1+k1
(9)
1 + k1 J1 + Jv
(1+k1 )2

Among them, ω1 and ωv are the rotational speeds of motor M1 and powertrain output shaft (planetary carrier of the
first planetary gear unit), T1 and Tv are the output torque of motor M1 and the load torque of powertrain output shaft
respectively, J1 and Jv are the rotational inertia of motor M1 and powertrain output port respectively.

3.2.2. Torque coupling mode

In the torque coupling driving mode. The gear ring is fixed and the clutch CL is engaged. The torque of motor M1 and
M2 are superposed to jointly drive the vehicle. The dynamic model is as follows.
Tv
ω˙ 1 ω˙ 2 T1 + T2 +
ω˙ v = = =
1+k1
(10)
1 + k1 1 + k1 J1 + J2 + Jv
(1+k1 )2

3.2.3. Speed coupling mode

In the speed coupling driving mode, the planet carrier of the second planetary gear unit is braked. The speed relationship
between the M1, M2 and the output shaft of the powertrain is
k1
ω1 − ω2 − (1 + k1 )ωv = 0 (11)
k2
The internal torque and power balance equations of the first row planetary gear unit are as follows:
Ts1 + Tr1 + Tc1 = 0
Ts1 ωs1 + Tr1 ωr1 + Tc1 ωc1 = 0 (12)
Among them, Ts1 ,Tr1 and Tc1 are the torque of the sun gear S1, ring gear and planet carrier C1; ωs1 ,ωr1 and ωc1 are the rota-
tional speed of the sun gear S1, ring gear and planet carrier C1 respectively. The dynamic equations of the main components
are as follows:
J1 ω˙ 1 = T1 + Ts1
Jv ω˙ v = Tc + Tv (13)
 
Jr + J2 k2
2
ω˙ r = T2 (1 + k2 ) + Tr
Where Jr is the moment of inertia of the ring gear.
According to the above formula, Ts1 ,Tr1 ,Tc1 ,ωs1 ,ωr1 ,ωc1 are eliminated. The dynamic model of dual-motor speed coupling
driving mode is obtained:
2
T1 Jv k1 Tv T2 (1+k2 )Jv k1
T1 +  2
 2 + 1+k1
− 2
 2
Jr +J2 k2 (1+k1 ) Jr +J2 k2 (1+k1 )
ω˙ 1 = ω˙ s1 = 2
Jv J1 Jv k1
J1 + + 
(1+k1 )2 2
Jr +J2 k2 (1+k1 )
2

1 T2 (1 + k2 ) + T2 (1+k2 )J2v + 1+ k1 Tv
k1
− T1 Jv k1 2
J1 (1+k1 ) J1 (1+k1 )
ω˙ r = ω˙ 2  2
 (14)
k2 2 Jv Jr +J2 k2 Jv k1
2
Jr + J2 k2 + 2 + 2
J1 (1+k1 ) (1+k1 )
ω˙ 1 + (1 + k1 )ω˙ r
ω˙ v = ω˙ c1 =
1 + k1

4. Control strategy

To evaluate the performance of the powertrains, the economic simulation is needed under certain conditions. In order
to make the comparison reasonable, the control strategy based on global optimization algorithm should be adopted, so that
the simulation can get the optimal performance of the powertrains under certain road conditions.
Dynamic programming algorithm is based on the principle of Bellman optimality, which is widely used in the prob-
lem of decision-making by stages [26,27]. According to this principle, if π ∗ = {u0 ∗ , u1 ∗ , . . . , uN−1 ∗ } is the optimal strat-
egy for basic problems, then {ui ∗ , ui+1 ∗ , . . . , uN−1 ∗ } is the optimal solution of the subproblem from the state of the

7
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Table 4
Control variables and constraints.

Control variables Constraints

Single-motor powertrains [gear] gear ∈ [1, 2]

⎧
⎪ mode ∈ [1, 2, 3]
⎪
⎪
⎨ω1_min ≤ ω1 ≤ ω1_max
Dual-motor powertrains [mode β ] T1_min ≤ T1 ≤ T1_max
⎪
⎪
⎩ω2_min ≤ ω2 ≤ ω2_max
⎪
T2_min ≤ T2 ≤ T2_max

In the single-motor powertrains, gear = 1 or 2 represent gear 1 and gear 2 respectively.

