INTEGRATED COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN

OF A HYBRID VEHICLE

Matthew Meschino

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of

BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE

Supervisor: Professor S. A. Meguid

Department of Industrial and Mechanical Engineering

Abstract

With increasing challenges facing traditional internal combustion engine vehicles and the impracticality of
electrically powered vehicles for a typical urban commute, a hybrid electric vehicle represents an efficient
compromise. The design objective presented in this thesis is focused primarily on the power train system
and chassis. A modified parallel power train system was selected. Target vehicle specifications were
defined, with rational assumptions made for parameters outside the scope of the design. Critical
components were selected; including a compression ignition engine (diesel) rated at a maximum power
output of 77.3 kW, an electric motor rated at 15 kW, a continuously variable transmission, and a Li-ion
battery pack. Through researched vehicle performance theory, the final minimum acceleration time
between 0 and 100 km/h was calculated to be 8.6 seconds, and the top speed was 180 km/h. The final
achieved weight of the chassis was 781 kg, with a safety factor of approximately 14 under static and
dynamic loads only.

i
Acknowledgements

This work would not have been completed without the help of several individuals. My sincere

appreciation goes to my supervisor, Professor Shaker A. Meguid, for the opportunity to explore a topic

that integrates my interests in both the energy and material engineering fields.

I would also like to thank my family, whose support during my educational career has been both vital and

unwavering. They are the major catalyst in many of my successes to date.

ii
Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Justification ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................... 2

Chapter 2: Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 General Vehicle Dynamics .................................................................................................. 4

2.1.1 Load Transfer .......................................................................................................... 5

2.1.2 Aerodynamic Drag .................................................................................................. 5

2.1.3 Rolling Resistance .................................................................................................. 6

2.1.4 Grading Resistance ................................................................................................ 6

2.2 Types of HEV Power Trains ................................................................................................ 7

2.2.1 Parallel Hybrid Electric Power Trains ..................................................................... 7

2.2.2 Series Hybrid Electric Power Trains ....................................................................... 7

2.2.3 Combined Hybrid Electric Power Trains ................................................................. 7

2.3 HEV Modes of Operation (Parallel Power Train) ................................................................ 8

2.4 HEV Power Train Components ......................................................................................... 11

2.4.1 Internal Combustion Engine.................................................................................. 11

2.4.2 Transmission ......................................................................................................... 13

2.4.3 Electric Motor ........................................................................................................ 13

2.4.4 Energy Storage Device ......................................................................................... 13

2.4.5 Regenerative Braking ........................................................................................... 14

2.5 Vehicle Performance Theory ............................................................................................ 15

2.5.1 Vehicle Performance Parameters ......................................................................... 15

iii
 2.5.2 HEV Fuel Economy and Emissions ...................................................................... 16

2.6 Industry Benchmarks: Production HEVs ........................................................................... 18

2.7 Additional Design Considerations ..................................................................................... 18

Chapter 3: Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 19

3.1 Overview of Approach ....................................................................................................... 19

3.2 Design Philosophy ............................................................................................................ 20

Chapter 4: HEV Design and Analysis...................................................................................................... 21

4.1 Design Characteristics and Performance Targets ............................................................ 21

4.2 HEV Power Train Selection .............................................................................................. 23

4.3 Modelling Vehicle Performance ........................................................................................ 24

4.4 Component Selection and Sizing ...................................................................................... 26

4.4.1 Internal Combustion Engine.................................................................................. 26

4.4.2 Transmission ......................................................................................................... 27

4.4.3 Battery ................................................................................................................... 27

4.5 Chassis Design ................................................................................................................. 28

4.6 Comparison of ICE and HEV Design ................................................................................ 31

4.7 Estimated HEV Performance and Specifications.............................................................. 34

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Future Work .............................................................................................. 35

5.1 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 35

5.2 Future Work ...................................................................................................................... 36

Chapter 6: References .............................................................................................................................. 37

Chapter 7: Figures and Tables ................................................................................................................ 43

7.1 Figures .............................................................................................................................. 43

7.2 Tables ............................................................................................................................... 51

iv
Appendix A: Comparison of 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid and Standard Gasoline Version ............. 54

Appendix B: ANSYS Code for Chassis Loading Analysis ................................................................ 56

v
List of Symbols

Symbol Description Units

µP Tractive coefficient (peak) -

µs Tractive coefficient (sliding) -

AF Projected frontal area of vehicle m2

aLAT Lateral acceleration (normalized by gravitational constant) -

aLON Longitudinal acceleration (normalized by gravitational constant) -

CD Drag coefficient -

CG Location of vehicle center of gravity -

E Energy J

EM Modulus of elasticity Pa

ER Energy recovered J

FA Aerodynamic drag N

FB Braking force N

FG Grading resistance N

FN Normal force on each tire N

FR Rolling resistance N

Ft Tractive effort N

FWT, LAT Lateral weight transfer N

FWT, LON Longitudinal weight transfer N

g Gravitational constant m/s2

G Grade of road %

HCG Height from ground to CG m

k Polytrophic exponent -

kR Rolling resistance coefficient -

LT Track length of vehicle m

LW Wheelbase length of vehicle m

vi
Symbol Description Units

mv Mass of vehicle kg

Paux Power required by auxilaries W

Preq Power required W

r Compression ratio -

rc Cut-off ratio -

t Time s

Tamb Temperature of environment deg C

V Vehicle speed m/s

Vc,max Maximum vehicle cruise speed km/h

α Angle of inclination degree

ηt Transmission efficiency %

ηth,CI Thermodynamic compression ignition engine efficiency %

ηth,SI Thermodynamic spark ignition engine efficiency %

ρAIR Density of air at STP (Pressure = 1 atm, Temperature = 25 deg C) kg/m3

ρM Material density kg/m3

vii
List of Figures

Figure 2.1 – Vehicle parameters related to vehicle performance theory ...................................................... 4

Figure 2.2 – Mode 1 – electric power only (parallel system) ........................................................................ 8

Figure 2.3 – Mode 2 – ICE power only (parallel system) .............................................................................. 8

Figure 2.4 – Mode 3 – battery charging (parallel system) ............................................................................ 9

Figure 2.5 – Mode 4 – acceleration (parallel system) ................................................................................... 9

Figure 2.6 – Mode 5 – regenerative braking (parallel system) ................................................................... 10

Figure 2.7 – Typical urban driving cycle (vehicle power requirements vs. time) ....................................... 11

Figure 2.8 – Mechanical vs. regenerative brake force ................................................................................ 15

Figure 4.1 – Required power for 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid during vehicle cruise conditions ..................... 22

Figure 4.2 – HEV power train schematic (based on parallel system) ......................................................... 23

Figure 4.3 – Power availability vs. vehicle speed distribution for baseline HEV power train design .......... 25

Figure 4.4 – HEV chassis design (side view).............................................................................................. 30

Figure 4.5 – HEV design chassis dimensions (top view) ............................................................................ 31

Figure 4.6 – 3-D computer model of HEV power train design (top, front, isometric view) .......................... 33

Figure 4.7 – 3-D computer model of traditional ICE power train design (top, front, isometric)................... 33

Figure 7.1 - Average price of regular unleaded gasoline in Ontario .......................................................... 43

Figure 7.2 – Typical tire performance curve (lateral vs. vertical load) ....................................................... 43

Figure 7.3 – Parallel hybrid power train system .......................................................................................... 44

viii
Figure 7.4 – Series hybrid power train system............................................................................................ 44

Figure 7.5 – Combined hybrid power train system (series-parallel) ........................................................... 45

Figure 7.6 – Historical HEV sales in United States .................................................................................... 45

