This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
Energy Management of Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Using Vehicle Lateral Dynamic in Velocity
Prediction
Lin Li, Serdar Coskun, Member, IEEE, Fengqi Zhang, Reza Langari, Senior Member, IEEE, and
Junqiang Xi,
 energy-saving and environmentally-friendly vehicles, making
Abstract— Accurately predicting changes in speed has a
significant impact on the quality of energy management in hybrid
vehicles. Many methods for predicting speed have been proposed
in the literature, but few fully consider vehicle dynamics to
predict speed changes. To this end, a new method is introduced to
predict vehicle speed and to perform energy management for
hybrid vehicles in situations where lateral dynamics plays a
significant role. Based on the tire-road friction coefficient and the
GPS signal, the maximum cornering speed of the vehicle, in
which each tire force does not saturate, is evaluated. Then the
principle of using less friction braking and using more
regenerative braking, the vehicle speed prediction controller is
designed. In the end, an optimal control method with a new
Equivalent Factor (EF) adaptive algorithm is designed to
distribute the torque of the engine and the motor, as well as the
shift schedule of the gearbox. A driver-in-the-loop experiment is
used to prove that the vehicle installed with the proposed speed
prediction controller has an average 29.1% increase in energy
efficiency compared to vehicle that do not have speed prediction
controller. And, the EF adaptive algorithm keeps the battery SoC
at a reasonable interval.
Index Terms— Vehicle Lateral Dynamic, Hybrid electric
vehicles, Velocity prediction, Energy management, Equivalent
Factor
I. INTRODUCTION
H umanity is currently facing energy shortage, drastic
climate change and environmental pollution among other
issues. These issues are closely related to energy use for
transportation, which has led industrialized countries to pursue
Copyright (c) 2015 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted.
However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be
obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
This work was supported in part by the China Scholarship Council
No.201706030054, and Beijing Institute of Technology Joint Ph.D. student
training scholarship.”
Lin Li is with School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of
Technology, Beijing, 100081 China (e-mail: elbert.lin.li@ gmail.com).
Serdar Coskun is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX, 77840 USA (e-mail:
scoskun@tamu.edu).
Fengqi Zhang is with School of Mechanical and Precision Instrument
Engineering, Xi’an University of Technology, Xi’an, Shanxi 710048, China.
(e-mail: zfqdy@126.com).
Reza Langari is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX, 77840 USA (e-mail:
rlangari@tamu.edu).
Junqiang Xi is with School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of
Technology, Beijing, 100081 China (e-mail: xijunqiang@bit.edu.cn).
0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
vehicle electrification a notable trend. For example, China
made vehicle electrification a cornerstone of its development
policies “Made in China 2025” [1]. A number of countries,
including China have introduced subsidy policies for new
energy vehicles. As a new energy vehicle, the hybrid electric
vehicle can overcome the shortcomings of pure internal
combustion engine vehicles and pure electric vehicles. It has
the advantages of energy saving and emission reduction,
reducing air pollution without reducing the performance of the
vehicle.
The performance of energy management in hybrid electric
vehicles is highly dependent on the forecasted velocity [2-3].
To this end, existing vehicle speed prediction methods can be
divided into two major categories: model-based parametric
methods (MBPM) and data driven non-parametric methods
(DDNPM) [4]. The area of vehicle speed prediction by data
driven non-parametric methods (DDNPM) has received much
attention in recent years [6, 30-32].
The work [7] designs a stochastic model predictive control
(SMPC) strategy to solve a constrained nonlinear optimization
problem on energy management of hybrid electric bus (PHEB).
In different studies, vehicle velocity predictors are developed
to improve the predicted performance based on neural network
[8-10]. Fuzzy encoding and nearest neighbor approaches are
used for velocity prediction, and a finite-state Markov chain
to learn transition probabilities of power demand is studied
[11]. Urban driving vehicles are taken into consideration in
[12]. In this system, the infrastructure constraints all vehicle’s
speed (traffic). A Krylov subspace method is exploited to
improve computational efficiency of a nonlinear time-varying
optimal problem to obtain optimal velocity trajectory. In [3],
the information available from V2V and V2I communications
is used to implement a multi-step-ahead prediction of velocity
by a Chaining Neural Network (CNN). A comparison between
three velocity predictors based on MPC energy management
in a power-split HEV is presented in [13]. They generalized
exponentially varying Markov chains and artificial NNs,
respectively. From this comparison, NN-based velocity
predictors show the best overall performance through
simulation and experiment. The disadvantage of neural
network model is the heavy calculation process, and this limits
its online application on a real traffic system [14]. Updating a
neural network transiently in real time brings a significant
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
Fig. 1. A small turning radius of an expressway auxiliary road in Texas, USA
computational load for real-time applications [6].
In the existing energy management work, vehicle dynamics
and vehicle stability control are not considered sufficiently
[15]. Therefore, a holistic or integrated controller is needed to
contain both energy management and vehicle dynamic
controller. In this way, the maximum energy efficiency of the
vehicle can be achieved without compromising its safety. [16]
presents a coordinated controller for a full drive-by-wire
electric vehicle to comprehensively optimize vehicle dynamics
performance and energy efficiency. In [17], an integrated
energy management strategy and traction control system for
an all-wheel-drive hybrid electric vehicle is proposed.
However, none of these works combine the vehicle lateral
dynamics with the hybrid electric vehicle energy management.
A large number of articles only care about the lateral
following characteristics of the vehicle, and do not notice that
the vehicle lateral dynamics have the same important
influence on the energy efficiency of the vehicle as the
longitudinal dynamics [26-29].
This paper presents a vehicle Speed Prediction Method
Based on Vehicle Lateral Dynamics (SPBVLD). SPBVLD is a
model based parametric method or MBPM. MBPMs require
predefined models to summarize the major driver responses,
and thus is most applicable for a deterministic driving scenario
[4] but can be extended to non-deterministic scenarios as well
in an approximate form.
A typical problem that combines vehicle lateral dynamics
and energy management of a hybrid electric vehicle system is
shown in Fig. 1. It shows a freeway exit and its auxiliary road.
The turning radius of the auxiliary road on the top left corner
of the figure is small. If vehicle’s speed is too high, it would
easily roll over. Through the lateral dynamics equation of the
vehicle and the tire's friction circle constraints, the maximum
vehicle speed can be calculated. Subsequently, one can predict
the vehicle’s speed when approaching the curve.
Compared with placing speed limit signs on roads and using
temporary warning signs, using vehicle lateral dynamics to
predict the maximum vehicle speed entering the corner has the
following advantages:
Firstly, it can potentially increase the vehicle's cornering
speed, thereby increasing the flow rate of the entire traffic
0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
system and improving traffic efficiency. It can also ensure that
the vehicle will not lose stability and thus improves the safety
of the vehicle.
Secondly, due to changes in temperature and weather, the
road-tire friction coefficient changes. This leads to a change to
the maximum speed at which the vehicle does not lose
stability when entering a corner. Once again, speed limit signs
on roads and adding warning signs have limited adjustment to
this naturally real-time changing parameter. Using a vehicle
speed prediction method based on vehicle lateral dynamics
may improve the vehicle's adaptability to naturally time-
varying parameters. This also increases the safety of the
vehicle.
Thirdly, distributed drive vehicles (in-wheel motors) have
been a research topic in recent years. A large number of
papers in recent years are focused on regulating vehicle on
desired path and controlling it to the driving limits [18].
Studying the relationship between the vehicle's lateral
dynamics and the energy management of hybrid electric
vehicles is the basis for future integration of distributed drive
stability control and energy management.
The main contributions of this research are listed as follows:
1) Proposed a maximum velocity predictor based on vehicle
lateral dynamics, which insures output force of each tire does
not saturate. This guarantees the stability of the vehicle
through curves.
2) Analyzed the reasons why different drivers use different
energy when driving a vehicle through a curve. Meanwhile,
proposed the principle of ensuring safety and energy saving
through curves.
3) Proposed a velocity prediction method before vehicle
entering the curves when vehicle’s maximum cornering speed
is calculated. Then, a SPBVLD controller is designed to make
vehicle use the least amount of energy through curves. We
proposed a new adjustment law for the Equivalent Factor (EF)
of hybrid vehicles with SoC changes.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. System
configuration and vehicle modeling are presented in Section II.
Section III introduces the prediction of maximum vehicle
speed into bends using lateral vehicle dynamics. Section IV
proposes the change prediction of the vehicle speed using the
vehicle’s maximum turning speed and energy management
method. In Section V, a driver in the loop experiment is
conducted for comparing this paper’s method and normal
equivalent consumption minimization strategy (ECMS) energy
management method and comprehensively analyzed, while
conclusions are presented in Section VI.
II. SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND VEHICLE MODELING
A. System Configuration
Fig.2 shows the research object of this paper, which is a
single shaft parallel hybrid electric vehicle’s powertrain.
Proper execution of a successful HEV design requires its key
mechanical and electrical components sizing [24]. The power
of a hybrid vehicle comes from multiple sources of power.
Therefore, the reserve power of the engine is partially replaced
by the motor. And, hybrid vehicles are more energy efficient
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

