Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

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

Analysis of fuel cell vehicles with advisor software MARK

⁎
Anil Can Turkmen , Salim Solmaz, Cenk Celik
Kocaeli University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 41380 Kocaeli, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: In this study, fuel cell systems in automobiles were modeled by ADVISOR, and those models were analyzed
Fuel cell vehicle through making comparisons. Fuel cell systems are essential parts of vehicles. Thus, before constructing fuel cell
Hydrogen systems in a vehicle, analyzing the coherence of the system with vehicle is important in terms of cost and
ADVISOR security. ADVISOR which has been developed by National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) facilitates
making comparisons of those kind of systems. In this article, the utilization of the software was denoted by an
example and through making comparisons of fuel cell types, and the obtained results were evaluated.

1. Introduction pares them with each other on a qualitative basis. Quantitatively,

Nowadays, due to increasing tendency to protect the environment,
automobile manufacturers are challenged to come up with new
solutions. Decrease in fossil fuels leads to more efficient energy use
and use of renewable energy sources instead. Decrease in one of the
most prominent energy resources, petroleum, and its increasing price
widely affect transportation industry. As a consequence, R & D invest-
ments for those vehicles are also escalating. Those progresses lead to
commercialization and use of vehicles driven by fuel cell. When the
vehicles run by fuel cell are compared to the traditional vehicles run by
fossil fuel, a significant fuel saving could be observed [1–5].
The most integral part of the vehicles run by fuel cells is fuel cell
itself. Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that directly convert
chemical energy into electrical energy. They are actively investigated
as an attractive alternative to conventional fossil fuel combustion
engines for cleaner power generation and are usually classified
according to the type of electrolyte used in the cells such as PEMFC,
AFC, MCFC, SOFC and PAFC [6]. There are tremendous amount of
different fuel cells, and they are distinguished in terms of their
performance and fuel type. Due to the fact that trying each type of
fuel cells on real vehicles cost too much, the above mentioned
comparisons are conducted through a software. The aim of this study
is to compare the performances of the same vehicle run by a fuel cell
fed by pure hydrogen directly and by hydrogen generated through
reformation of petroleum.
2. Literature review for fuel cell vehicle modeling software
This chapter analyzes different fuel cell vehicle models and com-
Hoefgen compares a subset of the models listed in Table 1. For the
qualitative comparison in this dissertation work, first a metric of
comparison was established [7].
The generic requirements for a fuel cell fuel vehicle model can be
defined as follows and are not different than the requirements of other
types of modeling work.
A fuel cell vehicle model has to be physically and mathematically
sound. All relevant physical effects have to be considered and the model
should be based on mathematically solid grounds. Unless these two
conditions are fulfilled, we cannot rely on the results obtained. In
addition to the soundness, the scope of the model should also be
complete. Complete in this context means that it should enable the
modeling of different types of vehicles (hybrids, non-hybrids and
different forms of hybrids) and fuel cell systems for different fuels.
The resolution of the modeling effort should be high enough to cover all
the effects of interest.
After establishing the method of comparison, following paragraphs
list the most significant (and most common) electric, hybrid and fuel
cell vehicle modeling programs. Among those, only the UC-Davis
hydrogen fuel cell vehicle model has been exclusively developed for
fuel cell vehicle modeling. All the other programs incorporate function-
ality for the simulation of battery electric and IC hybrid vehicles.
In addition to the vehicle models listed in Table 1, other models are
under development or already completed. Most of the other models
that are not listed are either propriety of and internally developed by
automotive manufacturers or contractors and only very limited in-
formation is publicly available or they are not completed yet. For this
reason, these models are not discussed in this dissertation work.
Five different development lines could be identified looking at the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: anilcan.turkmen@hotmail.com (A.C. Turkmen).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.011
Received 5 July 2015; Received in revised form 9 October 2016; Accepted 3 December 2016
Available online 08 December 2016
1364-0321/ © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.C. Turkmen et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071

Table 1
Overview about alternative fuel vehicle models.

Name Source Backwards/ Forwards Fuel cell vehicles

HYZEM Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd. Forward No

Elvis Southwest Research Institute Backwards No
Path Southwest Research Institute Forward No
PSAT Southwest Research Institute and Argonne National Laboratories Forward Yes
Advisor National Renewable Research Laboratory (NREL) Backwards Yes
Simplev Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Backwards No
Avte UC-Davis, ITS Backwards No
UC Davis– Hydrogen UC-Davis, ITS Backwards Yes

public by Argonne National Laboratory for registered researchers.