Figure 7.7 – Net power to weight ratio for selected production HEVs ........................................................ 46

Figure 7.8 – Vehicle range for selected production HEVs .......................................................................... 46

Figure 7.9 – Fuel economy for selected production HEVs ......................................................................... 46

Figure 7.10 – ANSYS chassis model key point locations ........................................................................... 47

Figure 7.11 – ANSYS chassis model loading for condition 1 ..................................................................... 47

Figure 7.12 – ANSYS chassis model displacement under condition 1 ....................................................... 48

Figure 7.13 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 1 ................................................ 48

Figure 7.14 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 2 ................................................ 49

Figure 7.15 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 3 ................................................ 49

Figure 7.16 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 4 ................................................ 50

ix
List of Tables

Table 1.1 – Cost comparison of 2009 Honda Civic EX to hybrid model ...................................................... 3

Table 2.1 – Relative impact of vehicle components on fuel economy ....................................................... 17

Table 2.2 – Emission contribution by road vehicles in Ontario (2005) ...................................................... 18

Table 4.1 – Target HEV design specifications ........................................................................................... 21

Table 4.2 – Operating conditions for HEV vehicle ...................................................................................... 21

Table 4.3 – HEV power train logic for electric motor and ICE .................................................................... 24

Table 4.4 – ICE selection scoring matrix .................................................................................................... 26

Table 4.5 – 1.9 L TDIe diesel engine from the 2009 Audi A3 .................................................................... 27

Table 4.6 – Battery selection scoring matrix ............................................................................................... 28

Table 4.7 – ANSYS chassis stress and displacement summary ................................................................ 30

Table 4.8 – Comparison of vehicle properties between hybrid and standard gasoline version ................. 32

Table 4.9 – Revised HEV design specifications and performance ............................................................. 34

Table 7.1 – Comparative engine specifications for gasoline and diesel powered vehicles ....................... 51

Table 7.2 – Typical performance attributes of various battery types ......................................................... 52

Table 7.3 – Average values for tractive effort coefficient ........................................................................... 52

Table 7.4 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing road grade ............................ 53

Table 7.5 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing vehicle mass ........................ 53

Table 7.6 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing maximum available power ... 53

x
List of Equations

Equation 2.1 – Weight transfer from lateral acceleration for each tire ......................................................... 5

Equation 2.2 – Weight transfer from longitudinal acceleration / deceleration for each tire ......................... 5

Equation 2.3 – Aerodynamic drag [] .............................................................................................................. 6

Equation 2.4 – Rolling resistance coefficient for passenger car on concrete road ...................................... 6

Equation 2.5 – Conversion from grade to angle of inclination ...................................................................... 6

Equation 2.6 – Rolling resistance ................................................................................................................ 6

Equation 2.7 – Grading resistance ............................................................................................................... 6

Equation 2.8 – Ideal thermal efficiency of a spark ignition engine ............................................................. 11

Equation 2.9 – Ideal thermal efficiency of a compression ignition engine ................................................. 12

Equation 2.10 – Energy absorbed during braking ..................................................................................... 14

Equation 2.11 – Engine power required for maximum vehicle cruise ......................................................... 15

Equation 2.12 – Engine power required for acceleration ............................................................................ 16

Equation 2.13 – Maximum allowable tractive effort from tire-ground contact ............................................ 16

xi
Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Justification

Current land transportation technology is dominated by internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. To

combat difficulties facing traditional fossil fuel technologies, new alternative energy systems have been

introduced. Electrically powered vehicles (or EPVs) are driven by an electric motor, with power supplied

by a battery. There is no onboard means of energy replenishment or generation, so these vehicles must

be plugged into an external power source to recharge. EPV fuel costs are limited only to the utility charge

when plugged-in and they produce zero emissions during operation.

Unfortunately, this technology also has several critical limitations. Depending on the battery technology

employed, the top speed of most currently available electric vehicles is limited to between 40 and 70

km/hr, with a range between 50 and 90 km [1]. Battery recharge rates can also vary between one and

several hours. This makes them ideal for short intra-city trips, but impractical for longer highway

commutes. While producing zero on-board emissions, an EPV contributes pollutant emissions depending

on the efficiency and power plant type that was used to generate its stored electricity [2]. While vehicle

purchase costs continue to drop, they still average between 50 to 100% greater than a petrol powered

vehicle of similar class [3].

Hybrid electric vehicles (or HEVs) are an efficient compromise between traditional ICE vehicles and

EPVs. A hybrid electric vehicle combines the use of both an electric motor and an internal combustion

engine to power the vehicle. Some general advantages include: reduced fuel consumption, reduced

exhaust emissions, and lower refuelling costs; with a range and acceleration competitive or superior to

ICE vehicles. Although currently more expensive than ICE models, the cost of HEVs continues to drop as

technologies improve and mass-production rates increase. In summation, hybrid electric vehicles are an

important emerging technology in reducing our dependency on traditional fossil fuel resources.

1
1.2 Objectives

The goal of this project is to produce a conceptual, computer-aided design (CAD) of a hybrid electric

vehicle. The software programs that will help facilitate the design and analysis include SoildWorks and

ANSYS. The vehicle design scope will be limited to the power train system and components, and the

chassis. Upon completion of the project, the following achievements are expected:

1. An understanding of the engineering principles behind the operation of an HEV.

2. A comparison between HEV power train characteristics and an equivalent ICE vehicle, displayed

through a 3-D computer model.

3. A complete 3-D computer model of the final HEV design. This includes both assembly and

component drawings of the major HEV systems where applicable.

4. Selection of a power train system based on established vehicle performance targets and

specifications.

5. Completion of a computer model of the vehicle chassis and analysis under typical driving loading

scenarios.

6. A sensitivity analysis of target parameters on expected vehicle performance.

1.3 Background

Whether to ship goods or act as transit for the average citizen, most land vehicles are powered by fossil-

based fuels such as gasoline or diesel. In Canada alone, road transportation vehicles used over 39

billion litres of gasoline and 17 billion litres of diesel fuel in 2007 [4]. The average price per litre of

gasoline in Ontario has risen over 50% since 2000 (see Figure 7.1). With increasing operating costs,

concerns over greenhouse gas emissions, and a finite global reservoir, alternatives to traditional ICE

powered vehicles have become an area of increasing interest.

2
While the average purchase price of a HEV is greater than a comparable ICE vehicle, the savings in fuel

cost will exceed this difference after approximately 7 years (see Table 1.1). Similarly, from fuel

consumption rates alone, the reduction in carbon emissions is quite significant at 31%. As resources

continue to diminish over time, the current economic viability and environmental benefits are expected to

further improve.

Table 1.1 – Cost comparison of 2009 Honda Civic EX to hybrid model [5] [6]

2009 Honda
2009 Honda Civic Sedan Difference
Parameter Unit Civic Hybrid EX-L (Hybrid – Sedan)
Continuous
Transmission - Variable Automatic
Retail price (MSRP) $CAN 27,350.00 23,480.00 3,870.00
Purchase price (MSRP + 13% tax) $CAN 30,905.50 26,532.40 4,373.10
Combined highway & city fuel
consumption L/100km 5.6 8.1 -2.5
Annual fuel cost $CAN $1,344.08 1,946.60 -$602.52

Note: Number of years for fuel savings = purchase price difference divided by annual fuel savings

Assumes an annual usage of 24,000 km per year, price of gasoline at $1.00/L.