In the dual-motor powertrains, mode = 1, 2 and 3 represent single-motor driving mode,
torque coupling mode and speed coupling mode respectively.

i th decision-making step to the state of the last stage. That is to say, when the decision is {ui ∗ , ui+1 ∗ , . . . , uN−1 ∗ },
the expected cumulative cost function from the state of the i th decision-making step to the state of the last stage is

min E {gN (xN ) + N−1
k=i k
g (x(k ), u(k ), w(k ))}. Where gN (xN ) is the cost of terminal state, gk (x(k), u(k), w(k)) is the stage cost
function of stage k, x(k),u(k) and w(k) are the state vector, control vector and random vector of time k, respectively.
The general steps of dynamic programming algorithm are as follows: first, all feasible state domains of each decision step
are determined; then, the periodic cost of each “state-action-state” is calculated and stored in the table; finally, the optimal
problem is solved in reverse or forward stages. In this paper, the following reverse equation is used to solve the problem.
J ∗ N (x (N ) ) = 0
x(k + 1 ) = f (x(k ), u(k )) (15)
∗ ∗
J (x(k ) ) = min [L(x(k ), u(k )) + J (x(k + 1 ) )]
u (k )

Where J∗ (x(k))
is the optimal cost function of the kth decision step. In the dynamic programming algorithm, the road con-
dition is known. So the driver’s demand torque and wheel angular velocity of the vehicle at each decision-making step can
be obtained according to the vehicle reverse dynamics model.
In the economic simulation, the simulation is divided into 1 segment per second. The road cycle is divided into N seg-
ments. Then the cost function at the k-th moment is
Lk (x(k ), u(k )) = Pe (k ) + γ θ (k )
x(k + 1 ) = f (x(k ), u(k )) (16)
x(k) is the state variable, and Pe (k) is the battery power in the state transition. In order to avoid too frequent mode switching,
the mode switching penalty term γ θ (k) is added, and γ is the penalty factor. In this paper, the control variables and
constraints of different powertrains are shown in Table 4. In the dual-motor coupling powertrains, the working mode and
the power distribution coefficient β = P1 /Pr are the control variables. Where P1 is the output power of M1, Pr is the demand
power of the whole vehicle. In the single-motor powertrains, the gear is the control variable and the SOC of battery is
the state variable. The total cost function under certain road conditions is shown in the following formula. By finding the
sequence of control variables to minimize the total cost function, the optimal energy management strategy is obtained.

N
J= Lk (x(k ), u(k )) (17)
k=0

5. Optimization design and optimal performance evaluation method

Parameters of the powertrains have a great impact on the performance of the vehicle. In order to reasonably compare
the performance of different powertrains, it is necessary to determine the optimal parameters of each powertrain to exclude
the influence of parameters on vehicle performance. The powertrain of electric vehicles is a complex dynamic system with
nonlinear and multivariable coupling. The initial parameters determined by experience can not guarantee the optimal per-
formance of the powertrain, only the approximate optimization space of parameters can be determined. In order to obtain
the optimal parameters of different powertrains and evaluate its performance under the optimal parameters. In this paper,
the second generation of non dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) is used to optimize the parameters of different
powertrains. The parameters of the powertrains can be optimized and the corresponding optimal performance of the pow-
ertrains can be obtained at the same time. On this basis, we can reasonably compare the advantages and disadvantages of
different powertrains.
NSGA-II is a bionic optimization algorithm, which is an efficient global intelligent search and optimization method de-
veloped by simulating the biological evolution mechanism. It studies directly from the samples and eliminate the complex
derivation process [28]. NSGA-II algorithm proposes a fast non inferior sorting method to find all non inferior solutions, and
designs a congestion distance to keep the whole solution set found evenly distributed on the Pareto front [29,30]. To ensure

8
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. 6. Flowchart of parameter optimization and optimal performance evaluation.

Table 5
Parameters of NSGA_ II algorithm.