• National Renewable Energy Institute with the program system
Advisor [11]. Since recently, Argonne National Laboratories is
responsibility for the development lines PSAT and Advisor and
incorporates them into a single graphical user interface for the ease
of use.
• UC-Davis starting originally with the Advanced Vehicle Test
Emulator (AVTE) and an (AVTE based) direct hydrogen fuel cell
vehicle model [3]. Both models are derived from Advisor. In
addition to this modeling effort, UC-Davis started within the fuel
cell vehicle modeling project a new forward looking fuel cell vehicle
model that incorporates currently the fuels namely hydrogen,
indirect methanol and indirect gasoline in hybrid and non- hybrid
versions.
• Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
(INEEL) with Simplev. The program has only historical meaning -
it was phased out in 1997 [12].
Fig. 1. Model evolvement and history [3].

Several vehicle-modeling tools have been introduced and compared

model properties and the historical development of the models (Fig. 1).
These are:
• Ricardo Consultants with the Hyzem program system [8,9].
• Southwest Research Institute (SWRI) with the modeling program
systems Elvis, Path, Apace and their final product PSAT [10]. PSAT
has been originally developed as the modeling tool for the
Partnership of New Generation Vehicles but will be soon made
with each other. The points of comparison have been a list of generic
requirements for mathematical modeling stated at the beginning of the
chapter and restated in the first seven items in Table 2. These criteria
define the theoretical potential of the modeling approach. Additionally,
in the second half of Table 2 (items 8–10), the actual realized potentials
of different models have been compared. Finally, the last row states the
public availability.

Table 2
Benchmark (-negative or not possible, O neutral,+good).

Requirement HY-ZEM PSAT Advisor UC-Davis H2 Simplev

Theoretical soundness
Completeness
Flexibility
Expanded resolution through
co-simulation
Validation supported through
rapid prototyping
Ease of use
Input data available
Realized fuel cell vehicle
models (2000)
Dynamic considerations
(Start up, reformer time
constants)
Modeling of emissions
Availability (October 2000)
+ + – – –
+ O O O O
+ – – –
+ + O – –
+(current – – – –
version)
- (1996
version)
O O O O O
+ + + – +
Indirect – methanol and direct-H2 in Only battery hybrid fuel Indirect- Gasoline and direct-H2 Direct-H2 in hybrid and –
hybrid and non-hybrid Versions, no cell vehicles, no ultra- in hybrid and non-hybrid non-hybrid versions, no
ultra-capacitor designs capacitor designs versions, no ultra-capacitor ultra-capacitor designs
designs
+ – – – –
Current version Place holder model Place holder model Place holder model
+ (maps) +(maps) – Not applicable + (maps)
– +(free) +(free) – –