3
Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 General Vehicle Dynamics

There are several physical properties that affect the loads on a vehicle, and consequently the design of

the power train and chassis. During manoeuvring procedures, there is a shift in load or the amount of

weight supported by each tire. Additionally, there are several elements resisting the longitudinal motion

of the vehicle. This section describes the mathematical relationships behind vehicle performance, which

are critical to power train and chassis design. Figure 2.1 visually defines vehicle parameters that are

referenced in the section ahead. FWT,LAT , FWT,LON

Figure 2.1 – Vehicle parameters related to vehicle performance theory

4
2.1.1 Load Transfer

Load transfer is a critical parameter in determining vehicle behaviour in each of the three main vehicle

driving scenarios: cornering, forward acceleration, and braking.

Cornering: During cornering, load transfer affects the weight distribution of the vehicle. Traction

represents the lateral load capability, while weight is the vertical load on each tire. Figure 7.2 is a typical

representation of tire performance in this respect. In a situation where there is no front / back end, or left /

right side weight bias, the static load on each tire is simply the total vehicle weight (m·g) divided by the

number of tires [7].

To determine the amount of weight transfer to each tire during cornering, the desired lateral acceleration

of the vehicle (aLAT) should be applied according to Equation 2.1. The weight transfer value is then added

to the static vertical load on the outside tires, and subtracted for the inside tires [8]. This change in

vertical load on each tire will have a corresponding affect on the tractive load available.

Equation 2.1 – Weight transfer from lateral acceleration for each tire [9]
· · ·
,
4 · LT

Forward Acceleration / Deceleration (Braking): Similar to cornering, load transfer due to forward

acceleration and braking uses the same principles (see Equation 2.2). The calculation of the total load

transfer to each wheel in a combined scenario must be calculated as a vector sum (i.e. both forward and

lateral acceleration).

Equation 2.2 – Weight transfer from longitudinal acceleration / deceleration for each tire [10]
· ·
,
4 · LW

2.1.2 Aerodynamic Drag

Aerodynamic Drag (FA): Aerodynamic drag consists of primarily shape drag and skin friction. Shape drag

is air resistance as the vehicle motion pushes air out of the way. High pressure tends to build up at the

5
front of the vehicle, and low pressure at the back [11]. This pressure differential directly opposes the

vehicle motion. Skin friction occurs due to the speed differential between air near the surface of the

vehicle, and that which is further away [12]. The air resistance force increases exponentially, due to the

squared velocity term. Additional terms include density of air (ρAIR), frontal area of the vehicle (AF), and

the drag coefficient CD, which is often determined experimentally.

Equation 2.3 – Aerodynamic drag [13]

A · · · ·

2.1.3 Rolling Resistance

Rolling Resistance (FR): Rolling resistance is primarily due to the deformation of vehicle tires as it rolls

along a surface. The force generated to resist motion is dependent both on the vehicle speed, through

the rolling resistance coefficient (kR) and angle of inclination (α) [14].

Equation 2.4 – Rolling resistance coefficient for passenger car on concrete road [15]

0.01 1 where V = speed of vehicle in km/h

Equation 2.5 – Conversion from grade to angle of inclination

G
α tan

Equation 2.6 – Rolling resistance [16]

· · ·

2.1.4 Grading Resistance

Grade Resistance (FG): This resistance component is considered when a vehicle moves up or down a

sloped surface. When determining maximum power requirements, the uphill components are of greatest

interest.

Equation 2.7 – Grading resistance [17]

· ·

6
2.2 Types of HEV Power Trains

There are several types of traditional HEV power trains, each with inherent benefits and deficiencies

which depend on the operating requirements. The most common systems are described as follows:

2.2.1 Parallel Hybrid Electric Power Trains

In a parallel hybrid, both the ICE and electric motor are capable of providing power to the driveshaft at the

same time. This is usually accomplished through torque-splitting or speed-matching transmissions. The

Toyota Prius, for example, uses a planetary gear module that acts as both a mechanical torque splitting

device and a continuously variable transmission [18]. The smaller ICE is operating in a more efficient

bandwidth of revolutions, maintaining power output without sacrificing fuel economy. In contrast to the

series power train system, a separate electrical generator is not required to transmit power from the ICE.

Refer to Figure 7.3 for a general parallel system power train schematic.

2.2.2 Series Hybrid Electric Power Trains

In a series hybrid, power is transmitted from the ICE / generator to the electric motor via electronic

elements. This property allows great flexibility in the distribution of components throughout the vehicle. A

similar approach was adopted in the first generation of Honda Insight vehicles [19] In general, a series

power train requires a small ICE and no transmission, since the electric motor is capable of operating

over the required bandwidth of speeds. However, the size of the electric motor and battery pack tends to

be larger than those found in a parallel power train. Refer to Figure 7.4 for a general series system power

train schematic.

2.2.3 Combined Hybrid Electric Power Trains

A combined hybrid (or series / parallel) arrangement is capable of diverting a portion of the ICE power

from driving the wheels to charging the battery, while in motion. Refer to Figure 7.5 for a general

combined system power train schematic.

7
2.3 HEV Modes of Operation (Parallel Power Train)

To illustrate the various modes of operation for a HEV power train, only the parallel system is detailed in

this section. The operation of a parallel powered HEV can be broken down into five general modes:

1. Electric power only (see Figure 2.2): Power is provided solely by the electrical system from the

stored energy device. Electric motors generally supply excellent low rpm torque; this mode is ideally

suited for propulsion between 0 and 15 mph. During this time, the engine is left idle or turned off, and

should be decoupled from the transmission to reduce unnecessary workload on the driveshaft [20].

Figure 2.2 – Mode 1 – electric power only (parallel system)

2. ICE power only (see Figure 2.3): Power is provided solely by the ICE, with no assistance from the

electrical system. With the engine sized to sustain maximum cruise conditions, this mode is generally

utilized for all constant speed conditions between 15 mph and top vehicle speed [21]

Electrical
System
Wheel

Engine

Figure 2.3 – Mode 2 – ICE power only (parallel system)

8
3. Battery charging (see Figure 2.4): Power is provided solely by the ICE in this mode. However, when

operating below its maximum power output, the remaining available load can be used to recharge the

energy storage device in the electrical system. This scenario is ideally suited for urban driving cycles,

when the engine is operating well under maximum power and continually depletes its stored energy

during starts. A secondary benefit of this feature is that it keeps the engine operating close to its

power level of maximum efficiency, further increasing fuel economy [22].

Electrical
System
Wheel

Engine

Figure 2.4 – Mode 3 – battery charging (parallel system)

4. Acceleration (see Figure 2.5): Power is provided by both the ICE and the electrical system, through

stored energy, during periods of acceleration. Since the ICE is generally sized to meet the power

requirements for maximum cruise speed only, additional power is required from the electrical system

during hill climbing and hard acceleration (e.g. city or highway passing) [23].

Electrical
System
Wheel

Engine

Figure 2.5 – Mode 4 – acceleration (parallel system)

9
5. Braking (see Figure 2.6): Kinetic energy from the moving wheel is recovered by the electrical system

for recharging and storage. Most commonly used is a regenerative braking system. The amount of

energy that can be recovered is generally limited by the braking load factor, as well as the maximum

charge rate of the storage medium. During braking, the ICE is brought to idle or turned off completely

[24].

