bonnet, mid area of the vehicle under the passenger seats occupying fuel tank space,

the rear boot accompanied with the spare wheel space and front wheels. Motors were
to be inside the front wheels. In this situation, battery pack and the motor controllers
could be placed in front, mid and rear space of the vehicle. As the battery pack was
of 330 kg, this weight was the significant factor of determining the load condition of
the retrofitted vehicle.

3.7 CAD model of the load distribution layouts

Based on three options of spaces in the vehicle to place the battery packs and
motor controllers three architectural layouts of the vehicle were chosen for the
analysis. These three architectural layouts presented three load distributions of the
retrofitted vehicle. The CAD models were generated to demonstrate the placing of
EV drive train components on the selected vehicle. Considering front (bonnet), mid
(under the passenger seats) and rear (boot) space of the vehicle, three architectural
layouts was suggested to be evaluated through the dynamic analysis. Those are:
1. Front-loaded Layout
2. Mid-loaded Layout
3. Rear-loaded Layout

3.7.1 Geometry Considerations for the CAD Model

In CAD model, the basic dimensions of the vehicle maintained as Toyota
Camry Attara S 2012 model. Basic dimensions included chassis with wheel-base,
track width, wheel size and ground clearance of the vehicle. The outer automobile
body was modelled using surface geometry. The shape of the outer body was not
modelled according to the existing vehicle to avoid the exhaustive representation of
the surface geometry and keep it simple only for demonstration purpose. After
modelling the chassis by maintaining the basic dimensions of length width and
height, the exterior panels were modelled by simplifying the detail enormously. The
detailed surfaces needed to define their contour, including the gaps between different
panels of the body surface or identify the rigid and moving parts (automobile doors)
or metal body and glasses. The interior arrangement of the vehicle was also

64
simplified by modelling only 2 seats with the dashboard. As the CAD model was to
demonstrate the placing arrangement of the EV components, simplified model was
adopted. The chassis, dashboard with seats, bonnet, main automobile body, door,
hood, battery pack, wheel, drive shafts, and motor controllers were designed
separately in part modelling and then assembled together.

3.7.2 Front Loaded Layout (Case I)

Front loaded layout demonstrated the major portion of the vehicle load at the
front. The removed weight from the vehicle during retrofitting was 170 kg and the
added weight was 420 kg. So, the extra weight added due to the retrofitting of the
vehicle was 250 kg. The major portion of this extra weight was the weight of the
battery pack. If the battery pack was placed in the front bay, it presented the major
load at the front side of the vehicle. The front-loaded layout was designed
accommodating the battery pack in the front bay, the control unit in the rear boot
keeping the spare wheel in the existing way, and the motor inside the front wheel as
shown in Figure 3-8. In this load distribution layout, the luggage space in the rear
boot was compromised due to the placement of the motor controller as shown in
Figure 3-8.
Rear

Motor
Controller

Battery

Front
Motor

Figure 3-8: Front-loaded Layout

65
 3.7.1 Mid Loaded Layout (Case II)
Mid-loaded layout accommodated the battery pack at the mid area under the
passenger seats as shown in Figure 3-9.

Rear

Motor
Battery
Controller

Front
Motor

Figure 3-9: Mid-loaded Layout

As the size of the battery pack was large, placing it under the passenger seats
can cause the discomfort to the passengers. That’s why the fuel tank was removed
from the existing vehicle so that battery pack could be placed comfortably in there.
The motor controller was placed in the spare wheel space and the motor inside the
front wheel as the front loaded layout. In case II layout, the luggage space in the rear
boot was kept empty.

3.7.1 Rear Loaded Layout (Case III)

A significant change in the rear-loaded layout was the battery pack in the rear
boot space of the vehicle and controller in the front bay (Figure 3-10).

66
 Battery Rear

Motor
Controller

Front
Motor

Figure 3-10: Rear Loaded Layout

In case III layout, as the battery pack was placed in the rear boot, the luggage
capacity was compromised. The motors were placed inside the front wheel as other
architectural layout of the vehicle. In this layout, the space in front bay was not
utilized properly.

3.8 Load distribution of the vehicle

Load distribution of the vehicle was important in improving vehicle
performance in terms of safe handling and stability. It was one of the dependencies
of locating the centre of gravity (CG) position in the vehicle. Architectural
orientation of the vehicle determined the load distribution of a vehicle. Placement of
components along longitudinal, lateral and vertical direction of the vehicle regulates
the load distribution ratio of the vehicle in each direction. In this study, longitudinal
and lateral load distribution was calculated in front, mid and rear loaded architectural
layout.

3.8.1 Longitudinal load distribution

The longitudinal placement of the EV components battery pack, motor and
motor controllers determined the longitudinal load distribution of the vehicle. It

67
showed the percentage ratio of the front and rear load of the vehicle. The load
distribution of the existing vehicle Toyota Camry 2.4L sedan was 56.5:43.5 (front:
rear load distribution). Considering this load distribution of the existing vehicle, the
added and removed weight of the retrofitted vehicle and their longitudinal distance
from the centre of the wheelbase, longitudinal load distribution for each load
distribution case was calculated.