Fig. 2. System architecture.

Fig. 4. Motor efficiency map.

𝑗
𝐺𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 , 𝑖𝑔 ) = ∑2𝑖=0 ∑2𝑗=0 𝑎𝑖,𝑗 𝑇𝑒𝑖 𝜔𝑒 ,
{ 𝑇𝑒 = (1 − 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 )𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚 , (3)
𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝜔𝑒 = 𝑉
𝑅
where 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 is the torque split ratio, which denotes the ratio of
motor’s torque in the total output torque of the HEV
powertrain system. 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) = 0 represents the vehicle is
driven by engine totally, 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) = 1 represents the vehicle is
driven by motor totally, 0 < 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) < 1 represents the
vehicle is driven by engine and motor, and 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) < 0
Fig. 3. Engine fuel rate map. represents the vehicle is work on regenerative braking mode to
recharge the battery. Wherein, the pure engine mode is
than ordinary fuel vehicles. These reduce the size and weight preferred when the engine works in its peak-efficient region.
of the engine and oil tank so that the overall vehicle mass of Pure electric mode is selected when engine’s efficient is low
the hybrid vehicle does not increase significantly after the such as low vehicle speed [12]; 𝑖𝑔 is the gear ratio of the
motor and battery are added. This article focuses on energy gearbox, 𝑖0 is the transmission ratio from input of the
management, and the work on sizing and components has differential mechanism to the wheel; 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚 is the total input
been done by our group in the early stage. Therefore, we have torque of the differential mechanism; 𝑎𝑖,𝑗 are tunable
chosen the existing models as the research object of this paper. parameters. 𝑅 is the radius of wheels.
The parameters of the vehicle are shown in the table II. The 2) Electrical Machine Model:
detailed structure is as follows: The motor model can also be established by experimental
data using motor’s torque, speed as input and efficiency as
B. Vehicle Modeling output. The motor efficiency map is shown in Fig. 4. The
1) Engine Model: motor efficiency is represented in Eq. (4). Motor’s actual
In general, researchers are accustomed to expressing the output torque is described in Eq. (5). The power is given by
engine’s fuel efficiency as a function of speed and torque. Fig. Eq. (6):
3 is the diesel consumption MAP of the engine based on
rotational speed and output torque. Eq. (1) is the function η𝑚 = 𝜓(𝜔𝑚 , 𝑇𝑚 ) (4)
expression of engine fuel rate, meanwhile Eq. (2) is the
function of engine output torque. min (𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚 , 𝑇𝑚_𝑚𝑎𝑥_𝑑𝑖𝑠 (𝜔𝑚 )) , 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚 > 0
𝑇𝑚 = {
max (𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚 , 𝑇𝑚_𝑚𝑎𝑥_𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 (𝜔𝑚 )) , 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚 < 0
b𝑒 = 𝑓(𝜔𝑒 , 𝑇𝑒 ) (1)
(5)
𝑇𝑒 = 𝛼𝑇𝑒_𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝜔𝑒 ) (2) 𝑇𝑚𝜔𝑚
, 𝑇𝑚 > 0
9550η
𝑃𝑚 = {𝑇 𝜔 η𝑚 (6)
where, b𝑒 is the engine’s diesel consumption rate, 𝜔𝑒 is the 𝑚 𝑚 𝑚
, 𝑇𝑚 ≤ 0
9550
engine axle rotational velocity, 𝛼 is the engine throttle angle,
𝑇𝑒 and 𝑇𝑒_𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝜔𝑒 ) are the total output torque and maximum
where, 𝜔𝑚 is the motor speed, 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚 is the required torque of
output torque of the engine at current speed.
the motor, 𝑇𝑚_𝑚𝑎𝑥_𝑑𝑖𝑠 (𝜔𝑚 ) is motor’s maximum output
Based on the bench test data of the engine, engine’s fuel
torque when motor drives the vehicle, 𝑇𝑚_𝑚𝑎𝑥_𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 (𝜔𝑚 ) is
rate 𝐺𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 , 𝑖𝑔 ) can be expressed as a piece-wise second
motor’s maximum output torque when motor brakes the
order function as: vehicle on regenerating braking mode, 𝑇𝑚 is the total output

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

torque of the motor, η𝑚 is the motor efficiency, 𝑃𝑚 is the

required battery power.
Similarly, electric motor’s efficiency ratio 𝐺𝑒𝑙𝑐 can be fitted
to an affine second order function with its torque and speed by
bench test data:

𝑗
𝐺𝑒𝑙𝑐 (𝑇𝑚 , 𝜔𝑚 ) = ∑2𝑖=0 ∑2𝑗=0 𝑏𝑖,𝑗 𝑇𝑚𝑖 𝜔𝑚 ,
{ 𝑇𝑚 = 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚 , (7)
𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝜔𝑚 = 𝑉
𝑅

where 𝑏𝑖,𝑗 are the parameters to be tuned.

3) Clutch Model:
In this work, the dynamic process of mode switch of HEV
is not considered; we assume that the clutch is engaged in an
instant. The torque function and speed function of clutch are
showed on Eq. (8) and Eq. (9):

𝜂 𝑇 (𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑) Fig. 5. front-wheel steering front-wheel drive vehicle model

