See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/228901176

Electric Vehicle Powertrain Architecture and Control Global Optimization

Article  in  World Electric Vehicle Journal · April 2009

DOI: 10.3390/wevj3040682

CITATIONS READS

11 9,636

4 authors, including:

Noëlle Janiaud Marc Petit

Renault CentraleSupélec
4 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    144 PUBLICATIONS   1,046 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Guillaume Sandou
CentraléSupélec
125 PUBLICATIONS   421 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The contribution of load control in increasing electric system flexibility View project

PhD Thesis: Modeling and observability of electric drives in view of mechanical sensorless control View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Guillaume Sandou on 23 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 EVS24
Stavanger, Norway, May 13-16, 2009

Electric Vehicle Powertrain Architecture and Control

Global Optimization
Noëlle Janiaud1, François-Xavier Vallet1,
Marc Petit2, Guillaume Sandou2
1
Technocentre RENAULT, 78288 Guyancourt, FRANCE, [email protected]
2
SUPELEC, 91192 Gif-sur-Yvette, FRANCE

Abstract
The design of a full electric vehicle (or battery electric vehicle (BEV)) requires the development and
optimization of a complete electric powertrain, including battery, power electronics, electric machine,
sensors and control system.
When designing an electrical platform, from the very beginning of the V-cycle, it is mandatory to rely on
modelling and simulation tools in order to drive the main choices and then to optimize the system. This
paper presents an electric powertrain simulation platform developed with Matlab-Simulink, dedicated to
multiphysic optimization of the system.
As an example, the basic electrical powertrain architecture first considered in this paper includes a battery,
an inverter, a dc-dc buck converter supplying motor inductor and a wound rotor synchronous machine
(WRSM). The purpose is to show how simulation tools can help in comparing different powertrain control
strategies.
The present simulation platform is also useful to study physics architecture. To illustrate this point, another
electrical architecture is also presented, including a dc-dc boost converter between battery and inverter.
This structure must be considered here as an example only in order to show how to optimize control laws
taking into account various criteria, including architecture ones. Simulation results are compared for both
architectures in terms of powertrain performances and range.

Keywords: Electric powertrain, simulation platform, powertrain control strategies, architecture optimization

1 Introduction models and equations are described in order to

introduce different optimization strategies with
When designing an electrical platform, from the criteria on performances and on powertrain losses
very beginning of the V-cycle, it is mandatory to in section 3. Optimization is performed with a
rely on modeling and simulation tools in order to powertrain architecture with three degrees of
drive the main choices and then to optimize the freedom. As the aim is to expose methodologies
system. and to show typical results, the results presented in
The paper is organised as follows. The section 2 this paper are related to typical study cases, and
presents an electrical powertrain simulation not to an industrial one.
platform developed with Matlab-Simulink. Main

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 1
Section 4 presents an architecture optimization
introducing a fourth degree of freedom, specially
used when battery is partially discharged.
Finally, we draw concluding remarks in
section 5.

2 Simulation Platform of an
Electric Vehicle Powertrain
2.1 Power system
An electric powertrain is a closed-loop system, Figure 2: Simulation platform of an Electric Powertrain
mainly constituted by battery, converters, motor These models can be split in three categories
and control structure (Fig.1). depending on the frequency scale [3].
The first category implements analytical
expressions of losses, range, cost, etc. used in a
global approach, for example for the synthesis of
control laws. The second category deals with
“average” models dedicated to driving cycle
simulations (e.g. NEDC) on wider time horizons.
Finally, the third category deals with short time
switching and fast variation of currents, voltages,
torque, etc. For example, it is possible to observe
electric resonances on the network and torque
Figure 1: Simplified representation of a typical electric oscillations on the drive shaft.
powertrain
In order to understand powertrain control methods
High-voltage battery has to supply with energy presented in section 3, it is important to detail
not only traction motor, but also high power converters and motor models.
loads like air-conditioning or heating as well as
the low-voltage network.
2.3 Electric motor model
2.2 Simulation platform The three-phase Motor considered in this paper is a
Wound Rotor Synchronous Machine (WRSM),
The powertrain simulation platform used for
represented in Park coordinate (a,b,c) → (d,q).
optimization includes the following models
(Fig.2) [1] [2]: Indeed, WRSM presents more degrees of freedom
• A dynamic battery model than Permanent Magnet Machine, as it will be
explained in section 3.1. It is why it has been
• Two three-phase AC-DC converter models
chosen for the work described in this paper.
supplying WRSM stator: one model for fast
However, the methodology is quite versatile and
transients including switch models and one
can also be applied to any other type of motor
model for quasi-static transients (first harmonic
(Permanent Magnet, Induction, etc.)
only) with voltage and current average signals.
These models make it possible to simulate fast
Motor notations and symbols:
phenomena over short times (dynamic
behaviour of the powertrain) and driving v d , v q : Stator voltages (V)
cycles lasting many minutes (e.g. NEDC) as it
is explained at the end of this section. id , iq : Stator currents (A)
• Two dc-dc converter models supplying WRSM
rotor (fast transient / quasi-static transient).
Φ d , Φ q : Stator magnetic fields (Wb)
• A WRSM model with consideration of v f : Rotor voltage (V)
magnetic saturation, using Park (d,q)
transformation. i f : Rotor current (A)
• Sensor models (currents, rotor position …).
Φ f : Rotor magnetic field (Wb)