3.8.1.1 Longitudinal load distribution: case I

To calculate the longitudinal load distribution in case I following
considerations was used as described in table below:

Table 3-8: Longitudinal load distribution of front loaded layout (Case I)

Weight Distance from the centre of

Item Direction
(kg) the wheelbase (mm)

Engine 140 1687.5 Towards Front

Removed Gear box-

20 1687.5 Towards Front
Weight Alternator

Battery 10 1687.5 Towards Front

Battery
330 1687.5 Towards Front
Pack
Added
Motor 60 1387.5 Towards Front
Weight
Motor Towards
50 1500
Controller Rear

From these data, longitudinal load distribution for case I was calculated as
58:42.

3.8.1.2 Longitudinal load distribution: case II

Longitudinal load distribution for case II was calculated from the following
data as given in table below:

68
 Table 3-9: Longitudinal load distribution of mid loaded layout (Case II)

Weight Distance from the centre of the

Item Direction
(kg) wheelbase (mm)
Engine 140 1687.5 Towards Front

Removed Gear box-

20 1687.5 Towards Front
Weight Alternator

Battery 10 1687.5 Towards Front

Battery Towards
330 200
Pack Rear
Added
Motor 60 1387.5 Towards Front
Weight
Motor Towards
50 1500
Controller Rear

From these data, longitudinal load distribution for case I was calculated as
49:51.

3.8.1.3 Longitudinal load distribution: case III

Longitudinal load distribution for case II was calculated from the following
data:
 The load distribution of the existing vehicle – 56.5:43.5

Table 3-10: Longitudinal load distribution of rear loaded layout (Case III)

Weight Distance from the centre of the

Item Direction
(kg) wheelbase (mm)

Engine 140 1687.5 Towards Front

Removed Gear box-

20 1687.5 Towards Front
Weight Alternator

Battery 10 1687.5 Towards Front

Battery Towards
330 1500
Pack Rear
Added
Motor 60 1387.5 Towards Front
Weight
Towards
Motor Controller 50 1687.5
Front

69
 From these data, longitudinal load distribution for case III was calculated as
37:63.

3.8.2 Lateral load distribution

Lateral mass distribution of the vehicle was an important factor during
cornering for easy manoeuver. It was crucial to maintain lateral load distribution
equal to both sides. When the vehicle was starting to turn, load transfer occurred in
lateral direction towards the outside tires of the vehicle. If the load distribution would
not be equal in left and right side of the vehicle, one side of tyres faced intrinsic
amount of weight force during either left or right turn. Huge amount of weight
transferred towards one side of tires could cause skidding. In this study, all three
layouts with different longitudinal load distributions, lateral placing arrangement of
the components were maintained as 50:50 left to right. For each layout, extra weight
(250 kg) added during retrofitting was distributed equally to both the left and right
side of the vehicle. In this way the existing stability condition of the vehicle would
not be affected by the lateral load distribution after retrofitting.

3.9 Vehicle performance and Effect of CG

CG is the point of equilibrium which is the mean location of all gravitational
forces acting on a vehicle. Position of CG plays an important role in improving
vehicle performance in terms of safe handling and stability. In this study,
determining the center of gravity was a complicated procedure because the load
might not be uniformly distributed throughout the object. Load distribution and CG
of the vehicle directly affected a variety of dynamic characteristics
including handling, acceleration, and traction and component life.
Placing of different EV components and drive train accessories changed the
position of CG along the vehicle and the dynamic stability of the vehicle with it. As
this study was concerned about the retrofitting of electric vehicle, load distribution
became more important in determining the CG of the vehicle than it was in case of
ICE vehicles. In case of conventional ICE vehicles, other factors such as track width,
length of wheelbase or suspension system could be changed. But due to the cost

70
effectiveness issues of EV, it was vital to maintain the systems of the vehicle body as
existing.
Except load distribution, there were other regulatory factors to control the
position of CG. Those are: vehicle track width, vehicle weight, length of wheelbase,
suspension system etc. In case of retrofitting, length of wheelbase could not be
changed. A little modification could be achieved in track width by modifying the tire
profile. Suspension system might also be changed by adding stiffer spring. So among
these factors, load distribution had an intrinsic effect in case of retrofitted EV in
determining the CG.

3.9.1 Calculation of longitudinal CG

Longitudinal position of CG included the longitudinal distance of front (lf)
and rear (lr) axle from the CG of the vehicle. ‘lf’ and ‘lr’ calculated considering all
weight items and their corresponding distance from the front axle as reference, using
the equation below:
∑
                              (3.3)

where,
lf = Distance of CG from front axle.
M = Vehicle weight.
n = No. of item.
m = Mass of component.
lf = Corresponding CG distance of component from front axle.

In determining the longitudinal CG of the vehicle the weight items include

the added items (battery pack, motor, and controller) in the retrofitted vehicle and the
weight of the vehicle after removing the engine, gearbox, alternator and battery. The
distance of these weight items from the front axle were measured practically from the
vehicle.

3.9.2 Calculation of lateral CG

Lateral CG depended on the lateral load distribution of the vehicle directly.
As in this case, lateral load distribution was maintained as close to 50:50, the lateral
position of the CG would be at close to the centre of the track width of the vehicle.

