Design and Optimization of a Drivetrain with Two-speed

Transmission for Electric Delivery Step Van

Alexei Morozov, Kieran Humphries, Ting Zou, Sudarshan Martins

and Jorge Angeles

Department of Mechanical Engineering &

Centre for Intelligent Machines
McGill University

C e
McGill
n t r e f o r

Intelligent Machines
Merry Christmas!

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 2/ 21

Montreal in winter

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 3/ 21

 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Outline

1 Introduction

2 Task Definition

3 Direct Drive Simulation

4 Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization

5 Conclusions

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 4/ 21

 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

First electric cars:

1884, London, UK, Thomas Parker built the first practical production
electric car
First U.S. speed offense done by electric taxi in May 20, 1899
First speeding offense in general, not for EV only!
Jacob German, a taxi driver in a leased electric taxi was speeding of 12
miles per hour (19.2 km/h) down Lexington Street in Manhattan when
he got caught and jailed (!) by a police-man that was riding a bicycle!

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 5/ 21

 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

EV & HEV first commercialization in the early XXth century =⇒

Commercial failure
1911-1918, Woods Motor Vehicle Company of Chicago: the Dual Power
Model 44 Coupe, a historically first hybrid electric vehicle:
$2,700
4-cylinder ICE + electric motor
Below 15 mph—electric power; above it—the ICE took over
Maximum speed of around 35 mph
To compare: Ford Model T Open Runabout: fully equipped— $680 ,
unequipped—$600; speed: 40-45 mph (64-72 km/h)

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 6/ 21

 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Late XX century—gas prices & global warming −→ resurrection

of interest to EV
Early XXI century: spreading of interest to EV & HEV from passenger
cars to commercial delivery fleets and buses

• Paris: electric rental

car network • MAN’s experimental
Metropolis plug-in
hybrid truck

Next phase: to consider multi-speed transmissions in EV

Situation on the market:
mostly research of two-speed: average efficiency improvement 10%–15%
fewer results on analysis of three-speed transmissions
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 7/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Oerlikon Graziano & Vocis Driveline Control: case study on a

two-speed EV vs. a single-speed EV

Main characteristics: acceleration time; maximum climbing grade;

maximum speed; and energy consumption
Limitation: majority of studies explore the application of multi-speed
transmissions in the passenger and sports car segments.
Most of existing e-trucks and e-busses are single-speed
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 8/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation Electric motors
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

McGill team—Task Definition

Our goal: to develop and optimize an e-truck with a multi-speed
transmission
Current phase of our research: stepvan with a two-speed transmission
To develop a battery e-truck (step van) with two-speed transmission
To compare performance/efficiency with e-truck w/o transmission
Method: Simulation & Optimization: AVL Cruise/Matlab
Prototype: 2004 GM Workhorse P32 chassis with Utilimaster body, fully
loaded GVWR: 14,100 lbs/6273 kg
Drive Cycle: Orange County Bus Cycle (OCC) Length: 10.53 km
100
speed (km/h)

50

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

National Renewable Energy Laboratory: OCC for delivery trucks

McGill Road Test Drive Cycle
Kinetic intensities: 0.7–2.5 1/km (up to 0.0007 1/ft)
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 9/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation Electric motors
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Electric motor: SUMO MD (TM4), Electric motor: Møtive B (TM4)

connected directly to the final drive

Torque/power scaled up—have the same

power output as Sumo MD
System specifications:
System specifications:
Operational speed: 0-3100 rpm Operational speed: 0–11,500 rpm
Max power: 200 kW Max power: 105 kW −→ scaled max
Efficiency: 95% power: 200 kW
Max torque: 2100 Nm Efficiency: 95%
Max torque 180 Nm −→ scaled max
Applications:
torque: 343 Nm
Medium duty electric trucks and
Applications:
buses
EVs and PHEVs
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 10/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation Electric delivery truck without transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

TM4 Sumo MD low speed motor without transmission

Class-4 delivery truck as a
prototype:

Motor for direct drive: Sumo MD, specifically designed for this type of
installation
Direct drive:
the motor connected directly to the final drive
no reduction gearbox
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 11/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation Electric delivery truck without transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

• Direct drive Sumo MD performance

iE 2.73 2.91 3.15 3.73 4.1 4.3 5.13

climbing grade (%) 23.01 24.64 26.88 32.32 36.04 38.02 46.92
maxi velocity (km/h) 120 113 105 89 81 78 65
OCC energy consump. (kWh) 4.323 4.222 4.111 3.92 3.837 3.803 3.712
accel time (s) 18.93 18.6 18.26 – – – –

3.15 is not typical for this kind of trucks

Actual final drive with ratio 5.13 does not allow to reach required
performance with direct drive Sumo MD motor!
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 12/ 21
 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Development of Two-Speed Transmission