Electrical
System
Wheel

Engine

Figure 2.6 – Mode 5 – regenerative braking (parallel system)

The power and speed requirements for a typical urban driving cycle are shown in Figure 2.7. The driving

cycle adequately describes all five modes of operation for a parallel HEV. From 0 to 15 km/h, power is

supplied solely by the electric motor through energy delivered by the onboard batteries (mode 1). If

accelerating slowly above 15 km/h, the ICE alone would have sufficient power to bring the vehicle to 70

km/h (mode 2). However, if aggressive acceleration was required, the power train would operate in mode

4 over the range. When cruising at 70 km/h, the maximum available power from the ICE engine exceeds

the requirement for steady state. In this state, the electric motor will act as a generator to recharge the

batteries by using a portion of the available power gap on the ICE (mode 3). Finally, when braking, the

kinetic energy of the vehicle is partially recovered by the electric motor to recharge the battery (mode 5).

10
 80
70
Power required [kW] or Vehicle speed [km/h]

60
50
40
30
20
10 Vehicle speed
0 Power required
‐10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
‐20
‐30
‐40
‐50
‐60
Time [s]

Figure 2.7 – Typical urban driving cycle (vehicle power requirements vs. time) [25]

2.4 HEV Power Train Components

2.4.1 Internal Combustion Engine

Spark ignition engine (gasoline): The thermal efficiency of a spark ignition engine is thermodynamically

limited by the compression ratio (r), as shown in Equation 2.8. Most spark ignition engines typically

operate with a ratio between 9 and 10:1, and the value of the polytrophic exponent (k) can be

approximated by 1.3 for air/fuel mixtures [26]. The 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid, for example, has an ideal

thermal efficiency (η of 51%. Actual thermal efficiencies fall between 30% and 40% [27].

Equation 2.8 – Ideal thermal efficiency of a spark ignition engine [28]

, 1

The primary limiting factor at higher compression ratios is a phenomenon called “knock” or spontaneous

combustion of the air/fuel mixture. High octane gasoline is more resistant to knock [29].

11
Compression ignition engine (diesel): The thermal efficiency of a compression ignition engine is usually

greater than that of a spark ignition engine; typically in the region of 40 to 45%. Ignition occurs almost

instantaneously once fuel is injected, due to the high compression ratios. As shown Equation 2.9, the

efficiency increases with a higher compression ratio. For example, the 2009 Volkswagen Jetta TDI has a

compression ratio of 16.5:1 [30].

Equation 2.9 – Ideal thermal efficiency of a compression ignition engine [31]

, 1 ·
·
where rc cut‐off ratio

In comparison, diesel engines are more fuel efficient and have a longer engine life than gasoline

counterparts, resulting in reduced operating costs. However, the engine cost is generally more

expensive, and experiences greater noise and vibration during running. The fuel itself is also less readily

available than gasoline and is currently higher in unit cost [32].

In recent years, several improvements have been made to reduce some of the shortcomings of diesel

engines. Direct injection devices improve efficiency and reduce emissions, while catalytic converters burn

soot and cut down on released particulate matter [33].

A comparison between gasoline and diesel powered vehicles can be found in Table 7.1. The data

contained within this table will provide the basis for the engine type selected in Section 4.4.1. Several

findings of note are:

• CO2 emissions, fuel consumption, minimum acceleration time (0-100 km/h): diesel superior to

gasoline

• Maximum engine power output: gasoline superior to diesel

12
2.4.2 Transmission

Continuously variable transmission (CVT): A continuously variable transmission provides a continuously

varying gear ratio between an upper and lower limit. This is achieved most commonly through a belt

slotted between two pulleys. As the separation distance between the pulleys is changed, the effective

diameter changes depending on their slope of depth [34]. Until recently, the use of this type of

transmission was limited due to poor contact between the belt and pulley surfaces. Improvements in CVT

design now make them an efficient and effective component for HEVs [35]. When a CVT is paired with

an ICE, the engine can remain in its most efficient range of operation, depending on the amount of

acceleration required. On a human interactions level, the jerk or change in acceleration associated with

shifting gears on manual or automatic transmissions is all but eliminated. This represents a significant

change for passengers to become accustomed to.

2.4.3 Electric Motor

The electric motor is responsible for transforming stored or converted energy into useable shaft work. It is

commonly placed in series with the ICE along the same crank shaft, or in parallel through power

transmission to the output shaft via gear, belt or chain systems [36]. Motor types include brushed,

brushless, induction, and switched reluctance. The total motor efficiency generally range between 85 and

95% [37]

2.4.4 Energy Storage Device

In an HEV application, the energy storage device should be capable of high bursts of power to

compliment ICE during acceleration. It should also be able to supply energy during low speed driving,

and power vehicle auxiliaries at low speed or at standstill [38].

Batteries: There are a variety of variety of battery types available, ranging from nickel-cadmium (NiCd),

nickel-metal-hydride (NiMH), lead-acid, and lithium-ion (Li-ion). In all cases, only a portion of brake

energy can be absorbed, since most batteries have poor power acceptance capability (i.e. ability to

13
recharge at high rates of power). This can be addressed by carrying a higher volume of batteries (at a

weight penalty cost), or using a different system (more efficient form of energy storage) [39]. The

operating temperature will also impact battery properties. In selecting a battery, features such as energy

density, cycle life, charge time, load current, cell voltage, and safety should be considered (see list below)

[40]. There are several alternatives to batteries, including flywheels and ultra-capacitors. However, these

remain impractical to supply the necessary power over a typical urban commute [41].

A comparison between various battery types can be found in Table 7.2. This data contained within this

table will provide the basis for the engine type selected in Section 4.4.3. Several findings of note are:

• Specific energy (greatest to lowest): Lithium-ion, NiMH, NiCd, lead-acid

• Cycle life (greatest to lowest): NiCd, NiMH, lead-acid, Li-ion

• Fast charge time (quickest to slowest): NiCd, Li-ion, NiMH, lead-acid

2.4.5 Regenerative Braking

During cruise, spare power capacity is used to recharge the energy storage device. Instead of simply

dissipating the kinetic energy during braking, a regenerative braking device is used to absorb and store it

(recharging the energy storage device). An electrical generator recovers the kinetic energy, and also

provides braking resistance load to the wheels [42], which is described mathematically in Equation 2.10.

Equation 2.10 – Energy absorbed during braking [43]

· where FB braking force

It should be noted that while the electric motor, operating in generator mode, is capable of recovering up

to 100% of its maximum rated power in electrical energy, the amount of energy recovered is usually

limited by the charge rate of the battery. In reality, only approximately 40% of the available kinetic energy

can be stored by the battery during a typical braking manoeuvre, as represented by Figure 2.8 [44].

14
 60

50

40
Brake Force [kN]

30
Mechanical
20 Regenerative

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
% of maximum brake force

Figure 2.8 – Mechanical vs. regenerative brake force

2.5 Vehicle Performance Theory

2.5.1 Vehicle Performance Parameters

Maximum Vehicle Cruise Speed (Vc,max): The power required at the maximum vehicle cruising speed is

determined by adding the power requirements of aerodynamic, rolling, and grading resistance terms at

the maximum vehicle speed. The transmission efficiency is conservatively assumed to be approximately

90% [45]. Therefore, the total required power train output is calculated as:

Equation 2.11 – Engine power required for maximum vehicle cruise

, ·

15
Acceleration Performance: The power required to achieve a specified acceleration is calculated

according to Equation 2.12. To achieve this, data on the ICE and electric motor power profile is required.

Equation 2.12 – Engine power required for acceleration

. · ·
∆ ∆

Tractive effort (Ft): During slip conditions on a road surface, the vehicle must be designed for a minimum

gripping force or tractive effort according to Equation 2.13. Table 7.3 details various tractive effort

coefficients, depending on the road surface type.