71
The track width of the existing vehicle was 1400 mm. So the lateral distance of the
CG from the left or right wheel was found 700 mm.

3.9.3 Calculation of vertical CG

Vertical CG could be calculated experimentally in different ways. Lifting and
tilting were found very commonly used method of determining the vertical CG of the
vehicle practically according to the literature review. As in this case, retrofitting of
the vehicle was involved, height of CG (CGH) from the ground was calculated
considering all weight items and their corresponding distance from the ground as
reference, using the equation below:
∑
(3.4)

where,
CGH = Distance of CG from ground.
M = Vehicle weight.
n = No. of item.
m = Mass of component.
CGH = Corresponding CG distance of component from ground.

In determining the vertical CG of the vehicle the weight items included the
added items (battery pack, motor, and controller) in the retrofitted vehicle and the
weight of the vehicle after removing the engine, gearbox, alternator and battery. The
height of these weight items from the ground were measured practically from the
vehicle.

3.10 Discussion and findings

The main objective of this research was to evaluate the vehicle dynamic
behaviour in different architectural layouts of the retrofitted electric vehicle. The
basic significant factor to define the architectural layouts was the load distribution of
the vehicle which was dependent on the positions of different retrofitted weight items
in the vehicle. In this condition, selection of appropriate EV propulsion system,
electric motor and vehicle parameter were also important for retrofitting of EV. To
obtain the load distribution, the available places in the vehicle were measured from
the selected vehicle for retrofitting. After getting the required measurement from the

72
vehicle, the longitudinal and lateral load distribution ratio of the vehicle was
calculated. From the weight of each component and the distance from a defined
reference the longitudinal, lateral and vertical positions of CG were calculated.
Results were presented in the Table 3-11 below according to case I, II and III. The
summery of different considerations of designing of the architectural layouts were
also associated with the load distribution and CG calculation results.

Table 3-11: EV component placement and different load properties of front, mid and rear
architectural layouts

Front Loaded Mid Loaded Layout Rear Loaded Layout

Criteria
Layout (Case I) (Case II) (Case III)

Mid area
Battery Location Front Bonnet Rear Boot
(Under the seats)

Inside the Inside the Inside the

Motor Location
Front Wheel Front Wheel Front Wheel

Controller Location Rear Boot Rear Boot Front Bonnet

Load Distribution Ratio

58:42 49:51 37:63
(F/R)

Load Distribution Ratio

50:50 50:50 50:50
(Lateral)

CG position - lf
(Longitudinal) 1165.5 1415.25 1748.25
(From Front Axle)

CG position - lr
(Longitudinal) 1609.5 mm 1359.75 mm 1026.75 mm
(From Rear Axle)

CG position
(Lateral - From Both 700 mm 700 mm 700 mm
Side)
CG position
(Vertical - From 765.98 mm 742.62 mm 781.75 mm
Ground)

In selection of suitable EV propulsion system for retrofitting, the basic

considerations were space savings for the battery pack and the rate of power loss due
to the transmission. In wheel technology was selected because it allowed more space
on board with the motor packaged inside the wheel when compared with other

73
propulsions. It also provided zero transmission power loss because it redundant the
transmission gear between the motor and the drive wheel. Electric motor was
selected to suit the requirements of in-wheel propulsion system. The vehicle with
suitable parameter was also selected based on the in-wheel propulsion system. The
wheel diameter, space allocation for the battery pack and power required to drive the
vehicle were the basic considerations based on which the collected data from the
automotive industry was scrutinized and categorized. Among all the industry data on
different size of vehicles, a mid-sized vehicle was chosen. Toyota CAMRY Attara S
2012 model was selected for retrofitting in this study.
The sustainability analysis of the brake and suspension system of the existing
vehicle was accomplished to check the feasibility of the vehicle parameter selection.
The extreme thermal and elastic load condition was considered during the both brake
and suspension system analysis with the retrofitted weight of the vehicle. The brake
analysis results referred to the sustainability of the existing disc brake with the
retrofitted load at the given operating temperature. The safety analysis of the
suspension system concluded that the coil spring of the existing suspension could
carry two times more than the retrofitted weight of the vehicle.
To obtain the architectural layout the potential spaces were defined in the
vehicle described with their merits and demerits to suit the requirements. After
analysing different space options, the front bay, mid area under passenger seat and
the rear boot space were selected for the design iterations. The literature review on
the battery placement in the commercial EVs were also considered. In the CAD
model the architectural layouts based on the space selected were demonstrated in
three cases as shown in Figure 3-8, Figure 3-9 and Figure 3-10 accordingly.
The longitudinal load distribution was calculated for three cases as 58:42,
49:51 and 37:63. The lateral load distribution was maintained as the existing vehicle
to avoid the unstable dynamic condition during cornering manoeuvring. The
longitudinal, lateral and vertical CG positions were calculated for the retrofitted
weight of the vehicle as mentioned in Table 3-11. These result data were used as the
input value in the vehicle dynamic analysis in different manoeuvring conditions.

74