Parameter Value

Population size 200

Number of iterations 300
Crossover probability 0.9
Mutation probability 0.1

the best solution, NSGA-II also introduces an elite strategy. In order to achieve the goal of 100% inheritance of excellent
individuals from the parent generation to the next generation, all the individuals of each generation are mixed with the
parent and offspring.
In this paper, the objective of optimization is to calculate the optimal structural parameters group c∗ and the optimal
control sequence x∗ according to the configuration of the powertrains and the specified road conditions. The objective of
optimization is to minimize the energy consumption, which is described by the formula.

(c∗ , x∗ ) = argmin(J ) = argmin(Jelectric ) (18)

Where J is the objective function calculated according to formula (17).
The dynamic performance of vehicles is often affected when the minimum energy consumption is taken as the optimiza-
tion objective. However, the purpose of this paper is to compare the energy saving potential of different powertrains, so the
dynamic performance of vehicles is not considered.
NSGA-II and dynamic programming algorithm are used to solve the optimization of structural parameters and optimal
performance evaluation of powertrains. The optimization process is shown in Fig. 6, algorithm parameters are shown in
Table 5, and the optimized parameters and feasible areas are shown in Table 6. The feasible region of the optimized param-
eters is derived according to the requirements of the maximum vehicle speed, climbing gradient and maximum acceleration,
and then approximated by experience. The optimization process is as follows:

(1) According to the given optimization parameters and feasible region, the initial values of optimization variables is
selected;
(2) Selection, crossover, variation;
(3) The dynamic model is established according to the values of the optimization variables, and the fitness function is
calculated by the dynamic programming algorithm;
(4) Fast non dominated sorting;

9
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Table 6
Optimization variables and feasible region.

Powertrain Optimization variables Feasible region

SMOSP i i ∈ [1 4]
i ∈ [2 6]
SMTSP [i1 i2 ] {1
i2 ∈ [1 4]
DMTCP k1 k1 ∈ [1 4]
k ∈ [1 4]
DMSCP [k1 k2 ] { 1
k2 ∈ [1 4]
k ∈ [1 4]
DMMCP [k1 k2 ] { 1
k2 ∈ [1 4]

Table 7
Optimal structural parameters of different powertrains (before/after optimization).

SMOSP SMTSP DMTCP DMSCP DMMCP

i i1 i2 k1 k1 k2 k1 k2

UDDS 3.5/3.58 5/5.47 3/3.48 2.5/1.55 2.5/1.45 2.5/2.42 2.5/1.47 2.5/2.58

NEDC 3.5/2.71 5/4.65 3/2.03 2.5/1.35 2.5/1.35 2.5/2.13 2.5/1.45 2.5/2.03
HWFET 3.5/2.61 5/5.03 3/2.61 2.5/1.06 2.5/1.06 2.5/3.16 2.5/1.26 2.5/2.46

Table 8
Proportion of time spent in different working modes(%) (before/after optimization).

Gear/Mode SMTSP DMTCP DMSCP DMMCP

1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 3

UDDS 71.53/37.88 28.47/62.12 73.65/65.26 26.35/35.84 87.3/51.46 12.7/48.54 72.34/43.36 19.2/14.74 8.47/41.9
NEDC 57.03/33.98 42.97/66.02 54.32/74.49 45.68/25.51 85.85/46.69 14.15/53.31 53.31/48.47 35.59/7.54 11.1/43.98
HWFET 17.62/87.73 82.38/12.27 8.49/78.33 91.51/21.67 14.62/70.37 85.38/29.63 8.22/50.26 9.92/30.94 81.85/18.8

(5) Check for convergence, if not, go to step (2);

(6) Output optimal solution.