𝑇𝑐 = { 𝑐 𝑒 (8)
0 (𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑)
𝜔 (𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑) is the vehicle mass, 𝑓 is the rolling resistance coefficient,
𝜔𝑐 = { 𝑒 (9) 𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎 is the acceleration resistance, 𝜎 is the rotating mass
𝜔𝑚 (𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑)
correction coefficient . In this paper, we have omitted the wind
where 𝜂𝑐 represents clutch’s efficiency.
4) Transmission Model: resistance 𝐹𝑎𝑖𝑟 and rolling resistance 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑙 in order to compare
We assume the components of the drivetrain system are the energy consumption of the vehicle within a short distance
at a limited vehicle speed.
rigid, and they can be presented as a concentrated mass. We
6) Driver Model:
ignore the torsional and lateral vibration of the drivetrain
In order to make the output torque of the engine and the
system.
motor follow the input of the driver through the accelerator
Then the model is shown in Eq. (10) ~ Eq. (13)
pedal and brake pedal. A PID controller is used as illustrated
in Eq. (15) and Eq. (16)
𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝑇𝑖𝑛 𝜂𝑔 𝑖𝑔 (10)
𝑇𝜔 = 𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝜂0 𝑖0 (11) 𝑡 𝑑𝑒
T𝑑𝑒𝑚 = 𝐾𝑝 𝑒 + 𝐾𝑖 ∫0 𝑒𝑑𝑡 + 𝐾𝑑
𝜔𝑖𝑛 = 𝜔𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑖𝑔 (12) { 𝑑𝑡 (15)
subject to: e = 𝑉𝑝𝑟𝑒 − 𝑉
𝜔𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝜔𝜔 𝑖0 (13)

where T𝑑𝑒𝑚 represents total powertrain output torque. 𝐾𝑝 , 𝐾𝑖

where 𝑇𝑖𝑛 and 𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡 are input and output torque of the
transmission (Nm) respectively, 𝑇𝜔 is the wheel output torque and 𝐾𝑑 are the parameters of vehicle powertrain system. V
(Nm), 𝜔𝜔 is the angular velocity of the wheel (rad/s), 𝜔𝑖𝑛 and represents vehicle’s actual speed. 𝑉𝑝𝑟𝑒 represents the
𝜔𝑜𝑢𝑡 are the angular velocity of transmission’s input and prediction speed of SPBVLD controller. e represents the error
output shaft (rad/s) respectively, 𝜂𝑔 is transmission’s between 𝑉𝑝𝑟𝑒 and V.
efficiency, 𝜂0 is the efficiency of differential mechanism and 7) Battery Model:
main reducer. When the effect of temperature and transients can be
5) Longitudinal Vehicle Dynamic Model: neglected, the battery model is simplified as [25]:
We assume the vehicle is operated on a flat road, which
means no up and down hill slope during driving. The V𝑜𝑐 −√V𝑜𝑐 2 −4𝑅𝑖𝑛 𝑇𝑚 𝜔𝑚 𝜂𝑚
−𝑠𝑔𝑛(𝑇𝑚 )
𝑑
longitudinal dynamic model is presented by Eq. (14) 𝑆𝑜𝐶 = − (16)
𝑑𝑡 2𝑅𝑖𝑛 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹𝜔 = 𝐹𝑎𝑖𝑟 + 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑙 + 𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎 (14)
where 𝑉𝑜𝑐 is the open circuit voltage, 𝑅𝑖𝑛 is the battery
𝑇 𝐶𝐷 𝐴
resistance, 𝑇𝑚 is the motor torque, 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum
where 𝐹𝜔 = 𝜔 , 𝐹𝑎𝑖𝑟 = ( 𝑓 ) 𝑉 2 , 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑙 = 𝑚𝑔𝑓, 𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎 = battery capacity, and 𝜔𝑚 is the motor speed.
𝑅 21.15
𝜎𝑚(𝑑𝑢⁄𝑑𝑡), 𝐹𝜔 is the drive force, 𝑇𝜔 is the total drivetrain
output torque, 𝐹𝑎𝑖𝑟 is the air resistance , 𝐶𝐷 is the air resistance
coefficient, 𝐴𝑓 is the frontal area of the vehicle, 𝑉 is the
vehicle longitudinal velocity, 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑙 is the rolling resistance, 𝑚

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

III. PREDICT THE MAXIMUM VEHICLE SPEED INTO BENDS

USING LATERAL VEHICLE DYNAMICS
A. Equations of motion with fixed coordinates on the vehicle
As shown in Fig.5. for a front-wheel steering front-wheel
drive vehicle. The basic equation of motion is as shown in Eq.
(17) [19]:

𝑑𝛽 2
𝑚𝑉 + 2(𝐾𝑓 + 𝐾𝑟 )𝛽 + [𝑚𝑉 + (𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 − 𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 )] 𝜔 = 2𝐾𝑓 𝛿
𝑑𝑡 𝑉
{ 2
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 +𝑙𝑟2 𝐾𝑟 )
𝑑𝜔
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 − 𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 )𝛽 + 𝐼 + 𝜔 = 2𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 𝛿
𝑑𝑡 𝑉
(17)

where 𝑚 is vehicle inertia mess, Front wheel and rear wheel

cornering stiffness are 𝐾𝑓 and 𝐾𝑟 respectively, 𝛽 and ω are the
vehicle’s side slip angle and yaw rate respectively, 𝑙𝑓 and 𝑙𝑟
Fig. 6. Tire’s experimental data of friction circle
are the distances from front and rear axles to the center of
gravity respectively, 𝛿 is steer angle, and 𝐼 is the yaw moment C. Calculate the Maximum lateral force that the tire can
of inertia. provide when the vehicle is steadily steered
When vehicle brakes or actuates, the tire is acted on by the
B. Calculation of Steady State Steering Angle of Vehicle gravity and the longitudinal force that accelerates or stops the
when Vehicle’s Turning Radius is Known vehicle. These forces affect the lateral force [19]. The relations
When the vehicle makes a steady-state steering movement, between lateral force and longitudinal force is:
its side-slip angle and yaw rate do not change, and the four
𝑇 𝑌
wheels do not output power either. Therefore, we consider ( )2 + ( )2 = 1 (23)
𝜇𝑊 𝑌0
steady-state conditions in Eq. (18) transformed from Eq. (17) where 𝑇 is the traction (or braking force), 𝑊 is the vertical
[19]: force, 𝜇 is the tire-road friction coefficient, 𝑌 is the lateral
force and 𝑌0 is the maxim lateral force decided by tire test data.
2
2(𝐾𝑓 + 𝐾𝑟 )𝛽 + [𝑚𝑉 + (𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 − 𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 )] 𝜔 = 2𝐾𝑓 𝛿 This article assumes that the vehicle does not apply
𝑉
{ 2
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 +𝑙𝑟2 𝐾𝑟 )
（18） longitudinal forces when cornering, and therefore does not
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 − 𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 )𝛽 + 𝜔 = 2𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 𝛿 consider the effect of tire longitudinal force when the vehicle
𝑉
turns and 𝑇 is equal to zero.
We solve for ω, to get: Tire-road friction coefficient differs in different
environmental conditions. Tire-road friction coefficient can be
2(𝐾𝑓 +𝐾𝑟 ) 2𝐾𝑓 detected by different methods. For instance, in [20], the
| |
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 ) 2𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓
ω= 2 𝛿 （19） maximum tire-road friction coefficient and vehicle’s speed are
2(𝐾𝑓 +𝐾𝑟 ) 𝑚𝑉+ (𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟)
𝑉 estimated in real-time using the data given for a production
| 2(𝑙2 2 |
𝑓 𝐾𝑓 +𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 ) vehicle. In this paper, we assume that the friction coefficient
2(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 )
𝑉
of the road surface has been evaluated. Based on the friction
Simplification： coefficient between asphalt and rubber [21], we set the road
surface friction coefficient to 0.85. Clearly this can be changed
1 𝑉 as needed based on available information.
ω=( 𝑚 𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 2
) 𝛿 （20）
1− 2 𝑉 𝑙 We use tire’s experimental data to get its maximum
2𝑙 𝐾𝑓 𝐾𝑟
longitude and lateral force. From tire’s experiment data (see
Fig. 6), we can determine the tire’s largest lateral force 𝑌0
When the vehicle uses a constant velocity V and yaw rate ω based on tire-road friction coefficient and side-slip angle. The
for steady-state steering motion, by using Eq. (20) its steady- specific graph is obtained from CarSim 8.02 based on the
state turning radius ρ is: vehicle’s vertical force.
𝑉 𝑚 𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 𝑙 D. Estimating the maximum vehicle speed at which each tire
ρ= = (1 − 𝑉 2) （21）
𝜔 2𝑙2 𝐾𝑓 𝐾𝑟 𝛿 force is not saturated during steady-state steering
The maximum lateral force of the vehicle at the
Then, under the condition that the turning radius is known, the corresponding side-slip angle can be calculated by the tire test
steady state steering angle of the vehicle can be obtained from
data described above. The transient response of the vehicle's
the (21) deformation as follows:
𝑚 𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 −𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 𝑙 side-slip angle to the steering angle of the vehicle is shown in
δ = (1 − 𝑉 2) （22） the following Laplace transformation formula [19]:
2𝑙2 𝐾𝑓 𝐾𝑟 𝜌