Equation 2.13 – Maximum allowable tractive effort from tire-ground contact [46]
· · Where tractive effort coefficient

2.5.2 HEV Fuel Economy and Emissions

Fuel Economy: There are many factors that contribute to the overall fuel economy of a vehicle. Some

vehicle properties, such as aerodynamics, weight, and rolling resistance, contribute to the required size of

a HEV power train. The following describes the effect of a parallel power train system and its

components on fuel economy:

1. High average engine efficiency [47]

• Smaller engine size used to meet vehicle maximum cruise speed requirements for an

extended period of time (i.e. 150 km/hr).

• Fuel is shut off during idle, deceleration, and low speed operation (i.e. first 10 km/hr electric

only).

• Energy saving is countered by charging the battery at higher engine loads. The net gain can

be positive, since the ICE operates at high efficiency at the charging speed. Conversely, the

net gain is offset by the reduction in actual power transmission to the wheels during charging.

16
 One option is to declutch the engine, thereby lowering the work required during electric only

operation [48].

• Ideal to match the highest charge efficiency speed to high efficiency band of ICE speed.

• During hard acceleration, additional energy is supplied by electric motor when ICE goes

beyond the highest efficiency point.

2. Transmission efficiency [49]

• When ICE alone powers the driveshaft, the transmission efficiency is equal to the differential

efficiency.

• Electric motor input is required for low speed and hard acceleration.

• Regenerative braking recovers energy to charge the energy storage device.

3. Vehicle weight

• Reducing the weight of all vehicle components, where possible, will lead to further weight

reduction in terms of lower power train requirements and vehicle rolling resistance [50].

Table 2.1 – Relative impact of vehicle components on fuel economy [51]

Parameter Relative Impact (H = high, M = medium, L = low)

Vehicle rolling resistance M
Vehicle cross-sectional area H
Vehicle weight H
Transmission control strategy M
Gear steps and gear shift ratio coverage H
Transmission efficiency H
Engine efficiency H
Engine thermal management M
Engine and auxiliary inertias L
Wheel and driveline inertias L
Tyre rolling resistance L
Power for auxiliaries M
Emissions: Vehicle emission rates will vary depending on the type of engine, displacement, fuel used,

and overall power train efficiency [52]. Reduced fuel consumption will lead to reduced emissions output

17
through greater energy efficiency. Table 2.2 details the contribution of road vehicles relative to total

emissions in Ontario.

Table 2.2 – Emission contribution by road vehicles in Ontario (2005) [53]

Emission Type Contribution Notes

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 13%
Nitrous Oxide (NOX) 27%
Particulate Matter (PM35) 20% Entire transportation sector
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 46%
Sulphur Oxide (SOX) 3% Entire transportation sector

2.6 Industry Benchmarks: Production HEVs

In recent years, hybrid vehicle sales in the United States have increased dramatically (see Figure 7.6).

Figure 7.7 to Figure 7.9 compare several popular and successful HEV vehicles on the basis of power to

weight ratio, maximum range, and fuel economy [54].

2.7 Additional Design Considerations

Noise reduction and body stiffness: TEROCORE / TEROSON are epoxy based products that can be

applied to an interior cavity for structural reinforcement and noise absorption [55]. Potential uses include

between body panels and the interior passenger space, as well as in the firewall barrier to reduce engine

noise entering the cabin.

Fuel efficiency improvements: A regenerative braking system can be used to recover kinetic energy from

moving vehicle when slowing down; especially useful for inter-urban driving as opposed to intra-urban.

Reduce exhaust emissions: A catalytic converter can be used to reduce concentrations of exhaust

pollutants, such as CO2, NOx, and CO [56].

18
Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1 Overview of Approach

The overall objective is to develop a conceptual, computer-aided design of a hybrid vehicle, strictly limited

to the power train system and chassis. To achieve this from theoretical research and the literature base

already presented, the following approach will be adopted:

HEV design

• Determine loading, both static and dynamic on a vehicle structure during driving conditions.

• Select vehicle design characteristics and performance targets.

• Create mechanical / electrical power train diagram of hybrid system selected.

• Prepare CAD model of HEV chassis using SolidWorks.

• Import body model into ANSYS and carry out preliminary finite element modelling under static

and dynamic loading conditions.

• Select power train components and sizes.

• Prepare CAD model of critical components using SolidWorks.

• Include loads for component, passenger, and cargo placement within the vehicle. Analyse under

all static and dynamic conditions.

Analysis and optimization

• Document and summarize initial results from ANSYS modelling.

• Analyse and describe effects of dynamic loading on the chassis.

• Compare HEV to traditional ICE power train design through SolidWorks model.

• Calculate revised vehicle characteristics where applicable and describe trends through sensitivity

analysis.

19
3.2 Design Philosophy

The overall design philosophy of the HEV design revolves around the following key engineering

parameters.

Power train system

• Minimize weight, volume, fuel consumption, environmental impact, noise, and component cost

• Maximize specific power, durability, life span, maximum speed, efficiency

Chassis

• Minimize weight, volume, cross-sectional area, engineering stress, environmental impact, and

material cost

• Maximize modulus of elasticity (EM) to density (ρM) ratio

20
Chapter 4: HEV Design and Analysis

4.1 Design Characteristics and Performance Targets

In order to determine the load constraints on the chassis and the component size required for the power

train, target vehicle specifications must be set. These values are a representation of industry standards

for a mid-size sedan (see Table 4.1).

Table 4.1 – Target HEV design specifications [57]

Vehicle Specification Target Value

Auxiliary load 3 kW
Braking distance 40 m (100-0 km/h)
Curb mass 1300 kg
Drag coefficient 0.30
Frontal area 2.47 m2
Gross vehicle mass (passengers + cargo) 1700 kg (70 kg per person, 50 kg cargo)
Lateral acceleration 0.8 m/s2
Minimum acceleration time < 10.0 s (0-100 km/h)
Maximum sustained climb gradient > 5% (at 100 km/h)
Maximum vehicle cruise speed 160 km/h
Number of passengers 5
Transmission efficiency, 90%
Vehicle Range 1000 km
Battery state of charge (SOC) > 60%

Additional assumptions were made for the environmental and road conditions of the vehicle in operation,

as detailed in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 – Operating conditions for HEV vehicle

Operating Environment Target Value

Air density, ρAIR 1.2 kg/m3
Road gradient, G -5 to +5%
Temperature, Tamb -40 to 50 deg C

21
By entering these specifications into a design matrix, in conjunction with the vehicle dynamics equations

detailed in Section 2.1, an approximation of vehicle performance can be made. The HEV is required to

operate in both an inter-urban (city), and intra-urban (highway) environment. This will have visible impact

on the sizing and type of power train used (see Section 4.2 and 4.4).

An example of the power requirements at varying vehicle cruise speeds is shown in Figure 4.1. When

applied to the 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid, using specification data detailed in Appendix A, the system

power requirements are displayed below.

48.0
44.0
40.0
Power Required [kW]

36.0
32.0
28.0
24.0 Drag
20.0 Rolling
16.0
12.0 Total
8.0
4.0
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Vehicle Speed [km/h]

Figure 4.1 – Required power for 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid during vehicle cruise conditions
Note: Assuming = 0%, G = 0%

Several trends are apparent from this figure. Power requirements, while rising exponentially, remain

relatively low at urban driving speeds between 0 and 60 km/h. When reaching normal highway speeds of

100 km/h, the power plant requirements have nearly tripled. Therefore, it is desirable in the power train

design and selection to limit the vehicle top speed as low as realistically possible.

22
4.2 HEV Power Train Selection

The selected HEV power train, shown in Figure 4.2, is a modified version of the parallel system described

in Section 2.2.1.