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 2
 Ω : Motor speed (rad/s) • (
a map of Lq id , iq , i f ) is obtained by
C e : Motor torque (N.m) (
dividing Φ q id , iq , i f ) by i q

Parameters: • equation Φ d = Ld .id + M f .i f is

p : Pole-pair number modified as follows:

Rs , R f : Stator and rotor resistances (Ω) Φ d = Ld .id + M f .i f + LM .id .i f (2)

with:
Φ d (id , iq , i f )
Ld , Lq , L f : Stator and rotor inductances (H)
M f : Mutual inductance (H) (
o Ld i d , i q , i f = )
id
Φ d (id , iq , i f )
The electrical equations of stator and rotor are
given in [3]. (
o M f id , iq , i f = )
if
Motor torque equation is as follows:
Φ d − Ld .id − M f .i f
Torque: C e =
3. p
.(iq .Φ d − id .Φ q ) (1) (
o LM id , iq , i f = )
2 id .i f
Magnetic saturations are taken into account: The methodology is the same for rotor field
Ld , Lq , L f , M f depend on stator and rotor (
Φ f id , iq , i f .)
currents through non-linear complex equations.
In addition to electrical equations, the mechanical
Each inductance parameter is function of three
( )
part can be modelled by the following
currents id , iq , i f . To determine these relations, equation [4]:
we use steady-state maps of magnetic fields dΩ
(
Φ d , Φ q , Φ f depending on id , iq , i f . ) J.
dt
= Ce − Cr. − Cl (3)

Figure 3 shows magnetic field Φ d according to with: J : Motor Inertia (kg.m²)

(i d , iq ) for different constant values of i f : C r : Resistive torque (N.m)
C l : “Losses” torque (N.m)

A resistive torque C l is added to classical

dΩ
mechanical equation J . = C e − C r . to take
dt
into account some motor losses, such as core
losses and mechanical losses. Losses expressions
are presented in section 3.3.
To determine C l expression, we solve the
following equation with steady state relations:
Pin − Pout = PTOT (4)
with:

.(v d .id + v q .iq ) + v f .i f : input

3
• Pin =
Figure 3: Stator magnetic field on axe d according to 2
stator current (units = p.u.) electric power
NB : Most figures in this paper are presented • Pout = C e .Ω : output mechanic power
with per-unit axes (between 0 and 1).
• Pmotor = PCopper + PCore + PMec : motor losses
To include magnetic saturation in Park equations, (cf. section 3.3).
we proceed as follows:

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 3
2.4 Converters models currents id , iq (hypothesis: ia + ib + ic = 0 ) and
rotor current i f .
Three-phase inverter
Let us briefly describe the powertrain control
The inverter converts DC-voltage from battery to structure. From the motor torque reference (C e )ref
AC-voltage in order to supply stator of electric
motor. This converter is made of six switches. three currents references i d ( ref
, i q ref , i f ref
) are
Our model considers simplified IGBT/diode defined. Three controllers achieve currents
switches (Fig.4). regulation. Finally, controllers outputs are
transformed in open / close switching positions for
inverter (Space vector PWM is used) and for dc-dc
buck converter [6]:

