4.5 Article

Considering Well-to-Wheels Analysis in Control Design: Regenerative Suspension Helps to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Battery Electric Vehicles

Journal

ENERGIES
Volume 12, Issue 13, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en12132594

Keywords

greenhouse gas emission reduction; battery electric vehicles; regenerative suspension; life cycle assessment; control design

Categories

Funding

  1. Noise and Vibration Control Centre at Beijing Institute of Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent research has investigated the energy saving potential of regenerative suspension. However, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation potential of regenerative suspension in battery electric vehicles (BEVs) has not been considered. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a typical method for evaluating GHG emissions but is rarely used in vehicle control design. Here we explore the effects of regenerative suspension on reducing the GHG emissions from a BEV, whose control design considers well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis. The work first conducts the WTW analysis and modelling of the GHG emissions from a BEV equipped with regenerative suspension. Based on the models, the relation between suspension control parameters and GHG emissions is obtained. To reach a compromise between dynamic performance and environmental benefit, two types of control parameters are recommended and their switch rules during the operation are proposed. Finally, we take a case study with different driving cycles, road levels and country contexts. The results show that considering WTW analysis in control design can contribute to GHG emission mitigation, especially for countries that have a high-carbon intensity of the electricity grid. These findings provide a quantitative reference for technology path decision on regenerative suspension. This paper may provide a new insight for employing LCA in vehicle design.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available