1067
A.C. Turkmen et al.
Fig. 2. ADVISOR's first screen.
3. Capabilities of ADVISOR software
Advanced Vehicle Simulator ADVISOR was established by National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in the end of 1990s. Firstly, they
were utilized for modeling and analysis of hybrid systems. It was
designed to make either forward or reverse modeling. This program is
used widely by automobile manufacturers, researchers in universities
or the industry. A lot of users have contributed to library of ADVISOR
through new components and data [5].
This software is an open-source one and used offline. It has friendly
graphical user interface. In order to make modeling and simulation in
ADVISOR, a module of Matlab/Simulink was used. That module is
used to perform dynamical system analysis in Matlab/Simulink.
Furthermore, this software was developed to support either instanta-
neous, linear, non-linear system in time domain systems or hybrid
systems [13].
One of the advantages of using Simulink/Matlab interface in
ADVISOR is the flexibility of making vehicle model, control strategy,
and easiness to make changes on algorithm such as breaking algorithm.
As a consequence of these advantages, it is easy to make analysis of
vehicle configurations and attaining results of the systems in graphical
format [14].
ADVISOR uses driving graphic first. From that graph, it derives the
relationship between torque and velocity of wheel or between wheel
1068
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071
and energy sources. The energy source could be electricity in battery or
the fuel in hybrid power unit.
The robustness of the model and relevance of the model with other
vehicle simulators are crucial for determining authenticity of the
ADVISOR. NREL has been making agreements with universities to
encompass more accurate data for models. Additionally, ADVISOR has
also been making agreements with some of commercial automobile
manufacturers, thus, by using the algorithms in industry attaining
minimum uncertainty can be achieved [15].
Another advantage of the ADVISOR is a user-friendly interface in
the vehicle configuration and analyzing process. User can make
preferences among 9 defined driving systems. In each configuration
among 19 motor run by electricity, 9 battery and 7 fuel cell, a selection
can be made. The components can be combined as a vehicle. On the
contrary, due to paucity of documentation, it is challenging to modify
an existing model or adding a new one [2,16].
In ADVISOR, driving transitions are deemed to be parallel in real
life, and generally velocity and location graph are chosen. Those
velocity graphs are used to compare different vehicles at same location
configuration, and through making compression, real driving condi-
tions can be achieved. Those driving transitions were standardized by
international institutions. For instance, for new automobiles kilometer
values in urban way and highway were evaluated by two different
velocity graph.
A.C. Turkmen et al.
Fig. 3. ADVISOR's test parameters screen.
Driving transitions have the experimental data of districts such as
suburb of New York City, Madras-India highway. After completing the
simulation, the results can be analyzed as whole, or the results in sub-
systems can be obtained separately. In the simulation, single data or
whole data can be accumulated and compared [17].
4. Methodology
The aim of this study is to compare the performances of the same
vehicle run by a fuel cell fed by pure hydrogen directly and by hydrogen
generated through reformation of petroleum. ADVISOR contains
friendly graphical user interface within the software itself. The software
is constituted by 3 different main screens. The steps of systematic
method followed during the study is listed below:
• Determining vehicle components (Fig. 2.)
• Selection of road conditions where the vehicle will be used (Fig. 3)
• Displaying the results of analysis (Fig. 4)
• Comparing the results
In this study, a fuel cell ANL50 which was developed by Argonne
National Laboratory and has 50 Kw optimal power was analyzed
1069
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071
through two distinctive power and two different fuel types. The results
were compared with each other. The used fuel cells were designed
either to use hydrogen obtained from gasoline or to use direct
hydrogen.
During the comparison, hydrogen and gasoline were used. In the
analysis, the power of fuel cell was set to either 30 kw or 50 kW which
are considered to be most prevailed in vehicles.
In fuel cell analysis parameters which directly affect the perfor-
mance of the vehicle such as battery, motor type, and motor power
were kept stabilized. For battery, NiMH with the power of 25 kW and
for an AC induced motor with the power of 59 kW were chosen. After
deciding technical parameters, in order to complete vehicle analysis,
road conditions should be identified in ADVISOR. In order to achieve
this task, among 59 driving conditions, New York City driving condi-
tions were selected in ADVISOR. The data related with driving
conditions was given in Table 3. Except those, a special driving line
can be added and an analysis can be performed for a problematic
driving plan [18]. Simulink diagram of the vehicle analyzed is shown in
Fig. 5, and the fuel consumption-power chart of the fuel cell used is
shown in Fig. 6.
A.C. Turkmen et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071

Fig. 4. Result screen.

requires much more power, increase in temperature of fuel cell is too

Table 3
much.
New York City driving transition features.
For fuel cells which directly uses hydrogen, for both selections of
Time (s) 598 power, it was observed that they use less fuel than others. Due to the
Distance (km) 1.9 fact that energy of hydrogen is lower than gasoline per unit of volume,
Maximum velocity (km/h) 44.58 it was concluded that the use of hydrogen is efficient in the cases where
Average velocity (km/h) 11.41
Maximum acceleration (m/s2) 2.68
it can be stored in high volumes.
Maximum deceleration (m/s2) −2.64
Average acceleration (m/s2) 0.62
Average deceleration (m/s2) −0.61

6. Conclusion
5. Results and discussion
In this study, through the use of ADVISOR analysis of a fuel cell
Advisor establishes results of analysis by graphics. Although 150
ANL50 was conducted. In the analysis, the effect of either power of fuel
different graphs were given by ADVISOR after analyzing, 5 of them are
cell or fuel type on the fuel test was analyzed. ANL50 is considered to
satisfactory for this study to observe impact of fuel cell on the
be one of the most prevailed fuel cell type in industry, therefore, fuel
performance of vehicle. In order to facilitate the understanding of
cell power is selected among power options of ANL50. The other
results, the results are given in Table 4.
components of fuel cell which have effects on performance of fuel cell
As can be understood from charts, the efficiency of fuel cell directly
were stabilized for that analysis.
run by hydrogen is more than the efficiency of the fuel cell run by
ADVISOR establishes results in graphic format. The graphs were
hydrogen produced from gasoline. Decrease in fuel cell temperature
interpreted and the data which have the effects on the performance of
increases life span of fuel cell. Data related with fuel consumption was
fuel cells were represented in charts. According to the results of the
given in Table 5. With the comparison of fuel cell which uses the same
analysis, it was concluded that either fuel cell power, or fuel cell type
fuel, it can be concluded that for a fuel cell which requires much more
effect vehicle performance significantly.
power, also consumes much more fuel. Furthermore, in fuel cell which

1070
A.C. Turkmen et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70 (2017) 1066–1071

Fig. 5. Block diagram.