Figure 4: Three-phase inverter

Switching parameters are series resistors and

threshold voltages for both IGBT and diodes. Figure 5: Electric Powertrain Control System
Concerning inverter control, we use a classical
Space Vector PWM: switches closed and open Electric powertrain global optimization is
positions are deduced from a reference voltage considered at three levels: the first step is the

( )
vector [5]. currents reference determination
i d ref , i q ref , i f ref , the second step deals with
To simulate complete driving cycles, we use a
slow-transient model of inverter (or “first controllers coefficients and the third step deals

( )
harmonic” model). Inputs are three-phased with switching control. This paper mainly focuses
voltage references, AC current and DC voltage. on the first step: i d ref , i q ref , i f ref triplet
Outputs are AC voltage and DC current. To take optimization.
into account converter losses, output DC current Many control strategies can be studied,
is modified according to losses map inside considering one main objective (following torque
motor reference (C e )ref ) and three main degrees
Simulink model.

DC-DC converters ( )
of freedom id , iq , i f . Optimization methods can
A classical buck converter is used between high-
voltage battery and machine rotor. Both fast-
thus be applied on variables (i d , iq , i f ) under
transient and slow-transient models are realized torque constraint with vehicle range and
in the same way as AC-DC converter. performances objectives [7], [8], [9]. Constraints
on maximal voltages and currents in battery,
converters and machine must also be taken into
account.
3 Control Optimization
Figure 6 shows an example of simulation results
3.1 Low-level control structure obtained with a losses minimization control
strategy (see section 3.3 for more details about this
Powertrain architecture, presented in Figure 5, strategy):
provides three degrees of freedom: two stator

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 4
 2 2
Motor torque for different values of I = sqrt(id +iq ), if = ifmax
1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Ce

MOTOR TORQUE
ref
0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ID

Figure 7: Motor torque according to stator current for

maximum rotor current (units = p.u.)

Figure 6: Example of power system simulation with a

losses minimization control strategy: machine torque Torque maximization control strategy consists in
and speed (typical study case) finding the curve for which (C e )ref = (C e )max .
Two control strategies with criteria on Optimal operating points corresponding to torque
performances (“torque maximization strategy”) maximum values are represented with stars (see
and range (“losses minimization strategy”) are Figure 7).
explained and compared in following sections.
Figure 8 shows maximum motor torque versus
3.2 Torque maximization ( )
id , iq . For a given value of (C e )ref corresponds
In a first time, we consider motor inductance
parameters as constant. According to torque
(
a triplet id , i q , i f max maximizing torque. )
equation (3), to maximize C e , we set rotor MAXIMUM MOTOR TORQUE, if = ifm ax

current at its maximum value : i f = i f max .

Concerning stator current, id and iq are linked by
MAXIMUM MOTOR TORQUE

the relation I = id + iq . The idea is to find

2 2 0.8

(i d , i q ) that maximize C e for any value of I .

0.6

0.4

Considering constant inductance parameters, we 0.2

compute C e partial derivatives: 0

1 1
0.8 0.8

∂C e 3. p   iq  
2 0.6

. M f .i f + (Ld − Lq ). id −
0.6

 (5)
0.4 0.4
= 0.2 0.2

∂iq 2    0 0

 i 
IQ ID
 d

∂C e Figure 8: Maximum motor torque according to stator

=0 → current (units = p.u.)
∂i q
− M f .i f + M f .i f + 8.(Ld − Lq ) .I 2
2 2 2
If we take into account magnetic saturation, results
id =
4.(Ld − Lq )
(6)
are similar, but the method is slightly different:
partial derivatives of C e equation cannot be easily
If Ld = Lq (round rotor machine),
(i , iq ) = (0, I ) corresponds to a maximum of
calculated as previously. We use a gradient-based
d optimization method to find C e maximum value
torque equation. for each value of I. The relation
To illustrate these results, we plot C e for if = i f max remains unchanged.
different values of I (Fig.7).