6. Results

In this paper, UDDS, NEDC and HWFET are selected to represent urban cycle, comprehensive cycle and high-speed cycle
respectively. By using the method of structural parameters optimization and optimal performance evaluation proposed in the
previous section, the optimal structural parameters and optimal economic performance of five powertrains under different
road conditions can be obtained. The optimization and simulation platform is Intel (R) core (TM) i3–4170 CPU, windows 10
and MATLAB 2018. The optimization of each powertrain converges after 30–50 iterations.
The simulation model established in this paper does not consider the influence of different mechanical efficiency of
different gear train arrangement. For the same powertrain, the efficiency of gear train will not change the optimization re-
sults. After optimization, considering the transmission efficiency of the gear train, the power consumption in the simulation
process is modified according to the following formula.
Em1 Em2
Eeff = + (19)
δ1 δ2
Among them, Em1 and Em2 is the electric energy consumption of motor M1 and motor M2 without considering the trans-
mission efficiency of gear train; Eeff is the power consumption considering the transmission efficiency of gear train; δ 1 and
δ 2 is the transmission efficiency of motor M1 and motor M2 to the output shaft. If the transmission efficiency of single-
stage gear transmission is 0.98, then in SMOSP, δ1 = 0.98; In SMTSP and DMTCP, δ1 = δ2 = 0.98; In DMSCP and DMMCP,
the motor M1 to the output shaft is a single-stage drive, and the motor M2 to the output shaft is a two-stage drive,
δ1 = 0.98, δ2 = 0.982 ≈ 0.96.
Table 7 is the optimal structural parameters of the powertrains obtained by taking the minimum energy consumption
as the optimization objective before and after optimization. Table 8 shows the proportion of different working modes of
powertrains in total time under different road conditions. Table 9 shows the energy consumption of different powertrains
under three road conditions before and after optimization. It can be seen from Tables 7 and 9 that the optimized param-
eters have a significant impact on the performance of the powertrain, and the economy of the powertrain is significantly
improved after optimization. Based on the electric energy consumed by the SMOSP, the economic improvement of the other
four powertrains compared with the SMOSP is shown in Table 10. Fig. 7 shows the working points of motors of different
powertrains under UDDS road condition. The working points of motors under NEDC and HWFET road conditions are shown

10
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Table 9
Energy consumption of powertrains under different road conditions (Unit:Kwh)
(before/after optimization).

Powertrain UDDS NEDC HWFET Average

SMOSP 1.506/1.347 1.5/1.36 2.353/2.137 1.786/1.615

SMTSP 1.46/1.315 1.502/1.313 2.381/2.135 1.781/1.588
DMTCP 1.402/1.264 1.401/1.237 2.318/2.092 1.707/1.531
DMSCP 1.436/1.278 1.397/1.236 2.313/2.084 1.715/1.533
DMMCP 1.399/1.258 1.359/1.235 2.312/2.065 1.69/1.519

Table 10
Economic improvement of powertrains compared with SMOSP under different
road conditions after optimization(%).

Powertrain UDDS NEDC HWFET Average

SMTSP 2.35 3.45 0.1 1.97

DMTCP 6.14 9.08 2.1 5.77
DMSCP 5.12 9.14 2.46 5.57
DMMCP 6.57 9.23 3.38 6.4

Fig. 7. Motor working points of different powertrains under UDDS: (a)SMOSP and SMTSP; (b)DMTCP; (c)DMSCP; (d)DMMCP.

in the Appendix. Fig. 8 shows the working curves of motors in different powertrains under UDDS conditions. The working
curves of motors under NEDC and HWFET road conditions are shown in the Appendix.
For single-motor powertrains SMOSP and SMTSP. It can be seen from Table 8 that the proportion of two gears of SMTSP
is similar in UDDS and NEDC road conditions. While in HWFET road condition, 87.73% of working time is in gear 1, which
does not play the advantages of two-gear transmission. Therefore, in UDDS and NEDC road conditions, the economy of
SMTSP is improved by 2.35% and 3.45% respectively compared with that of SMOSP. While in HWFET road condition, the
economy is only improved by 0.1%. It shows that the economy of SMTSP is improved by about 3–4% compared with that of
SMOSP under the urban and comprehensive road conditions, while the economy of SMTSP and SMOSP is similar under the
condition of high-speed road.

11
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. 8. Motor working curves of different powertrains under UDDS: (a)Speed curve of M0; (b)Torque curve of M0; (c)Speed curve of M1; (d)Torque curve
of M1; (e)Speed curve of M2; (f) Torque curve of M2.