Design and optimization

Phase 1: preliminary selection of the transmission gear ratios
Phase 2: verification and optimization in AVL Cruise and Matlab
Typical performance evaluation criteria are:
maintenance cost o
out of the scope
system reliability/longevity
energy consumption o in urban environment→
acceleration time from 0 to 60 mph (100 km/h) objective function in
optimization
top speed (105 km/h) o
additional evaluation parameters
maximum gradability (30%) in comparison analysis
Design variables: two gear ratios of the two-speed transmission

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 13/ 21

 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Total powertrain ratio in conventional vehicles: iA = iS iiE

where iS —the clutch/torque converter ratio, i—the gearbox ratio, and
iE —the final drive ratio
Simplified equation for EV: iA = iiE
First gear ratio from the climbing grade requirements:
rdyn mF g(fR cos αst + sin αst )
iA1 ≥
TM,max ηtot
Second gear ratio from the vehicle top speed and electric motor
maximum velocity:
3.6πnrate rdyn 3.6πnmax rdyn
≤ iA2 ≤
30vmax 30vmax
Final drive ratio: Typical values in the industry
for best fuel economy: iE = 2.73, 2.91
for best pulling performance: iE = 3.73, 4.10, 4.30, 5.13
In our prototype: 5.13
Required
 design range for the two-speed gearbox ratios:
i1 ≥ 4.4944
1.4743 ≤ i2 ≤ 3.2167
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 14/ 21
 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Møtive B with 2-speed transmission

Motor:
based on the TM4 Møtive B design
scaled up to match the peak power output of the TM4 Sumo
Two-speed BEV model:
similar as the direct drive BEV, with added two-speed transmission

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 15/ 21

 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Optimization procedure:
AVL Cruise −→ initial experiments (acceleration time & energy
consumption) −→ objective function model −→ Matlab (multi-objective
genetic algorithm) −→ AVL Cruise (optimal set of ratios for verification)

OCC cycle run (kWh)

Acceleration time

to 100 km/h (s)

from standstill

consumption in
Overall energy
24.5
23.0 5.05
21.5 4.95
20.0
4.85 4.5
18.5 4.5
17.0 4.75 5
1.5 5
2 1.5 5.5
5.5 2
2.5 2.5
3 6 3 6 Gear ratio i1
Gear ratio i1
Gear ratio i2 Gear ratio i2
For the described application the gear ratios are recommended: i1 ≥ 5.5
and i2 ≥ 3.0

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 16/ 21

 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Optimal solution is not unique—more than one optimum gear-ratio

pair is obtained.
1
consumption, kWh) 0.995
Objective 2, ue
(overall energy
0.99
0.985
0.98
0.975
0.97 Optimum point
0.965
0.96
0.0 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1
Objective 1, ta (acceleration time, s)

The range of optimum gear ratios:

from lower acceleration time but higher energy consumption to lower
energy consumption with higher acceleration time
Expert judgment is needed:
designer is not limited to one strict point to reach the optimization
objectives
the possibility of a choice is provided, depending on specific priorities
and importance to the customer in a particular application

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 17/ 21

 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

Validation of results

Obtained gear ratios are exported into AVL Cruise =⇒ calculation of

the overall energy consumption and acceleration time

For the scaled-up Møtive B with two-speed transmission: minimum

acceleration time of 17.05 s and minimum energy consumption of
4.77 kWh are reached at i1 = 5.9 and i2 = 3.11

maxi accel energy

climbing
i1 i2 velocity time consumption
grade
(km/h) (s) (kWh)
5.9 3.11 39.69% 120 17.05 4.77

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 18/ 21

 Introduction
Optimization criteria
Task Definition
Two-speed transmission ratio selection
Direct Drive Simulation
Electric delivery truck with two-speed transmission
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Alternative solution
Conclusions

TM4 Sumo MD low speed motor with a two-speed transmission

Set of gear ratios: i1 = 1.12 and i2 = 0.62
climbing grade maxi velocity OCC energy accel time
motor
(%) (km/h) consumption (kWh) (s)
SUMO MD 48 104.5 4.46 16.1
Møtive B 39.69 120 4.77 17.05

Slightly more efficient than its high-speed counterpart (scaled Møtive B):
Performance—acceptable
Heavier, larger and more expensive
Sumo MD Møtive B (scaled)
motor inventer motor inventer
weight (kg) 348 35 661 11
cost ($) 10000 60001
1
Estimated values
Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 19/ 21
 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Fully loaded direct drive battery e-truck with a low-speed motor Sumo
MD is not able to reach both climbing grade and maximum speed

E-truck with a two-speed transmission:

no significant improvement of energy efficiency in comparison with the
direct drive (as opposed to small passenger EV with 10–15% of efficiency
improvement)
performance significantly improved by adding a two-speed transmission
to any of the motors
Analysis of weight/cost characteristics should be added for the motor
selection

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 20/ 21

 Introduction
Task Definition
Direct Drive Simulation
Two-Speed Simulation and Optimization
Conclusions

Thank you for your attention!

Alexei Morozov Optimization of Drivetrain 21/ 21