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 5
Optimization problem:
• cost function to minimize:

.(M f .i f .iq + (Ld − Lq ).id .i q ) (7)

3. p
J opt = −
2
• variables : id , iq

constraint : I = id + iq
2 2
•

We use a classical SQP (Successive Quadratic

Procedure) to solve this optimization. Results are
plotted on Figures 9 and 10.
2 2
Motor torque for different values of I = sqrt(id +iq ), if = ifmax
1
TORQUE MAXIMUM VALUES
0.9 - MAGNETIC SATURATION MODEL -

0.8

0.7
MOTOR TORQUE

0.6

0.5

0.4 Figure 11: Motor torque maximization method

0.3
The result is a non analytic algebraic relation
0.2

0.1
( )
giving id , iq , i f from (C e )ref .
In order to take into account battery output
( )
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ID voltage, a constraint on v d , v q is added:
Figure 9: Motor torque according to stator current for
v d + v q ≤ Vmax must be respected
2 2
maximum rotor current with a magnetic saturation inequality
model (optimal operating points = stars) (units = p.u.) for all operating points (C e , Ω ) .
MAXIMUM MOTOR TORQUE, if = ifm ax

3.3 Losses minimization

1
The difficulty of a losses minimization strategy
MAXIMUM MOTOR TORQUE

0.8 depends on the chosen approach:

0.6
• approach 1 : to use a fine and complex model of
0.4 motor losses (e.g. through losses maps from
tests). Advantage is a high correlation between
0.2
tests and simulation results. Major drawback
0
1
concerns optimization method complexity: when
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.5 the cost function to minimize is not an explicit
0
0.2
0 -0.5 function of optimization variables, simple and
IQ ID
fast gradient-based methods can not be applied.
Figure 10: Maximum motor torque according to stator More complex methods (such as heuristic
current with a magnetic saturation model (units = p.u.) algorithms) are required, with longer
computation times.
Finally, the Motor Torque Maximization
methodology can be summarized in three steps: • approach 2 : to use simplified losses model, with
explicit expressions of optimization variables.
There are two advantages of this approach : first,
the use of fast optimization methods is possible;
secondly, it allows studying losses variations
with motor parameters. Drawback is advantage
of first approach (classical compromise between
precision and computation times).

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 6
Approach 2 is used in this paper. For that To determine AC , BC , AS , BS coefficients for
purpose, simplified losses expressions are
stator and rotor converters, we apply linear
required.
regression to data maps. These maps represent
converters global losses and motor current
The cost function to minimize represents global
measures according to torque and speed.
losses in powertrain (apart from battery losses).
Linear regression consists in approximating a
linear equation Y = A. X with X a vector of
Converters losses: unknown parameters, by a least square method
( min Y − AX 2 ),
X
• Conduction losses: where:
PCond = AC .I 2 + BC .I (8)  AC Stator 
B 
• Switching losses:  C Stator 
(
PSw = f c . AS .I 2 + BS .I + C S ) (9)
 AS Stator 
 
 BS Stator 
where the parameters are: C S Stator 
f c : switching frequency (Hz) X = 
 AC Rotor 
AC , BC B 
: Constant coefficients to determine
AS , BS  C Rotor 
 AS Rotor 
I : Converter current: B 
o Stator AC-DC converter:  S Rotor 
 C S Rotor 
I → i d + iq
2 2

o Rotor DC-DC converter: I → i f and Y and A contain data from measures.

X can be compute from the well known
expression:
Motor losses [10]: ( )
−1
X = AT . A . AT .Y (15)
Concerning motor losses coefficients
• Copper losses:
determination, we use the same method applied to
3
PCopper = R f .i f + .R S . i d + i q
2

2
2
(
2
) (10) stator and rotor losses data with:

 kh 
• Core losses: k 
( )(
PCore = Φ d + Φ q . k h .Ω + k e .Ω 2
2 2
) (11)
 e
X = k df 
 
• Mechanical losses (dry friction, viscous  k vf 
friction and windage losses):  k w 
PDry Friction = k df .Ω (12)
If stator and rotor resistance values are unknown
PViscous Friction = k vf .Ω 2 (13) parameters, linear regression can provide them by
modifying Y , A and X so that:
PWindage = k w .Ω 3 (14)
R f 
k h , k e , k df , k vf and k w are constant coefficients X ' =  Rs 
to determine, respectively corresponding to  X 
hysteresis, eddy current and mechanical losses.
Coefficients determination (Using this vector is also a mean to check motor
resistance values)

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 7
Figures 12 and 13 represent converters and motor Global losses:
losses from tests versus simulation results. PTOT = PCopper + PCore + PMec + PStator Sw
Modelling error on converters losses is quasi- (16)
inexistent. Concerning motor, in low torque area, + PStator Cond + PRotor Sw + PRotor Cond
there is up to 20% error, certainly due to losses
simplified model (e.g. stray losses are neglected). PTOT is the cost function to minimize.
Optimization variables are id , i q , i f .
Constraint to respect concerns motor torque
(eq.(3)): C e = (C e )ref .
(
For each couple (C e , Ω ) , we find id , iq , i f ) that
minimize PTOT , verifying torque expression and
respecting following constraints:

v d + v q ≤ Vmax
2 2

id + iq ≤ I max
2 2
(17)
i f ≤ I f max

To achieve computation, we use as previously a

SQP procedure.