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

Fig. 7. Maximum speed prediction flow chart

Fig. 8. Vehicle Energy Management Test Path. s is the distance between the
𝛽(𝑠) 1+𝑇𝛽𝑠 vehicle and the point into the corner
𝛽
= 𝐺𝛿 (0) 2𝜉𝑠 𝑠2
(24)
𝛿(𝑠) 1+ +
𝜔𝑛 𝜔 2
𝑛 vehicle is shown in Fig. 7. Firstly, we use the GPS signal to
subject to: get impending radius of the road. Secondly, we calculate the
𝑚 𝑙𝑓 vehicle’s steady state steering angle by Equitation (22).
1− 𝑉2 𝑙
𝛽
𝐺𝛿 (0) = 2𝑙𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 𝑟 Thirdly, we get the vehicle’s side-slip angle transient response
1+𝐴𝑉 2 𝑙
𝐼𝑉 1 by Eq. (24). Fourthly, we find the corresponding maximum
𝑇𝛽 = lateral force. For each time step’s side-slip angle 𝛽 , there
2𝑙𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟 1−𝑚 𝑙𝑓 𝑉 2
2𝑙𝑙𝑟 𝐾𝑟
(25) corresponds an actual lateral force 𝑌 and a maximum lateral
2𝑙 √𝐾𝑓 𝐾𝑟
𝜔𝑛 = √1 + 𝐴𝑉 2 force 𝑌0 . Fifthly, we calculate the maximum vehicle speed
𝑉 √𝑚𝐼
2 going into the curve according to Eq. (28).
𝑚(𝑙𝑓 𝐾𝑓 +𝑙𝑟2 𝐾𝑟)+𝐼(𝐾𝑓 +𝐾𝑟 )
𝜉=
2𝑙√𝑚𝐼𝐾𝑓 𝐾𝑟 (1+𝐴𝑉 2 ) 𝑖𝑓 𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 ∗ ≤ 1, 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (−𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 ∗ + 1)2
{
{ (28a)
𝑖𝑓 𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 ∗ > 1, 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 − (−𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 ∗ + 1)2
Subject to:
where A is the stability factor, 𝑙 equals to 𝑙𝑓 + 𝑙𝑟 , 𝜔𝑛 and 𝜉 are
𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 ∗ = 𝑆 ∗ 𝑇𝐹𝑆𝐶 (28b)
the vehicle system’s natural frequency and damping ratio
respectively. It is worth mentioning that MATLAB-Simulink where 𝑆 is safety factor, the role of the safety factor is to make
block diagram modeling with basic equation (17) is a more the TFSC not necessarily equal to 1, and vehicle can act
efficient method to solve the transient response β(s) [19]. before tires force reach saturation. The safety factor is set that
Vehicle’s maximum lateral force changes along with side- when the vehicle's TFSC is close to 1, the TFSC* is brought to
slip angle during the transient response of the vehicle’s side- 1 after multiplying by S. 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the predicted maximum
slip angle to the steering angle. From Eq. (23), we define tire speed into the curve.
force saturation coefficient (TFSC):
IV. PREDICT THE VEHICLE SPEED USING THE
𝑇𝑖 𝑌𝑖 2
TFSC = max(( )2 + ( ) ) (26) VEHICLE’S MAXIMUM TURNING SPEED AND ENERGY
𝜇𝑊𝑖 𝑌0𝑖
MANAGEMENT
of which the lateral force 𝑌𝑖 subject to: When we get the maxim vehicle speed of steady State
𝑙𝑓
steering in a curve, we can predict the vehicle’s speed
𝑌1,2 = 𝑌𝑓 = −𝐾𝑓 (𝛽𝑓 + 𝜔 − 𝛿) changing before it enters into the curve and manage the energy.
𝑉
{ 𝑙 𝜔
(27) The goal of energy management for hybrid systems is:
𝑌3,4 = 𝑌𝑟 = −𝐾𝑟 (𝛽𝑟 − 𝑟 )
𝑉 1, The engine works in its high efficient range
where 𝑌𝑓 is the vehicle front wheel’s lateral force and 𝑌𝑟 is the 2, Make the friction process (Tire-road and Friction-braking)
vehicle’s rear wheel’s lateral force. This article restricts the of the vehicle as small as possible.
vehicle's tires from working under non-linear conditions by 3, The SoC of the battery is in a general condition state
limiting the vehicle's maximum speed. We assume that the (Preliminarily set at 40%~90%) compared to the Saturated
tire's cornering stiffness 𝐾𝑓 and 𝐾𝑟 are constant. state (90%~100%) and the Insufficient state (0%~40%).
The stability of the vehicle can be guaranteed when the tire
The algorithm for calculating the maximum velocity of the
force does not reach saturation. In fact, the key to the
combination of vehicle lateral dynamics and energy

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

management is the change in vehicle speed. When the speed is curve. The distance between the vehicle and the point into the
too high, the vehicle is in danger of losing stability passing a corner is assumed to be detected by GPS signal. Please refer to
curve. Therefore, the vehicle will decelerate to a safe speed as Fig. 8.
it passes through the curve. In this process, the vehicle can be
A. Forecast changes in speed
decelerated by friction braking, or it can be decelerated by
regenerative braking. It is clear that regenerative braking is This paper uses the vehicle’s real-time speed ( V ), its
more energy efficient during deceleration. However, the maximum cornering speed (𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) and the distance (s) from the
torque for regenerative braking is limited. The driver cannot vehicle to impending curve to predict the changes of vehicle’s
accurately grasp how far away from the corner to start braking. speed. The speed forecasting process is expressed as follows:
In our article, this distance has been calculated when the Set vehicle doing uniform decelerate motion during
vehicle is far from the corner. Therefore, the vehicle can travel Regenerative braking. Vehicle’s accelerated speed (a) can be
without friction braking. This will save a lot of energy. written as Eq. (29) during uniform deceleration. And, the
In order to achieve a goal, which both ensures the stability required distant s𝑟𝑒𝑞 is written by Eq. (30) from V to 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥
of the vehicle and minimizes the energy consumed by the during uniform deceleration.
𝐹𝑓 +𝐹𝑤 𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
vehicle when HEV passes a curve, we design a controller to a= + (29)
𝑚 𝑅∙𝑚
automatically use regenerative braking instead of driver’s (V−𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 )(𝑉+𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 )
braking operation on the straight lane before entering the s𝑟𝑒𝑞 = (30)
2𝑎

If V > Vmax and s ≥ sreq , or V ≤ Vmax .

𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝐹𝑓 +𝐹𝑤 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛(𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 )𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = 𝜑𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 ∗ ( + )− − , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 ≤ 𝜑0
𝑅𝑚 𝑅𝑚 𝑚 𝑅𝑚
𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝐹𝑓 +𝐹𝑤 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛(𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 )𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = 𝜑𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 ∗ ( + )− − − 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚 𝑅𝑚 𝑚 𝑅𝑚
𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛(𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 )𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 > 𝜑0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 + 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 < 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 (31)
𝑅𝑚
𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔 𝐹𝑓 +𝐹𝑤
𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = 𝜑𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 ∗ ( + )− − 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚 𝑅𝑚 𝑚
𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛(𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 )𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
{ , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 > 𝜑0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 + 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 ≥ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚

If V > 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 and s < 𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 :

𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 ≤ 𝜑0
𝑅𝑚
𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = − 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚
𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
(32)
, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 > 𝜑0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 − 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 < 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚
𝑇𝑏𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑖0 𝑖𝑔
{ 𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 = −𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 > 𝜑0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 − 1.25 ∗ (𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 − 𝜑0 ) ∗ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔 ≥ 𝑚𝑢 ∗ 𝑔
𝑅𝑚

where 𝐹𝑓 is vehicle’s frictional resistance, 𝐹𝑤 is vehicle’s wind
resistance. For the sake of simplicity, we assume both 𝐹𝑓 and
𝐹𝑤 are zero.
The speed forecast can be divided into three situations:
Case 1: When V is larger than 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 and s is larger than s𝑟𝑒𝑞 ,
the vehicle can be freely controlled by the driver. The
vehicle’s accelerated speed 𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 is decided by throttle and
brake pedal’s angle 𝜑𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 and 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 respectively. It can
be expressed as Eq. (31).
Case 2: When V is larger than 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 , but s is smaller than
s𝑟𝑒𝑞 , the vehicle will be forced decelerate by the controller
using regenerative braking to recycle the energy. Under this
circumstance, vehicle’s accelerated speed 𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒 can be
expressed as Eq. (32).
Case 3: When V is smaller than Vmax , Vehicle can be freely
controlled by the driver like Case 1. And, its equation is
formulated the same as Eq. (31).
It should be noted. In equations (31) - (32), we take the
value of 𝜑0 as 0.2. It is a reference value for the brake pedal
angle 𝜑𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 . This value is to allow the driver to actively use
the motor regenerative braking. There is no theoretical basis
for us to take this value as 0.2, and its selection can further
depend on the driver's feelings. This value varies with the
characteristics of different drivers.
B. Energy Management
1) Methodology and Problem Formulation
The powertrain structure of the HEV used in the article is
shown in Fig. 2. There are several power flow paths for this
structure. But, in this article, we just consider the hybrid mode
(0 < 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) < 1) and the recharging mode (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡) < 0).
Equivalent Consumption Minimization Strategy (ECMS) is
an online optimization method, which is commonly used for
hybrid electric vehicle energy management. It is used to
minimize instantaneous equivalent fuel consumption with
constraints. The optimal problem can be formulated as Eq. (33)
and Eq. (34) [3]:

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

TABLE I
EQUIVALENT FACTOR PARAMETERs
𝑎1 = 1.459 × 107 𝑏1 = −0.5224 𝑐1 = 0.1626
𝑎2 = 109.8 𝑏2 = −1.049 𝑐2 = 0.7535

𝑡+∆𝜏
min 𝐽 = ∫𝑡 (𝑃𝑒 (𝑡 ′ )𝐺𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑡 ′ ), 𝑖𝑔 (𝑡 ′ )) +
𝑃𝑚(𝑡 ′)∗𝐺𝑒𝑙𝑐 −𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛(𝑇𝑚 ) (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟(𝑡 ′),𝑖𝑔 (𝑡 ′))
𝑠(𝑡) )𝑑𝑡 ′ (33)
𝑄𝐿𝐻𝑉
Subject to:
𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚 (𝑡) = 𝑇𝑒 (𝑡) + 𝑇𝑚 (𝑡)
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑚_𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 (𝜔𝑚 (𝑡)) ≤ 𝑇𝑚 (𝑡) ≤ 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑚_𝑑𝑖𝑠 (𝜔𝑚 (𝑡))
0 ≤ 𝑇𝑒 (𝑡) ≤ 𝑇𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝜔𝑒 (𝑡))
0 ≤ 𝜔𝑚 (𝑡) ≤ 𝜔𝑚 𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝜔𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝜔𝑒 (𝑡) ≤ 𝜔𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 ≤ 1 (34) Fig. 9. Driver in-the-loop experiment based on Matlab Simulink and dSPACE

where 𝐽 is the total energy consumed by the engine and the through solving these optimization control problems. The
motor, 𝑃𝑒 (𝑡 ′ ) and 𝑃𝑚 (𝑡 ′ ) are the engine power and the motor Hamilton function for optimal control problem is shown as
power (KW) respectively, 𝑄𝐿𝐻𝑉 is the fuel lower heating value follows [12]:
(kJ/kg), 𝑠(𝑡) is the equivalent factor (EF), 𝜔𝑚 𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the motor
maximum angular speed, 𝜔𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑛 and 𝜔𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑥 are the engine’s 2
minimum and maximum rotational speed respectively [3]. H = L = A(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) (𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 − 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉)) + 𝛽(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) (37a)
Equivalent Factor (EF) plays a significant role in 𝐵(𝑖𝑔 ,𝑉)
𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) = − (37b)
maintaining the SoC value around the reference at the end of 2𝐴(𝑖𝑔 ,𝑉)
2
the drive cycle while improving the fuel economy [22-23]. 𝐵(𝑖𝑔 ,𝑉)
𝛽(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) = 𝐶(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) − ( ) , 𝐴(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) ≠ 0 (37c)
Thus, it is important to adjust the value of EF, attaining battery 2𝐴(𝑖𝑔 ,𝑉)

SoC charge-sustainability and guaranteeing the optimality of The optimization control problem can be described as:
ECMS. However, EF is closely related to the driver's future ∗ }
power demand and current SoC value. The future power {𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 = arg 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝐻 (38)
demand is a function of the road slope and future velocity. In
Reference [12] gives the solution(Eqs.39-41) to Eq.38 under
this paper, the road slope is assumed to be zero. To improve
different conditions:
the optimality of ECMS by adjusting the EF, a new equation,
Eq. (35), is proposed for EF updating that is only affected by
If A(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) > 0,
SoC.
𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) ≤ 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑆𝑜𝐶−𝑏1 2 𝑆𝑜𝐶−𝑏2 2 ∗
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 ={ 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) > 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 (39)
s(t) = 𝑎1 exp (− ( ) ) + 𝑎2 exp (− ( ) ). (35)
𝑐1 𝑐2
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) < 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛
where, 𝑆𝑜𝐶 is the vehicle's instantaneous State of Charge, 𝑎1 ,
𝑏1 , 𝑐1 , 𝑎2 , 𝑏2 , 𝑐2 are fitting parameters for Eq. (35). In the If A(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) < 0,
future, these fitting parameter can be adjusted based on 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 +𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥
working condition demand power. In this paper, we assume 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) ≤
∗ 2
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 ={ 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 +𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 (40)
that these fitting parameters are fixed values, see Table I. 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝜉(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) >
Bring Eq. (3) and Eq. (7) into the Eq. (33), the cost function 2

can be rewritten as:

If A(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) = 0,
L= 2
A(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉)𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 + 𝐵(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉)𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 + 𝐶(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) (36) ∗
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐵(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) ≥ 0
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟 ={ (41)
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐵(𝑖𝑔 , 𝑉) < 0
2) Torque Split and Transmission Shift Control
Suppose {-1,1,0} are all of the gear shift commands, which 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 and 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 satisfy the following equation:
represents downshift, upshift and sustaining respectively. Each 𝑇𝑚_𝑚𝑎𝑥
gear position corresponds to an optimal control problem, 𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = min { , 1}, (42a)
𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑚
which can be expressed as 𝐽1 , 𝐽2 and 𝐽3 for different gear 𝑇𝑒_𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑅𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥 {0,1 − } (42b)
position’s energy consumption value. Then we can calculate 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑚_𝑒
the gear ratio of transmission and the split ratio of the torque
where the constraints in (34) are used.