For dual-motor coupling powertrains DMTCP, DMSCP and DMMCP. Because DMMCP can realize the coupling of speed and
torque, the economy of it is the best in three road conditions. DMTCP is better than DMTSP in UDDS, but not as good as
DMSCP in NEDC and HWFET. It shows that torque coupling mode is more suitable for urban cycle, and speed coupling mode
is more suitable for comprehensive and high-speed cycle. In summary, the energy-saving effects of the three powertrains
can be ranked from high to low: DMMCP, DMTCP, DMSCP.
It can be seen from Table 10 that the overall economy of the dual-motor coupling powertrains is significantly better than
that of the single-motor powertrains. However, there are obvious differences in the degree of economic improvement under
different road conditions. Under UDDS and NEDC conditions, the degree of economic improvement is significantly higher
than that of HWFET. This is because under the condition of high speed and light load, the motor usually works in the
area with high efficiency, and the economic difference of different powertrains is small. However, under UDDS and NEDC
conditions, due to both high-speed and low-speed conditions, and the wide range of vehicle speed changes, it can better
reflect the performance differences of different powertrains.

12
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

7. Conclusions

In this paper, three dual-motor coupling powertrains based on planetary gear unit for pure electric vehicle are proposed,
which are DMTCP, DMSCP and DMMCP. In order to evaluate the economy of the three powertrains, we compare them with
single-motor powertrains SMOSP and SMTSP. In order to compare them rationality, a structure parameter optimization and
optimal performance evaluation algorithm is proposed, which combines dynamic programming and NSGA_Ⅱ algorithm. The
results show that the average economy of SMTSP is 1.97% higher than that of SMOSP. The average economy of DMTCP,
DMSCP and DMMCP is 5.77%, 5.57% and 6.4% higher than that of SMOSP. It can be seen that the dual-motor coupling
powertrains can significantly improve the economy of the electric vehicles and extend the driving range of the vehicle,
which has a good application prospect.
In the future, we will deeply study the dual-motor coupling powertrain, reveal its energy-saving operation mechanism,
propose a real-time energy management strategy suitable for the dual-motor coupling powertrain, and verify the superiority
of the dual-motor coupling powertrain and energy management strategy through hardware in the loop experiments.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.

Acknowledgements

This work was jointly supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the National Key Research and Development
Program of China (Grant No.2017YFD070 020 0) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China for key Program (Grant
No. U1937203).

Appendix

Fig. A1. Motor working points of different powertrains under NEDC: (a) SMOSP and SMTSP; (b) DMTCP; (c) DMSCP; (d) DMMCP.

13
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. A2. Motor working points of different powertrains under HWFET: (a) SMOSP and SMTSP; (b) DMTCP; (c) DMSCP; (d) DMMCP.

14
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. A3. Motor working curves of different powertrains under NEDC: (a) Speed curve of M0; (b) Torque curve of M0; (c) Speed curve of M1; (d) Torque
curve of M1; (e) Speed curve of M2; (f) Torque curve of M2.

15
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

Fig. A4. Motor working curves of different powertrains under HWFET: (a) Speed curve of M0; (b) Torque curve of M0; (c) Speed curve of M1; (d) Torque
curve of M1; (e) Speed curve of M2; (f) Torque curve of M2.

References

[1] M.A. Hannan, F.A. Azidin, A. Mohamed, Hybrid electric vehicles and their challenges: a review, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 29 (2014) 135–150.
[2] C.C. Chan, A. Bouscayrol, K. Chen, Electric, hybrid, and fuel-cell vehicles: architectures and modeling, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 59 (2009) 589–598.
[3] A. Emadi, Y.J. Lee, K. Rajashekara, Power electronics and motor drives in electric, hybrid electric, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, IEEE Trans. Indust.
Electron. 55 (2008) 2237–2245.
[4] A. Khaligh, Z. Li, Battery, ultracapacitor, fuel cell, and hybrid energy storage systems for electric, hybrid electric, fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles: state of the art, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 59 (2010) 2806–2814.
[5] C.C. Chan, Outlook of electric, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles, J. Automot. Safety Energy.
[6] L. Situ, Electric vehicle development: the past, present & future, in: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Power Electronics Systems and
Applications (PESA), 2009, pp. 1–3.
[7] M. Cheng, L. Sun, G. Buja, L. Song, Advanced electrical machines and machine-based systems for electric and hybrid vehicles, Energies 8 (2015)
9541–9564.
[8] S. Hiroshi, H. Junji, B. Colby, et al., Advanced concepts in electric vehicle design, IEEE Trans. Ind. 44 (1997) 14–18.
[9] L. Zhai, H. Huang, S. Kavuma, Investigation on a power coupling steering system for dual-motor drive tracked vehicles based on speed control, Energies
10 (2017) 1118.
[10] C. Zhang, S. Zhang, G. Han, H. Liu, Power management comparison for a dual-motor-propulsion system used in a battery electric bus, IEEE Trans.
Indust. Electron. 64 (2017) 3873–3882.

16
W. Du, S. Zhao, L. Jin et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 156 (2021) 104143

[11] J. Ruan, P. Walker, N. Zhang, A comparative study energy consumption and costs of battery electric vehicle transmissions, Appl. Energy 165 (2016)
119–134.
[12] P. Walker, B. Zhu, N. Zhang, Powertrain dynamics and control of a two speed dual clutch transmission for electric vehicles, Mech. Syst. Signal Process.
85 (2017) 1–15.
[13] J.W. Shin, J.O. Kim, J.Y. Choi, et al., Design of 2-speed transmission for electric commercial vehicle, Int. J. Automot. Technol. 15 (2014) 145–150.
[14] Y. Yang, X. Hu, H. Pei, et al., Comparison of power-split and parallel hybrid powertrain architectures with a single electric machine: dynamic program-
ming approach, Appl. Energy 168 (2016) 683–690.
[15] T. Holdstock, A novel clutchless multiple-speed transmission for electric axles, Int. J. Powert. 2 (2013) 103–131.
[16] L.P. Zhang, L. Li, B.N. Qi, et al., Parameters optimum matching of pure electric vehicle dual-mode coupling drive system, Sci. China Technol. Sci. 57
(2014) 2265–2277.
[17] J. Wu, J. Liang, J. Ruan, et al., Efficiency comparison of electric vehicles powertrains with dual motor and single motor input, Mech. Mach Theory 128
(2018) 569–585.
[18] H. Pei, X. Hu, Y. Yang, et al., Configuration optimization for improving fuel efficiency of power split hybrid powertrains with a single planetary gear,
Appl. Energy 214 (2018) 103–116.
[19] H. Pei, X. Hu, Y. Yang, et al., Designing multi-mode power split hybrid electric vehicles using the hierarchical topological graph theory, IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol. 69 (2020) 7159–7171.
[20] M. Hu, J. Zeng, S. Xu, et al., Efficiency study of a dual-motor coupling EV powertrain, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 64 (2015) 2252–2260.
[21] M. Hu, S. Chen, J. Zeng, Control strategy for the mode switch of a novel dual-motor coupling powertrain, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 67 (2017)
2001–2013.
[22] C. Desai, S.S. Williamson, Optimal design of a parallel hybrid electric vehicle using multi-objective genetic algorithms, in: Proceedings of the IEEE
Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, IEEE, 2009, pp. 871–876. Sep.
[23] S. Zhang, R. Xiong, Adaptive energy management of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle based on driving pattern recognition and dynamic programming,
Appl. Energy 155 (2015) 68–78.
[24] W. Zhuang, X. Zhang, D. Li, et al., Mode shift map design and integrated energy management control of a multi-mode hybrid electric vehicle, Appl.
Energy 204 (2017) 476–488.
[25] X. Zhou, D. Qin, J. Hu, Multi-objective optimization design and performance evaluation for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle powertrains, Appl. Energy
208 (2017) 1608–1625.
[26] J. Liu, H. Peng, Modeling and control of a power-split hybrid vehicle, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 16 (2008) 1242–1251.
[27] R. Bellman, Dynamic programming, Science 153 (1966) 34–37.
[28] L.V. Pérez, G.R. Bossio, D. Moitre, et al., Optimization of power management in an hybrid electric vehicle using dynamic programming, Math. Comput.
Simul. 73 (2006) 244–254.
[29] L. Jin, X. Zhi, S. Zhao, Enhanced subspace clustering through combining Minkowski distance and Cosine dissimilarity, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 35 (2018)
5541–5556.
[30] K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, et al., A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6 (2002) 182–197.

17