To understand the importance of taking into

account both losses in motor and converters for
optimization (instead of motor losses only for
Figure 12: Motor losses measures vs. simulation example), we compare global efficiency with two
results (units = p.u.) control strategies (Fig.16) [11]:
a. motor losses minimization (Fig.14)
b. (motor+converters) losses minimization
(Fig.15)

Figure 14: Powertrain efficiency with a strategy of

motor losses minimization (units = p.u.)

Figure 13: Converters losses measures vs. simulation

results (units = p.u.)

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 8
 Figure 15: Powertrain efficiency with a strategy of Figure 17: Global efficiency with a strategy of torque
global losses minimization (units = p.u.) maximization (units = p.u.)

Figure 16: Powertrain efficiency gain with a strategy Figure 18: Global efficiency gain with a strategy of
of global losses minimization vs. motor losses losses minimization vs. motor torque maximization
minimization (units = p.u.) (units = p.u.)

Efficiency gain does not exceed 5%. Indeed, in

Losses minimization strategy allows increasing
this study case, converter efficiency is much
efficiency, especially for low torques area, where a
higher then motor efficiency.
maximal rotor current is not necessary.

3.4 Strategies comparison

4 Architecture Optimization
Figure 17 shows a global efficiency map
obtained with torque maximization strategy When dealing with powertrain performances, it is
(previously presented and frequently used in mandatory to take into account the way battery
literature [6]). voltage changes with respect to the state of charge.
This voltage value has a direct impact on
( )
This strategy is compared with losses
minimization strategy (Fig.18). id , iq , i f optimization.

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 9
 4.1 DC-DC Boost converter

The electrical architecture of the powertrain may

have a great influence on battery voltage variations
impact. For example, introducing a dc-dc converter
between the battery and the inverter can change the
behaviour of the system. The function of this
converter is to stabilize as much as possible the
inverter dc voltage whatever the battery state of
charge is [12].
To study the efficiency of this architecture, a dc-dc
boost converter model with IGBT has been
integrated in the simulation platform (Fig. 21).

Figure 19: Global efficiency with losses minimization

strategy for different battery voltages (units = p.u.)
Figure 21: Electric Powertrain with dc-dc boost
converter

4.2 Low-level control with four degrees

of freedom

With this new powertrain architecture, four

degrees of freedom are now potentially available:
( )
id , iq , i f currents as previously presented and
dc-dc voltage reference. When optimizing
powertrain control, output battery voltage
constraints can thus be partly relaxed (especially
when the battery state of charge is low).
Figure 20: Operating points limits for different battery
voltages (units = p.u.)
4.3 Architectures comparison
Figure 19 shows powertrain efficiencies
according to battery state of charge. Results are Figure 22 shows various results with and without
obtained by losses minimization for three
( )
different constraints on v d , v q .
dc/dc converter.

As well as global efficiency differences, we

observe variations of operating points limit due
to optimization constraints (Fig.20). Battery
voltage has an impact on both efficiency and
performances.

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 10
 Figure 22: Example of simulation results comparison with and without dc-dc boost converter
(typical case study)