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

TABLE II
VEHICLE PARAMETERS
Component Parameter Value
Engine Maximum Power (kW) 125
Maximum Torque (Nm) 600
Maximum speed (r/min) 2600
Motor Maximum Power (kW) 150
Maximum Torque (Nm) 650
Nominal speed (r/min) 2600
Transmission AMT gear ratio [6.25 3.583
2.22 1.36 1
0.74]
Vehicle Mass (kg) 9000 Fig. 10. Steady-state steering response of vehicle’s side-slip angle
Roll coefficient 0.01
Wheel radius (m) 0.5715
Correction coefficient of
rotating mass 1.04
Rotational inertia (kg ∙
𝑚2 ) 70000
Length width and height
(m) 11.88 × 2.55
Wheelbase (m) × 3.2
The distance from front 5.8
axle to the center of mass
(m)
The distance from rear 2.900 Fig. 11. Steady-state steering response of vehicle’s yaw rate
axle to the center of mass
(m) sensor in the vehicle. And, the maximum speed of the vehicle
Front axle track (m) 2.900 passing the curve is calculated by the method described in this
Rear axle track (m) 2.156 paper.
Centroid height (m) 1.910
Through the experiment, we observe the speed curve and
0.6
the energy consumption of the vehicle with and without the
Differential Final ratio 6.17
controller respectively.
Tire Tire cornering stiffness
(N/rad) 74522 The parameters of the vehicle used in this article are shown
in Table II.
B. Experiment Results
According to the experiment setup described in part A, the
V. EXPERIMENT RESULTS velocity and the distance of the vehicle to the next corner are
A. Experiment Setup obtained from traffic model of dSPACE. A set of test data of
To evaluate the performance of the proposed velocity tire, showed in Fig. 6, is used for predicting the maximum
prediction method based on vehicle lateral dynamic, an velocity. Experiment results are given and discussed in the
experimental study using MATLAB SIMULINK and following section.
dSPACE is conducted. We use dSPACE software to simulate
the real driving environment and complete the driver's in-the- 1) Maximum speed estimator
loop experiment to make a comparison of energy consumption To assess the performance of the proposed prediction
with controller and no controller, shown in Fig. 9. We built a method, an online predictor experiment to assess the saturation
ring road to test the controller’s effect, showed in Fig. 8. We force of vehicle tires was conducted. For a known road turning
set the straight part of the ring road to be 1000 meters’ long, radius, when the vehicle is steered steadily, the response
and the turning radius of the curve to be 50 meters’ long. The curves of its side-slip angle, yaw rate, tire force saturation
experiment was set to start at point A in the figure. The coefficient (TFSC), and predicted maximum speed are shown
vehicle traveled in a counterclockwise direction. After two in Figs. 10-13.
corners, it reached point A again and the experiment was As can be seen from the Figs. 10-13, at the beginning of the
stopped. experiment, the response curves of vehicle’s side-slip angle,
Before entering the two curves in the figure, we assume the yaw rate, tire force saturation coefficient (TFSC), and
vehicle has already learned the radius of the curve through the predicted maximum speed have an oscillation stage. These
GPS signal and completed the evaluation of the friction oscillations are due to the faster response of the maximum
coefficient between the tire and the road surface with the speed than the response of the other three parameters.

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
Fig. 12. Steady-state steering response of vehicle’s tire force saturation
coefficient (TFSC)
Fig. 13. Steady-state steering response of vehicle’s Maximum Velocity
It can also be seen from Figs. 10-13 that after 300 seconds,
the values of all predicted parameters reach steady state. But
this is not the actual calculation time. This time represents the
response time of the vehicle during the searching for
maximum speed. The actual calculation time for predicting the
maximum speed of the vehicle is less than one second. It can
be calculated independently and then be used by the
simulation model to predict the speed change of the vehicle.
2) Comparison Experiment with and without the SPBVLD
controller
In order to compare the energy saving effect of the control
method proposed in this paper, a driver-in-the-loop test is
conducted. Seven drivers' experimental data were collected.
These drivers drove a vehicle, which does not include a
velocity predictor. But, the vehicle they drove also contained
energy management method for real-time engine motor torque
distribution and automatic transmission shifting. The seven
driver’s driving data without SPBVLD controller and one
driver’s driving data with the SPBVLD controller are shown
in Fig. 14 and Fig.15.
Fig. 14 shows speed change curve of each driver. We see
the speed curve of driver with a SPBVLD controller. Its speed
in the two corners (50s~60s and 110s~120s) is almost the
largest one. Because of the presence of safety factors S, there
is a small margin for the maximum speed at which the vehicle
will not lose its stability. We can also notice that SPBVLD has
a slow deceleration process compared to driver 1~7 in Fig. 15.
This is because SPBVLD only use regenerative braking before
entering the corner. In comparison, driver 1-7 use more
0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Fig. 14. Speed curve of the driver-in-the-loop experiment
Fig. 15. Energy consumption of the driver-in-the-loop experiment
friction braking though they can also use regenerative braking.
The difference between the two kinds of braking are shown on
Figs. 16-17. Fig. 16 shows SPBVLD’s braking torque is
provided entirely by motor, and the energy is restored in the
battery. The blue line in Fig. 17 indicates the required torque
by control system. The sum of the output torques of the engine
and the motor is shown by a red line. The braking force shown
in Fig. 17 is equivalently expressed as the torque before the
differential and the final drive. The braking power provided by
the motor is not sufficient to meet the requirements, so the
vehicle's braking system is activated to meet the total braking
force requirements.
Fig. 15 shows the energy consumption curves of drivers 1-7
and SPBVLD. Since no friction brake is used, SPBVLD’s
energy consumption is minimal. It is also because it uses
regenerative braking to recover the most energy. In Fig. 18,
the red line represents the total distance from the vehicle to the
curve (s𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 ), and the blue line represents the distance (𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 )
to decelerate from the current speed 𝑉 to 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 using the
regenerative braking. When s𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 < 𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 , regenerative
braking is started. Fig. 19 shows vehicle’s actual speed is
smaller than 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 when it enters the corner under SPBVLD.
In the end, it can be seen from Fig. 20 that the driver with
the SPBVLD controller traveled the furthest distance
compared with other drivers in same time. The driver who
owns the SPBVLD controller is 2.5 percent larger than the
average travel distance of other drivers who do not have a
SPBVLD controller in same time. Because, the vehicle is
passing the curve at almost maximum speed. This improves
the efficiency of the entire transportation system.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

Fig. 20. Driving distance of the driver-in-the-loop experiment

Fig. 16. Diagram of the total torque output by the engine and the motor via the
transmission and the required torque to follow the predicted speed from
speed-prediction-controller

Fig. 21. The operating points of the engine when the Equivalent Factor
changes

Fig. 17. Diagram of the total torque output by the engine and the motor via the
transmission and the required torque to follow the predicted speed without
speed-prediction-controller

Fig. 22. The operating points of the engine when the Equivalent Factor
doesn’t change

Fig. 18. Comparison between the distance from the vehicle to the corner’s
entrance and the distance that vehicle decelerates from current speed to
maximum speed 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 into the corner through regenerative braking with
speed-prediction-controller

Fig. 23. The change in battery SoC when the vehicle passes through multiple
corners.