Figure 4.2 – HEV power train schematic (based on parallel system)

While the general states of operation were explained in Section 2.3, there are several modifications to the

initial schematic. Firstly, engine and the electric motor are both attached to the same crankshaft. This

has the further benefit of reducing space, at a cost. During braking, the electric engine will act as a

generator to recover the vehicles’ kinetic energy. However, some of this energy would be lost due to the

pumping action within the ICE cylinders, even when the engine is off. To counter this effect, the exhaust

valves of the each cylinder should be left open, reducing cylinder pressure to atmospheric. This will

ensure that the ICE losses are kept to a minimum.

Secondly, the battery provides an energy reservoir to power the electric motor during low speed or

contribute during hard acceleration, as well as the auxiliary systems (i.e. air conditioner, lights). The

battery level should be maintained within a certain range of state of charge (SOC) or remaining energy

capacity. This will reduce degradation of the battery, especially when using Li-ion.

23
The HEV power train design logic is described in Table 4.3. This can be most efficiently controlled

through an electronic power control system, which can activate or de-activate components automatically.

Table 4.3 – HEV power train logic for electric motor and ICE

Driving Scenario Electric motor ICE Notes

Low speed (0-15 km/h) On Off -
Slow acceleration Off On -
Hard acceleration On On -
Cruise Off* On * Only functional as generator if battery
level is below minimum SOC
Braking On** Off ** Functions as generator to recover
kinetic energy and charge battery
Stop Off Off Power for auxiliaries comes from battery

4.3 Modelling Vehicle Performance

To adequately size the power train components, a mathematical model of the theoretical vehicle

performance is created. All of the design targets defined in Section 4.1 will be incorporated with the

vehicle performance theory presented in Section 2.5.1.

To establish a baseline scenario, the following assumptions are made: mass of the vehicle plus one

occupant is 1370 kg, maximum electric motor power is 15 kW, maximum ICE power is 65 kW, and the

road grade is 0%. From this input data, the trends in power and acceleration can be estimated using

Equation 2.11 and Equation 2.12.

24
 95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
Power [kW]

55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Vehicle speed [km/h]
Maximum Available Resistance Available for acceleration

Figure 4.3 – Power availability vs. vehicle speed distribution for baseline HEV power train design

With a combined output of 80 kW between the electric motor and ICE, the estimated acceleration time

from 0-100 km/h is 8.0 seconds. Similarly, the top speed of the vehicle is 170 km/h. Both of these results

exceed the targets of less than 10 seconds, and at least 160 km/h respectively.

To understand the effect of the key variables on acceleration and maximum speed performance, a

sensitivity analysis was performed at five varying values (including the baseline). The results are

summarized in Table 7.4 to Table 7.6.

To set the standard for the HEV power plant component sizes, the theoretical performance is calculated

in a reasonable worst case scenario. With a vehicle mass of 1700 kg and the road grade is 2%, the total

required maximum power need is 90 kW to satisfy both targets. The resulting estimated 0-100 km/h

acceleration time is 9.7 seconds and the top speed is 160 km/h. Therefore, a total power plant of 90 kW

will provide the basis for component sizing.

25
4.4 Component Selection and Sizing

The next phase of the HEV design process involves component selection and sizing. As detailed in the

power train schematic, the critical components are the ICE, transmission, electric motor, and battery. To

facilitate the selection of the ICE, the HEV design will incorporate an electric motor capable of a maximum

15 kW. Therefore, based on the 90 kW total power plant limit, the ICE should be capable of producing

approximately 75 kW.

4.4.1 Internal Combustion Engine

There are two practical candidates for selection of the internal combustion engine: gasoline and diesel

powered. Based on the design philosophy presented in Section 3.2 and engine data summarized in

Table 7.1, a scoring matrix is created with a logical weighting system (see Table 4.4).

Table 4.4 – ICE selection scoring matrix

Relative Scores
Parameter Weighting Gasoline Diesel
Weight 9 0.50 0.50
Volume 6 0.50 0.50
Fuel Consumption 9 0.43 0.57
Acceleration 9 0.57 0.43
Top Speed 6 0.50 0.50
Noise 6 0.51 0.49
Environmental Impact 6 0.40 0.60
Operating Cost 9 0.45 0.55

By calculating the weighted score of each parameter and performing a summation, the gasoline engine

received an index score of 29.02, while the diesel engine scored 30.98. As a result, the HEV design will

incorporate an engine powered by diesel fuel.

After reviewing a number of existing diesel engines existing on the market, the chosen ICE was the 1.9 L

TDIe power plant of the Audi A3. The engine specifications are outlined in Table 4.5.

26
Table 4.5 – 1.9 L TDIe diesel engine from the 2009 Audi A3 [58]

Parameter Units 2009 Audi A3 1.9 L TDIe engine

Engine type - CI (diesel)
Displacement L 1.896
Cylinders - 4
Maximum power output kW 77.3 kW
Rev @ max. power rpm 4000
Maximum torque N-m 250
Rev @ max. torque rpm 1900
CO2 emissions kg/km 0.119
City fuel economy L/100 km 4.9
Highway fuel economy L/100 km 3.2
Combined fuel economy L/100 km 3.7

4.4.2 Transmission

While more traditional technologies, such as the manual and automatic transmission are available, the

continuously variable transmission (CVT) has the greatest capability to optimize power train efficiency.

Since the CVT is able to vary the gear ratio between the crank shaft and the output shaft to any value

between set limits, it allows the power plant to run at its most efficient level depending on the power

requirements and driving load.

4.4.3 Battery

There are four practical candidates for selection of the battery type: lead-acid, Li-ion, Ni-Cd, and Ni-MH.

Based on the design philosophy presented in Section 3.2 and battery data summarized in Table 7.2, a

scoring matrix is created with a logical weighting system (see Table 4.6).

27
Table 4.6 – Battery selection scoring matrix

Relative Score
Parameter Weighting Lead-acid Li-ion Ni-Cd Ni-MH
Weight 9 0.15 0.45 0.17 0.23
Volume 6 0.22 0.08 0.28 0.42
Fuel Consumption 3 0.24 0.30 0.23 0.23
Power Availability 9 0.11 0.61 0.11 0.17
Environmental Impact 3 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.30
Durability 9 0.19 0.06 0.43 0.32
Capital Cost 9 0.85 0.59 0.87 0.68

By calculating the weighted score of each parameter and performing a summation, the Li-ion battery

received the best overall score of 18.01, followed by Ni-Cd with 16.81, Ni-MH with 16.74, and lead-acid

with 14.44. As a result, the HEV design will incorporate a Li-ion battery pack.

From Table 7.2, the key parameters for Li-ion batteries are specific energy (150 Wh/kg) and energy

density (360 MJ/m3). The maximum energy consumption from the electric motor (18 kW) and auxiliary

(kW) load is a total of 18 kW. If 100 kg of batteries were used, the available energy would by 15,000 Wh,

which is equivalent to 54 MJ. Since the minimum state of charge is 60%, only 40% of the batteries

capacity should remain available for discharge (21.6 MJ). Therefore, the battery can be drained at a

maximum load of 18 kW for 1200 seconds or 20 minutes before needing to be recharged. This does not

include energy recovery from regenerative braking, which would further delay recharging. Similarly, the

battery pack volume is 0.056 m3.

4.5 Chassis Design

The creation of a conceptual chassis design constitutes the second component of the HEV design. The

purpose of a chassis is to support the major power train components, as well as support and protect the

occupants and cargo of the vehicle.