5 Conclusion Acknowledgments
A platform for Electric Vehicle Powertrain has The authors wish to thank their colleagues from
been presented in this paper. Battery, converters RENAULT and SUPELEC for their comments and
and traction motor are modelled with the suggestions.
intention of optimizing performances and
powertrain efficiency (highly linked with vehicle References
range). Consequently, models are as much
[1] K.L. Butler, M. Ehsani, P. Kamath, A Matlab-
simplified as possible. Further, explicit Based Modeling and Simulation Package for
formulations depending on degrees of freedom Electric Hybrid Electric Vehicle Design,
are preferred. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology,
In a second step, we have presented two Vol.48, n°6, Nov.1999
powertrain control strategies resulting from a
[2] B. Jeanneret, R. Trigui, F. Badin, F. Harel,
“software” optimization: we have used a classic New Hybrid concept simulation tools,
electric powertrain architecture and shown how evaluation on the Toyota Prius car,
performances and efficiencies can be different International Electric Vehicle Symposium,
depending on control laws. Bejing (China), 1999
Finally, we have studied an example of
[3] N. Janiaud, P. Bastard, M. Petit, G. Sandou,
“hardware” optimization by introducing an
Electric Vehicle Powertrain and Low-Voltage
additional degree of freedom with a dc-dc boost Network Simulation and Optimization,
converter between battery and inverter. Automotive Power Electronics, Paris
Comparison results have been obtained with the (France), 2009
simulation platform. This platform has proven its
[4] B. Multon, L. Hirsinger, Problème de la
efficiency and has brought much than
motorisation d’un véhicule électrique, Revue
satisfactory results for the deep understanding of 3E.I, n°5, p.55-64, March 1996
proposed optimized control laws and
architectures. [5] G. Grellet, G. Clerc, Actionneurs électriques.
Principes, modèles, commande, Chapter 9,
p.217–222, Eyrolles, 1999

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 11
 [6] R. Trigui, F. Harel, B. Jeanneret, F. Badin, Authors
S. Derou, Optimisation globale de la
commande d’un moteur synchrone à rotor Noëlle Janiaud was born in Paris,
bobiné. Effets sur la consommation simulée France, in 1984. She received the Eng.
de véhicules électriques et hybrides, degree and the Master’s degree in
Colloque National Génie Electrique Vie et control engineering and signal
Qualité, Marseille March 21-22, 2000 processing from SUPELEC (Ecole
Supérieure d’Electricité), Gif-sur-
[7] P. Bastiani, Stratégies de commande Yvette, France, in 2007.
minimisant les pertes d’un ensemble In 2007, she joined the Advanced
convertisseur – machine alternative : Electronics Division of RENAULT in
Application à la traction électrique, PhD, the context of a PhD cooperation with
INSA Lyon, Feb. 23, 2001 SUPELEC. Her research interests
[8] J. Regnier, Conception de systèmes include modeling, simulation and
hétérogènes en Génie Electrique par optimization of power systems for
optimisation évolutionnaire multicritère, electric vehicle.
PhD, INP Toulouse, Dec. 18, 2003
François-Xavier Vallet is working in
[9] A. Haddoun, M. El Hachemi Benbouzid, D. RENAULT since 2003. He used to
Diallo, R. Abdessemed, J. Ghouili, K. work for the Electronics and Electrical
Srairi, A Loss-Minimization DTC Scheme Division before joining the Advanced
for EV Induction Motors, IEEE Electronics Division in 2008 to
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. develop the modeling approach for
56, no.1, Jan. 2007 mechatronic systems designing. He
graduated from SUPELEC in 2003.
[10] James L. Kirtley Jr., Analytic Design
Evaluation of Induction Machines, Class
Marc Petit is a former student of the
Notes from MIT (Dpt of Electrical
Ecole Normale Supérieure de Cachan
Engineering and Computer Science), Jan.
in Paris, France. He received the Ph-D
2006
degree from the University of Orsay,
[11] H. Helali, Méthodologie de pré- France, in 2002. Currently, he is
dimensionnement de convertisseurs de assistant professor in the power
puissance : Utilisation des techniques systems group of the Department of
d’optimisation multi-objectif et prise en Power and Energy Systems of
compte de contraintes CEM, PhD thesis, SUPELEC.
INSA, Lyon (France), 2006
Guillaume Sandou graduated from the
[12] B. Eckardt, A. Hofmann, S. Zeltner, M.
Ecole Supérieure d’Electricité
Maerz, Automotive Powertrain DC/DC
(SUPELEC) in 2002. He obtained his
Converter with 25kW/dm3 by using SiC
PhD thesis (Modeling, optimization
Diodes, CIPS (International Conference on
and control of multi energy networks)
Integrated Power Electronics Systems),
from the Univerisity Paris Sud XI in
Naples (Italy), 2006
2005. He is currently an assistant
professor at the Automatic Control
Department of SUPELEC. His
research interest deals with the
modeling and optimization of complex
systems, robust control, mixed integer
optimization and metaheuristics.

EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium 12

View publication stats