3) Effect of Equivalent Factor (EF) change and some

optimization results
Fig. 19. Comparison of actual vehicle speed and maximum speed with speed- We compare the position of the engine operating point, SoC
prediction-controller evolution, the energy consumption, engine and motor output
torque distribution ratio and the gearbox's gear position
changes

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
Fig. 24. The change in total energy consumed by the vehicle as it passes
through multiple corners
Fig. 25. The vehicle's equivalent factor changes as it passes through multiple
corners.
Fig. 26. The torque output ratio of the engine to the motor (0 means that the
power is completely output by the engine, and 1 means the power is
completely output by the motor). And the actual output torque of the motor
and engine
Fig. 27. The change in vehicle speed as the vehicle passes through multiple
corners, as well as the gear position change of the transmission.
when the equivalent factor changes and does not change in a
multiple-turned condition.
0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Figs. 21-22 show the working points of the engine when
Equivalent Factor (EF) changes and does not change. We
found that they are all located in the high efficient operating
range of the engine. The difference is that the engine's output
torque is greater when the EF changes. This means that more
fuel is used when the EF changes, and the electric power is
used relatively less when battery’s SoC is low. The above
analysis can also be reflected from the Fig. 23. When the
Equivalent Factor changes, the energy of the battery is more
sufficient than the Equivalent Factor do not change case.
Fig. 23 gives further details. When the SoC is low, battery
energy of EF-changing-case is consumed less with vehicle
accelerating at points 1-4 in Fig. 23. If we look at the output
torque distribution ratio of the engine and the motor in Fig. 26,
during vehicle acceleration indicated by points 1-4 in Fig.23,
the outputs torque provided only by the motor when the driver
torque demand is low (200-400 N*m). When the driver's
torque demand is high, the motor does not work and all output
torque is provided by the engine. In fact, when the equivalent
factor is constant, the battery's SoC becomes negative. This
means that battery’s energy cannot meet the driver's needs.
This situation should be avoided in reality.
It must be noted here that the battery SoC will not reach too
high under normal operating conditions due to the change in
the equivalent factor. The reason is that when the battery SoC
is high, the power of the vehicle will be almost completely
provided by the motor. The EF is 0.0004, very close to 0 based
on Eq. (35), when SoC is 1. Even if energy is recovered by
regenerative braking, it is impossible to achieve the SoC value
before vehicle acceleration. However, there is a danger of the
battery being overcharged by regenerative braking under some
special conditions (such as long downhill conditions).
Therefore, there is a need to set a boundary for the battery SoC
in practical applications.
Fig. 24 shows the equivalent fuel consumption value of the
vehicle. The energy of Fig. 24 represents the sum of the
energy consumed by the vehicle, which converts the fuel
consumed into an energy representation. As mentioned above,
when the SoC of the battery is low, the change in the
Equivalent Factor prevent the motor from consuming more
electric power, and the power is completely provided by the
engine. At this point, the efficiency of the powertrain will
decrease, meaning that it will consume more energy.
When the battery's energy is replenished by regenerative
braking, as shown in Fig. 23 points 5-8, the motor will work
normally to ensure that the engine is operating in the high
efficiency range. At this time, the equivalent factor is kept at a
small value shown on Fig. 25, and the motor output torques
are similar in both cases shown on Fig. 26.
Fig. 27 shows the vehicle speed and gear shift of the
transmission. When vehicle accelerate, Transmission ratio
increase to reduce engine and motor speed and increase their
output torque at a vehicle speed range close to 80km/h. At
time 10s-20s, transmission ratio dose not increase when EF
change. That is because battery’s SoC is low, and almost all
the torque is from engine. As the required torque is low,
engine will work at a low efficient interval when increase
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
transmission ratio. When the time is up to 60s-70s and further
to 110s-120s, the battery's SoC is still low (see Fig.23).
However, if the driver needs more power, the transmission
will downshift when the speed is close to 65km/h, causing the
transmission ratio to rise. This is because large torque makes
the engine work at high efficiency interval. When battery’s
SoC is at a medium level (180s-190s and 230s-240s), more
electric power is used. The motor is highly efficient at high
torque and high speed. This causes the transmission ratio to
come to a high value until the vehicle speed reaches a higher
value (closing to 80km/h). On the other hand, the transmission
ratio remains low to ensure efficient engine operation when
the speed is about 65km/h-75km/h. When the battery’s SoC is
further increased, the motor will replace the engine as the
primary source of power to prevent the battery from being
overcharged.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this work, a new idea of using vehicle lateral dynamics to
predict vehicle speed and to do energy management for hybrid
vehicles were proposed. Based on the assumption that
instantaneous tire-road friction coefficient and vehicle position
can be obtained by censor and GPS signal, the maximum
cornering speed of the vehicle is evaluated, in which each tire
force does not saturate. Then based on the principle of using
less friction braking and using more regenerative braking, a
vehicle speed prediction controller is designed. In the end, an
optimal control method is designed to distribute the torque of
the engine and the motor, as well as the shifting of the gearbox.
And, a new Equivalent Factor adapt method was proposed for
the ECMS energy management method. Several conclusions
are made as well. Firstly, using a vehicle speed predictor
based on vehicle lateral dynamics (SPBVLD) can not only
ensure the stability of the vehicle, but also reduce the energy
consumption of the vehicle. This improves the safety and fuel
economy of the vehicle. Secondly, the SPBVLD controller can
help increase the traffic efficiency of the transportation system
and increase the flow of the road. Thirdly, the Equivalent
Factor updating method proposed in this paper helps the
vehicle SoC to avoid depletion and overcharging. Improve the
feasibility of vehicle energy management. Fourthly, in
addition to solving the vehicle's maximum cornering speed
online, it is necessary to further study the offline plus online
calculation method to achieve the purpose of increasing
calculation speed. Off-line calculations need to consider
various possibilities of road surface friction coefficients, road
corner radii, vehicle mass, and tire cornering stiffness changes,
etc. Then get an empirical formula. This empirical formula
allows the calculation to reach convergence faster, further
improving the safety of the vehicle's cornering.
References
[1] Li, Ling. "China's manufacturing locus in 2025: With a comparison of
“Made-in-China 2025” and “Industry 4.0”." Technological Forecasting
and Social Change 135 (2018): 66-74.
[2] Xiao, Renxin, et al. "Comparisons of Energy Management Methods for a
Parallel Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle between the Convex
0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Optimization and Dynamic Programming." Applied Sciences 8.2 (2018):
218.
[3] Zhang, Fengqi, Junqiang Xi, and Reza Langari. "Real-Time energy
management strategy based on velocity forecasts using V2V and V2I
communications." IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems 18.2 (2017): 416-430.
[4] Zhang, Fengqi, et al. "A supervisory control algorithm of hybrid electric
vehicle based on adaptive equivalent consumption minimization strategy
with fuzzy PI." Energies9.11 (2016): 919.
[5] Lefèvre, Stéphanie, et al. "Comparison of parametric and non-parametric
approaches for vehicle speed prediction." American Control Conference
(ACC), 2014. IEEE, 2014.
[6] Jing, Junbo, et al. "Vehicle speed prediction using a cooperative method
of fuzzy Markov model and auto-regressive model." Intelligent Vehicles
Symposium (IV), 2017 IEEE. IEEE, 2017.
[7] Xie, Shanshan, Hongwen He, and Jiankun Peng. "An energy management
strategy based on stochastic model predictive control for Plug-in hybrid
electric buses." Applied energy 196 (2017): 279-288.
[8] Xiang, Changle, et al. "Energy management of a dual-mode power-split
hybrid electric vehicle based on velocity prediction and nonlinear model
predictive control." Applied energy 189 (2017): 640-653.
[9] Sun, Chao, Fengchun Sun, and Hongwen He. "Investigating adaptive-
ECMS with velocity forecast ability for hybrid electric vehicles."
Applied Energy 185 (2017): 1644-1653.
[10] Tianheng, Feng, et al. "A supervisory control strategy for Plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles based on energy demand prediction and route preview."
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 64.5 (2015): 1691-1700.
[11] Liu, Teng, et al. "Reinforcement Learning Optimized Look-Ahead
Energy Management of a Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle."
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 22.4 (2017): 1497-1507.
[12] Guo, Lulu, et al. "Optimal Energy Management for HEVs in Eco-Driving
Applications Using Bi-Level MPC." IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems 18.8 (2017): 2153-2162.
[13] Sun, Chao, et al. "Velocity predictors for predictive energy management
in hybrid electric vehicles." IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology 23.3 (2015): 1197-1204.
[14] Park, Jungme, et al. "Real time vehicle speed prediction using a neural
network traffic model." Neural Networks (IJCNN), The 2011
International Joint Conference on. IEEE, 2011.
[15] Huang, Yanjun, et al. "Model predictive control power management
strategies for HEVs: A review." Journal of Power Sources 341 (2017):
91-106.
[16] Li, Yutong, et al. "Coordinated control of the steering system and the
distributed motors for comprehensive optimization of the dynamics
performance and the energy consumption of an electric vehicle."
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal
of Automobile Engineering 231.12 (2017): 1605-1626.
[17] Song, Dafeng, et al. "Traction control–integrated energy management
strategy for all-wheel-drive Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle." Advances in
Mechanical Engineering 9.12 (2017): 1687814017747157.
[18] Ni, Jun, Jibin Hu, and Changle Xiang. "Envelope Control for Four-Wheel
Independently Actuated Autonomous Ground Vehicle Through
AFS/DYC Integrated Control." IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology 66.11 (2017): 9712-9726.
[19] Abe, Masato. Vehicle handling dynamics: theory and application.
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2015.
[20] Han, Kyoungseok, et al. "Adaptive scheme for the real-time estimation of
tire-road friction coefficient and vehicle velocity." IEEE/ASME
Transactions on Mechatronics 22.4 (2017): 1508-1518.
[21] Persson, Bo NJ. "Rubber friction: role of the flash temperature." Journal
of Physics: Condensed Matter 18.32 (2006): 7789.
[22] Paganelli, Gino, et al. "Equivalent consumption minimization strategy for
parallel hybrid powertrains." Vehicular Technology Conference, 2002.
VTC Spring 2002. IEEE 55th. Vol. 4. IEEE, 2002.
[23] Zhou, Min, Hui Jin, and Wenshuo Wang. "A review of vehicle fuel
consumption models to evaluate eco-driving and eco-routing."
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 49 (2016):
203-218.
[24] Wu, Xiaolan, et al. "Component sizing optimization of plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles." Applied energy 88.3 (2011): 799-804.
[25] Hou, S. "The optimal energy management of hybrid electric vehicle
based on dynamic programming." Beijing Institute of Technology:
Beijing, China (2011).
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2019.2896260, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology

[26] Mashadi, Behrooz, et al. "A path-following driver/vehicle model with
optimized lateral dynamic controller." Latin American journal of solids
and structures 11.4 (2014): 613-630.
[27] Mashadi, Behrooz, et al. "Vehicle path following control in the presence
of driver inputs." Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part K: Journal of Multi-body Dynamics 227.2 (2013): 115-132.
[28] Tabti, Khatir, Mohamend Bourahla, and Lotfi Mostefai. "Hybrid control
of electric vehicle lateral dynamics stabilization." Journal of Electrical
Engineering 64.1 (2013): 50-54.
[29] Reeves, Kieran, Allahyar Montazeri, and C. J. Tayor. "Validation of a
Hybrid Electric Vehicle dynamics model for energy management and
vehicle stability control." Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2016 IEEE 25th
International Symposium on. IEEE, 2016.
[30] Xie, Shaobo, et al. "Time-Efficient Stochastic Model Predictive Energy
Management for a Plug-In Hybrid Electric Bus with an Adaptive
Reference State-of-Charge Advisory." IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology 67.7 (2018): 5671-5682.
[31] Liu, T., Hu, X., Li, S. E., & Cao, D. (2017). Reinforcement learning
optimized look-ahead energy management of a parallel hybrid electric
vehicle. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 22(4), 1497-1507.
[32] Martinez, C. Marina, et al. "Energy management in plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles: Recent progress and a connected vehicles perspective."
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol 66.6 (2017): 4534-4549.
Lin Li received the B.S. degree in mechanical
engineering from North University of China, Taiyuan,
Shanxi, China in 2011 and the M.S. degree in
mechanical engineering from Guizhou University,
Guiyang, Guizhou, China in 2015. He is currently
pursuing the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering
at Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China.
From 2016 to 2018, he was a visiting scholar with
the Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas,
USA. His research interest includes vehicle dynamic
and control, hybrid electric vehicle energy management, intelligent vehicles
and intelligent transportation system.
1991. He has since held research positions at the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration Ames Research Center, the Rockwell International
Science Center, the United Technologies Research Center, and the U.S. Air
Force Research Laboratory. Dr. Langari’s expertise is in the area of
computational intelligence, with application to mechatronic systems,
industrial automation, and automated vehicles. He has coauthored Fuzzy
Logic: Intelligence, Control and Information (Prentice Hall, 1999) and
Measurement and Instrumentation [Elsevier, 2011, 2015, 2nd ed.] and has
coedited Fuzzy Control: Synthesis and Analysis (Wiley, 2000) and Industrial
Applications of Fuzzy Systems (IEEE Press, 1995).
Dr. Langari has served as an Associate Editor of IEEE Transactions on
Fuzzy Systems, the IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technologies, and
ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control. He currently
serves as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems
(IOS Press, Netherlands.)
Junqiang Xi received the B.S. in Automotive
Engineering from Harbin Institute of Technology,
Harbin, China, in 1995 and the PhD in Vehicle
Engineering from Beijing Institute of Technology
(BIT), Beijing, China, in 2001. In 2001, he joined the
State Key Laboratory of Vehicle Transmission, BIT.
During 2012-2013, he made research as an
advanced research scholar in Vehicle Dynamic and
Control Laboratory, Ohio State University(OSU),
USA. He is Professor and Director of Automotive
Research Center in BIT currently. His research interests include vehicle
dynamic and control, power-train control, mechanics, intelligent
transportation system and intelligent vehicles.

Serdar Coskun (S'16, M'18) received the B.Sc.

degree in mechanical engineering from Inonu
University, Malatya, Turkey, in 2010, the M.Sc.
degree in mechanical engineering from University of
Houston, Houston, TX, USA, in 2014, and the Ph.D.
degree in mechanical engineering from Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX, USA, in 2018. Mr.
Coskun received the Turkish Ministry of National
Education Fellowship for his graduate studies. His
major research interests include modeling and control
of vehicle lateral dynamics and human-like decision
making algorithms for autonomous driving.

Fengqi Zhang received his M.E. in vehicle

engineering from Lanzhou Jiaotong University,
Lanzhou, Gansu province, in 2012, and the Ph.D.
degree in vehicle engineering from Beijing Institute of
Technology, Beijing, China, in 2016. He is currently a
Lecturer in School of Mechanical and Precision
Instrument Engineering, Xi’an University of
Technology, Xi’an, China. His research interests
include modeling, optimal control of hybrid vehicles
and powertrain control.

Reza Langari (SM’02) received the B.Sc., M.Sc.,

and Ph.D. degrees from University of California,
Berkeley, CA, USA, in 1981, 1983, and 1991,
respectively.
He was with Measurex Corporation (1984-195);
Integrated Systems, Inc. (1985-1986); and Insight
Development Corporation (1987-1989) prior to
starting his academic career with Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX, USA, in September

0018-9545 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.