28
A space frame chassis was adopted for this design for proper distribution of structural strength throughout

the vehicle. All members were of a tubular cross-section (outer diameter 0.1 m) and were modeled in

ANSYS using PIPE16. Also, the material selected for the chassis was aluminum (Al 2014-T6) for its high

elastic modulus (73 GPa) and low density (2790 kg/m3). In order to best assess the stresses on the

chassis, it was constrained near the center of gravity along the bottom framing (key point 30 as shown in

Figure 7.10).

Six different types of loads were considered (see Figure 7.10 and Figure 7.11):

1. Reaction load from tires (evenly distributed across key points 11, 16, 40, and 47)

2. Engine, electric motor, and transmission (evenly distributed across key points 11, 16, and 63)

3. Passengers (evenly distributed across key points 58, 59, 60, 61, and 62)

4. Battery (evenly distributed across key points 60, 61 and 62)

5. Cargo (key point 64)

6. Fuel tank (key point 64)

Variations to the reaction loads were made depending on the type of vehicle manoeuvring. The following

loading scenarios are applied to the chassis using ANSYS software:

1. Static loading (gross vehicle mass)

2. Static loading plus lateral acceleration (cornering)

3. Static loading plus longitudinal acceleration (forward acceleration)

4. Static loading plus longitudinal acceleration (braking)

5. Variations in tube thickness are tested at loading condition 1

29
With a total of seven different loading tests completed, the stress distribution diagrams can be found in

Figure 7.13 through Figure 7.16.

Table 4.7 – ANSYS chassis stress and displacement summary

Loading Tube Thickness Maximum Stress Minimum Stress Maximum Displacement

Scenario (m) (Pa) (Pa) (m)
1 0.025 3.84E+06 -1.15E+07 0.0021
2 0.025 5.14E+06 -1.18E+07 0.0021
3 0.250 3.60E+06 -1.16E+07 0.0023
4 0.025 1.65E+07 -1.61E+07 0.0040
5A 0.020 4.14E+06 -1.24E+07 0.0022
5B 0.015 4.74E+06 -1.42E+07 0.0026
5C 0.010 6.12E+06 -1.83E+07 0.0033

The yield stress of Al 2014-T6 is approximately 260 MPa in both tension and compression. From Table

4.7, it is clear that the maximum stress occurs in scenario 5C, with a maximum compressive strength at

18.3 MPa. Therefore, the minimum safety factor from the analysis is 14.2.

After the completion of the stress and displacement analysis, the chassis was remodelled in SolidWorks,

with the critical dimensions show in Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4 – HEV chassis design (side view)

30
Figure 4.5 – HEV design chassis dimensions (top view)

The estimated mass of the chassis is 780 kg, based on a total volume calculated through the SolidWorks

model and the density of Al-2014-T6. Also, the maximum frontal area was calculated to be 2.29 m2

based on the chassis dimensions.

4.6 Comparison of ICE and HEV Design

Below is a comparison of several critical vehicle properties between the 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid and the

standard gasoline powered Sedan. It is important to note the improved fuel economy and reduced power

output required for the hybrid, at the cost of a 6% weight increase.

31
Table 4.8 – Comparison of vehicle properties between hybrid and standard gasoline version

2009 Honda 2009 Honda

Parameter Unit Civic Hybrid Civic DX-G Difference
Maximum Gas Engine Power* W 69,350 104,398 -50.5%
Maximum Total Power* W 82,027 104,398 -27.3%
Curb Weight kg 1,310 1,229 6.2%
Gas Power to Weight Ratio* W/kg 53.0 85.0 -60.4%
Net Power to Weight Ratio* W/kg 62.6 85.0 -35.6%

Combined Fuel Economy L/100km 5.6 8.1 -44.8%

Tank Capacity L 46.6 50.0 -7.3%
Range* km 831 616 25.9%

Frontal Area* m2 2.15 2.15 0.0%

Notes: Based on data from Appendix A; * implies calculated values

To provide a more visual representation, a 3-D computer model of both the HEV design and traditional

ICE power train system was created in SolidWorks (see Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7). All major

components were approximated in scale and located within the vehicle to provide a reasonable front to

rear weight ratio.

32
Figure 4.6 – 3-D computer model of HEV power train design (top, front, isometric view)

Figure 4.7 – 3-D computer model of traditional ICE power train design (top, front, isometric)

33
4.7 Estimated HEV Performance and Specifications

The completion of both the vehicle performance modeling and chassis design permits a revised, final

summary of the HEV design parameters and characteristics in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9 – Revised HEV design specifications and performance

Battery Specification Revised Value

Minimum state of charge (SOC) 60%
Total energy capacity 54 MJ
Total mass 100 kg
Total volume 0.056 m3
Dimensions (length, width, height) 0.8, 0.35, 0.2 m

Chassis Specification Revised Value

Total mass 781 kg
Dimensions (length, width, height) 4.3, 1.7, 1.4 m
Wheelbase 3.1 m
Track 1.7 m

Power Plant Specification Revised Value

Electric motor (maximum power) 15 kW
ICE displacement 1.9 L
ICE (maximum power) 77.3 kW
Maximum total available power 92.3 kW

Vehicle Specification Revised Value

Frontal area 2.29 m2
Gross vehicle mass (passengers + cargo) 1700 kg (70 kg per person, 50 kg cargo)
Minimum acceleration time (0-100 km/h) 8.6 s (0% grade, gross mass)
Maximum sustained climb gradient 5% (at 100 km/h)
Maximum vehicle cruise speed 180 km/h (0% grade, gross mass)

34
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Future Work

5.1 Conclusions

Hybrid electric vehicles (or HEVs) represent an efficient compromise between traditional ICE vehicles and

EPVs. While land vehicles tend to be quite complex, the focus of this design was strictly on the power

train components and chassis. Through an understanding of the basic engineering principles of vehicle

dynamics, HEV power train types, and performance theory, a conceptual, computer-aided design was

developed, with the following results:

• Selection of a modified parallel power train, with the ICE and electric motor contained along a

single crank shaft.

• Use of a CVT to allow power plant operation in its most efficient range in all conditions.

• Selection of a diesel engine as the primary power source, for its excellent fuel economy and low

emissions; supplementary power provided by an electric motor; Li-ion batteries to supply power

for the electric motor and auxiliary systems.

• Creation of a 3-D computer model to show differences in ICE and hybrid electric vehicles.

• Performed analysis of chassis design through both static and dynamic loading scenarios, ranging

from cornering to braking.

• Revised target vehicle specifications based on selection criteria, to produce an HEV design

capable of achieving 0-60 acceleration in 8.6 s, and a maximum speed of 180 km/h.

35
5.2 Future Work

The level of detail in both the design and analysis is largely limited by time constraints and overall

complexity of the mechanical system. However, there is significant opportunity for further computer-aided

design and experimentation work based on the initial findings presented in this document.

• Since crash loading scenarios were not reviewed or analysed in this design, the chassis was

chosen not to be fully optimized. Further modifications to the chassis structure and re-distribution

of strengthening members would have been required. Exploration into different material types,

such as structural steels, titanium alloys, as well as the effect of cyclic loads and fatigue.

• To calculate a more accurate performance model of the HEV design, it is recommended that the

program be run through proprietary software, such as ADVISOR 2004. This would allow

estimates into fuel economy and general vehicle response to various drive cycles.

• Another area for further research is the aerodynamics of the car body. Minimization of both the

skin friction and shape drag would further reduce the power plant requirements, and boost vehicle

response and fuel economy.

36
Chapter 6: References

[1] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotive Engineers, 2005. Pp. 3

[2] Hodkinson, Ron and John Fenton. Lightweight Electric/Hybrid Vehicle Design. Oxford, UK:

Butterworth Heinemann, 2001.

