Advertisement

Control Theory and Technology

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 335–345 | Cite as

Two-stage on-board optimization of merging velocity planning with energy management for HEVs

  • Bo ZhangEmail author
  • Wenjing Cao
  • Tielong Shen
Article
  • 20 Downloads

Abstract

This paper proposes a two-stage hierarchy control system with model predictive control (MPC) for connected parallel HEVs with available traffic information. In the first stage, a coordination of on-ramp merging problem using MPC is presented to optimize the merging point and trajectory for cooperative merging. After formulating the merging problem into a nonlinear optimization problem, a continuous/GMRES method is used to generate the real-time vehicle acceleration for two considered HEVs running on main road and merging road, respectively. The real-time acceleration action is used to calculate the torque demand for the dynamic system of the second stage. In the second stage, an energy management strategy (EMS) for powertrain control that optimizes the torque-split and gear ratio simultaneously is composed to improve fuel efficiency. The formulated nonlinear optimization problem is solved by sequential quadratic programming (SQP) method under the same receding horizon. The simulation results demonstrate that the vehicles can merge cooperatively and smoothly with a reasonable torque distribution and gear shift schedule.

Keywords

Merging model predictive control (MPC) powertrain control parallel hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Y. Zhang, X. Shen, T. Shen. A survey on online learning and optimization for spark advance control of SI engines. Science China Information Sciences, 2018, 61(7): DOI  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-017-9377-7.
  2. [2]
    S. E. Lucena. A Survey on Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicle Technology. Rijeka, Croatia: IntechOpen, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Kumar, T. Shen. Estimation and feedback control of air-fuel ratio for gasoline engines. Control Theory and Technology, 2015, 13(2): 151–159.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Y. Zhang, T. Shen. Cylinder pressure based combustion phase optimization and control in spark-ignited engines. Control Theory and Technology, 2017, 15(2): 83–91.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Ohata. Comparison of generalized engine control and MPC based on maximum principle. Control Theory and Technology, 2017, 15(2): 150–157.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Hegyi, B. De Schutter, H. Hellendoorn. Model predictive control for optimal coordination of ramp metering and variable speed limits. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2005, 13(3): 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. M. Sarvi, M. Kuwahara. Microsimulation of freeway ramp merging processes under congested traffic conditions. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2007, 8(3): 470–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Papageorgiou, I. Papamichail, A. D. Spiliopoulou, et al. Real-time merging traffic control with applications to toll plaza and work zone management. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2008, 16(5): 535–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Weng, S. Xue, X. Yan, et al. Modeling vehicle merging behavior in work zone merging areas during the merging implementation period. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2015, 17(4): 917–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    H. Kita. A merging giveway interaction model of cars in a merging section: a game theoretic analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 1999, 33(3/4): 305–312.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    P. Hidas. Modelling vehicle interactions in microscopic simulation of merging and weaving. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2005, 13(1): 37–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    W. Cao, M. Mukai, T. Kawabe, et al. Cooperative vehicle path generation during merging using model predictive control with real-time optimization. Control Engineering Practice, 2015, 34: 98–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    W. Cao, M. Mukai, T. Kawabe, et al. Gap selection and path generation during merging maneuver of automobile using real-time optimization. SICE Journal of Control, Measurement, and System Integration, 2014, 7(4): 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Gao, M. Li, Y. Hu, et al. Challenges and developments of automotive fuel cell hybrid power system and control. Science China Information Sciences, 2019, 62(5): DOI  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-018-9690-y.
  15. [15]
    F. R. Salmasi. Control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles: Evolution, classification, comparison, and future trends. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2007, 56(5): 2393–2404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    M. F. M. Sabri, K. A. Danapalasingam, M. F. Rahmat. A review on hybrid electric vehicles architecture and energy management strategies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016, 53: 1433–1442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    F. R. Salmasi. Control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles: Evolution, classification, comparison, and future trends. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2007, 56(5): 2393–2404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Y. Zhang, H. Liu. Fuzzy multi-objective control strategy for parallel hybrid electric vehicle. IET Electrical Systems in Transportation, 2012, 2(2): 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    C. Dextreit, I. V. Kolmanovsky, J. P. Schoder. Game theory controller for hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2014, 22(2): 652–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    J. Zhang, T. Shen. Real-time fuel economy optimization with nonlinear MPC for PHEVs. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2016, 24(6): 2167–2175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    J. Zhang, T. Shen. Receding horizon optimal control of PHEV with demanded torque estimation model. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2018, 51(31): 183–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    J. Zhang, F. Xu, Y. Zhang, et al. ELM-based driver torque demand prediction and real-time optimal energy management strategy for HEVs. Neural Computing and Applications, 2019, 31: 1–19.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    H. Chu, L. Guo, B. Gao, et al. Predictive cruise control using high-definition map and real vehicle implementation. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2018, 67(12): 11377–11389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    H. Kazemi, Y. P. Fallah, A. Nix, et al. Predictive AECMS by utilization of intelligent transportation systems for hybrid electric vehicle powertrain control. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 2017, 2(2): 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    L. Guo, B. Gao, Y. Gao, et al. Optimal energy management for HEVs in eco-driving applications using bi-level MPC. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2016, 18(8): 2153–2162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    P. G. Anselma, Y. Huo, J. Roeleveld, et al. Integration of on-line control in optimal design of multimode power-split hybrid electric vehicle powertrains. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2019, 68(4): 3436–3445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    T. Liu, X. Hu, S. E. Li, et al. Reinforcement learning optimized look-ahead energy management of a parallel hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2017, 22(4): 1497–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    W. Cao, M. Mukai, T. Kawabe. Merging trajectory generation method using real-time optimization with enhanced robustness against sensor noise. Artificial Life and Robotics, 2019:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10015-019-00546-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    T. Ohtsuka. A Continuation/GMRES method for fast computation of nonlinear receding horizon control. Automatica, 2004, 40(4): 563–574.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    F. Xu, J. Zhang, T. Shen. Putting HEV powertrain dynamics into a road traffic simulation platform. JSAE Congress (Autumn), Nagoya, Japan, 2018: 17–19.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    M. Diehl, H. G. Bock, J. P. Schloder. A real-time iteration scheme for nonlinear optimization in optimal feedback control. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 2005, 43(5): 1714–1736.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© South China University of Technology, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Faculty of Science and TechnologySophia UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations