Search Results

In the 1995 HEV Challenge competition, 17 prototype Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) were tested by using special HEV test procedures. The contribution of the batteries during the test, as measured by changes in battery state-of-charge (SOC), were accounted for by applying SOC corrections to the test data acquired from the results of the HEV test. The details of SOC corrections are described and two different HEV test methods are explained. The results of the HEV test methods are explained. The results of the HEV tests and the effects on the test outcome of varying HEV designs and control strategies are examined. Although many teams had technical problems with their vehicles, a few vehicles demonstrated high fuel economy and low emissions. One vehicle had emissions lower than California's ultra-low emission vehicle (ULEV) emissions rates, and two vehicles demonstrated higher fuel economy and better acceleration than their stock counterparts.

Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) can be designed and operated to satisfy many different operational missions. The three most common HEV types differ with respect to component sizing and operational capabilities. However, HEV technology offers design opportunities beyond these three types. This paper presents a detailed HEV categorization process that can be used to describe unique HEV prototype designs entered in college and university-level HEV design competitions. We explored possible energy management strategies associated with designs that control the utilization of the two on-board energy sources and use the competition vehicles to illustrate various configurations and designs that affect the vehicle's capabilities. Experimental data is used to help describe the details of the power control strategies which determine how the engine and electric motor of HEV designs work together to provide motive power to the wheels.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through Argonne National Laboratory sponsored and recorded energy data of electric vehicles (EVs) at five competitions in 1994. Each competition provided different test conditions (closed-track, on-road, and dynamometer). The data gathered at these competitions includes energy efficiency, range, acceleration, and vehicle characteristics. The results of the analysis show that the vehicles performed as expected. Some of the EVs were also tested on dynamometers and compared to gasoline vehicles, including production vehicles with advanced battery systems. Although the EVs performed well at these competitions, the results show that only the vehicles with advanced technologies perform as well or better than conventional gasoline vehicles.