References

[1] Amac A, Aras F, Gurcan Y. Analysis and simulation of automotive electrical system
with ADVISOR. ELECO’2008; 2008. p. 178–182
[2] Amac A, Aras U, Sahin YG, Yorukeren N. Comparative performance analysis of
batteries in hybrid vehicles. Energy Effic Qual Symp 2011.
[3] Hauer K. Analysis tool for fuel cell vehicle hardware and software (controls) with an
application to fuel economy comparisons of alternative system designs, Ph.D.
thesis. Germany: University of Braunschweig; 1990.
[4] Johnson VH. Battery performance models in ADVISOR. J Power Sources
2002:321–9.
[5] Feroldi D, Serra M, Riera J. Design and analysis of fuel cell hybrid systems oriented
to automotive applications. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2009;58(9).
[6] Celik C, Boyaci San FG, Sarac HI. Influences of sodium borohydride concentration
on direct borohydride fuel cell performance. J Power Sources
2008;Vol:185:197–201.
[7] Hauer KH, Moore RM. Fuel cell vehicle simulation – Part 1: benchmarking
Fig. 6. Fuel consumption-power chart. available fuel cell vehicle simulation tools. Fuel Cells 2003;3:84–94. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/fuce.200332102.
[8] Heath RPG, Mo CY. A modular approach to powertrain modeling for the prediction
Table 4 of vehicle performance SAE 960427. Economy and Emissions, Ricardo Consulting
Analysis results. Engineers Ltd; 1996.
[9] Sadler M, A dynamic model of a fuel cell car, powerpoint presentation at uc-davis
Power 30 kW 50 kW fuel cell modeling workshop; 1998.
[10] McBroom, Scott T. et. al., Models get tooled up, electric and hybrid vehicle
Fuel type H2 Gasoline H2 Gasoline technology 99; 1999. p. 66–70
[11] National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Advisor Documentation and Help
Files, World Wide Web: 〈http://www.ctts.nrel.gov/analysis/download.html〉.
Heat of exhaust gas (W) 756 1308 1250 2150
[12] Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Simplev
Temperature of exhaust gas (°C) 120 580 120 580
Documentation, DOE ID-10293-2 (〈http://ev.inel.gov/simplev/manual.html〉).
Fuel cell output efficiency (%) 48,8 35,2 48,8 35,2
[13] Goncalves GA, Bravo JT, Baptista PC, Silva CM, Farias TL. Monitoring and
Fuel consumption (g/s) 0,08 0,35 0,13 0,62 simulation of fuel cell electric vehicles. World Electr Veh J 2009;3:2032–6653,
Fuel cell temperature (°C) 60 73 62 81 ISSN.
[14] Markel T, Wipke K, Haraldsson K, Kely K. Vlahinos Fuel Cell Vehicle Systems
Analysis. California: DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cell 2003 Annual Merit Review
Table 5 Berkeley; 2003.
[15] Katrašnik T. Fuel Economy of Hybrid Electric Heavy-Duty Vehicles Strojniški
Fuel Consumption.
vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 56, 12; 2010. p. 791–802.
[16] Zhou YL. Modeling and Simulation of Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Yüksek lisans tezi,
Power 30 kW 50 kW
University of Science & Tech. Beijing; 2005.
[17] Ogburn M, Nelson D, Wipke K, Markel T, Modeling and validation of a fuel cell
Fuel type H2 Gasoline H2 Gasoline hybrid vehicle, SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-1566.
[18] Folkesson A, Andersson C, Alvforsa P, Alakulab M, Overgaardc L. Real life testing
Fuel consumption (l/100 km) 123 11.4 194.6 18.1 of a hybrid PEM fuel cell bus. J Power Sources 2003;118:349–57.
Gasoline equivalent 8.3 11.4 13.2 18.1

1071