[3] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotive Engineers, 2005. Pp. 3

[4] Statistics Canada. Sales of fuel used for road motor vehicles, by province and territory. 2008. 30

September 2008 <http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/trade37c.htm>.

[5] Honda. 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid Complete Specifications. 2008. 16 October 2008

<http://automobiles.honda.com>.

[6] Honda. 2009 Honda Civic Sedan Complete Specifications. 2008. 16 October 2008

<http://automobiles.honda.com>.

[7] Adams, Herb. Chassis Engineering: Chassis Design, Building, and Tuning for High Performance

Handling. HPBooks, 1993. Pp. 8

[8] Adams, Herb. Chassis Engineering: Chassis Design, Building, and Tuning for High Performance

Handling. HPBooks, 1993. Pp. 8

[9] Adams, Herb. Chassis Engineering: Chassis Design, Building, and Tuning for High Performance

Handling. HPBooks, 1993. Pp. 9

[10] Adams, Herb. Chassis Engineering: Chassis Design, Building, and Tuning for High Performance

Handling. HPBooks, 1993. Pp. 9

[11] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 25

[12] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 25

37
[13] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 88

[14] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 33

[15] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 33

[16] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 33

[17] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 26

[18] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[19] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 25

[20] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[21] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[22] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[23] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[24] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 21

[25] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 91

[26] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 60

38
[27] Cengel, Yunus A. and Michael A. Boles. Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach (5th

Edition). New York, United States: McGraw-Hill, 2006. Pp. 496

[28] Cengel, Yunus A. and Michael A. Boles. Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach (5th

Edition). New York, United States: McGraw-Hill, 2006. Pp. 501

[29] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 60

[30] Volkswagen. Volkswagen Jetta Technical Specifications. 2008. 28 October 2008

<http://www.vw.ca/vwcms_publish/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/en_ca_on/models/jetta/jett

a_sedan/technical_specifications.detail.0.1.html>.

[31] Cengel, Yunus A. and Michael A. Boles. Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach (5th

Edition). New York, United States: McGraw-Hill, 2006.

[32] How Stuff Works. Introduction to How Diesel Engines Work. 2008. 23 September 2008

<http://auto.howstuffworks.com/diesel.htm>.

[33] How Stuff Works. Introduction to How Diesel Engines Work. 2008. 23 September 2008

<http://auto.howstuffworks.com/diesel.htm>.

[34] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 271

[35] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 271

[36] Hodkinson, Ron and John Fenton. Lightweight Electric/Hybrid Vehicle Design. Oxford, UK:

Butterworth Heinemann, 2001.

[37] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 35

[38] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 35

[39] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 35

39
[40] Buchmann, Isidor. The Cost of Battery Power - will rechargeables replace the primary battery?

December 2001. 20 December 2008 <http://www.buchmann.ca/article20-page1.asp>.

[41] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 57.

[42] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 35

[43] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 89

[44] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 89

[45] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 92

[46] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004.

[47] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 3

[48] Hodkinson, Ron and John Fenton. Lightweight Electric/Hybrid Vehicle Design. Oxford, UK:

Butterworth Heinemann, 2001.

[49] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 3

[50] German, John M. Hybrid Gasoline-Electric Vehicle Development. Warrendale, PA: Society of

Automotiv Engineers, 2005. Pp. 3

[51] Miller, John M. Propulsion Systems for Hybrid Vehicles. London, UK: The Institute for Electrical

Engineers, 2004. Pp. 103

[52] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004.

[53] Ontario Ministry of the Enivronment. Air Quality in Ontario (2006 Report). 2006. 21 October 2008

<http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/en/publications/air/index.php#4>.

40
[54] MSN Auto Guide. MSN Autos. 2008. 12-28 October 2008 <http://autos.msn.com/>.

[55] Henkel. Teroson. 2008. 26 September 2008

<http://www.henkel.com/cps/rde/xchg/henkel_com/hs.xsl/5497_COE_HTML.htm?countryCode=c

om&BU=ut&parentredDotUID=8000000380&redDotUID=8000000380&brand=000000038M&para

m1=history>.

[56] Nice, Karim and Charles W. Byant. How Catalytic Converters Work. 2007. 30 September 2008

<http://auto.howstuffworks.com/catalytic-converter.htm>.

[57] Miller, John M. Propulsion Systems for Hybrid Vehicles. London, UK: The Institute for Electrical

Engineers, 2004.

[58] Audi. Audi Models and Pricing. 10 February 2009

<http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/new_cars/Pricing_and_Specifications.html>.

[59] Ontario Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure. Fuel Prices. 27 January 2009. 2 March 2009

<http://www.mei.gov.on.ca.wsd6.korax.net/english/energy/oilandgas/index.cfm?page=fuel-

prices>.

[60] Adams, Herb. Chassis Engineering: Chassis Design, Building, and Tuning for High Performance

Handling. HPBooks, 1993. Pp. 2

[61] Hybrid Cars Website. August 2008 Dashboard. 2008. 1 October 2008

<http://www.hybridcars.com/market-dashboard/august-2008-dashboard-undersupply-and-

discouraged-buyers-24953.html>.

[62] Volkswagen. Volkswagen Jetta Technical Specifications. 2008. 28 October 2008

<http://www.vw.ca/vwcms_publish/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/en_ca_on/models/jetta/jett

a_sedan/technical_specifications.detail.0.1.html>.

[63] United States Department of Energy. Car Comparison. 12 January 2009

<http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm>.

[64] Buchmann, Isidor. The Cost of Battery Power - will rechargeables replace the primary battery?

December 2001. 20 December 2008 <http://www.buchmann.ca/article20-page1.asp>.

[65] Jefferson, C.M. and R.H. Barnard. Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion. Southampton, UK: Wit Press, 2002.

Pp. 49

41
[66] Buchmann, Isidor. The Cost of Battery Power - will rechargeables replace the primary battery?

December 2001. 20 December 2008 <http://www.buchmann.ca/article20-page1.asp>.

[67] Ehsani, Mehrad, et al. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals,

Theory, and Design. London, UK: CRC Press, 2004. Pp. 31

[68] Honda. 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid Complete Specifications. 2008. 16 October 2008

<http://automobiles.honda.com>.

[69] Honda. 2009 Honda Civic Sedan Complete Specifications. 2008. 16 October 2008

<http://automobiles.honda.com>.

42
Chapter 7: Figures and Tables

7.1 Figures

1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
Price [$ CAN /L]

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

Regular Unleaded Diesel

Figure 7.1 - Average price of regular unleaded gasoline in Ontario [59]

Figure 7.2 – Typical tire performance curve (lateral vs. vertical load) [60]

43
Figure 7.3 – Parallel hybrid power train system

Figure 7.4 – Series hybrid power train system

44
Figure 7.5 – Combined hybrid power train system (series-parallel)

Number of HEVs sold

Year

Figure 7.6 – Historical HEV sales in United States [61]

45
 160.0
Net Power to Weight Ratio [W/kg]
140.0

120.0 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid

100.0 2006 Honda Insight
80.0 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid
60.0 2009 Toyota Prius

40.0 2009 Nissan Altima Hybrid

20.0 2009 Lexus GS 450h

0.0
Vehicle

Figure 7.7 – Net power to weight ratio for selected production HEVs

1200
1100
1000
900 2009 Lexus GS 450h
800
Range [km]

2009 Ford Escape Hybrid

700
600 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid
500
400 2009 Toyota Prius
300
2006 Honda Insight
200
100 2009 Nissan Altima Hybrid
0
Vehicle

Figure 7.8 – Vehicle range for selected production HEVs

60
55
50
45
Fuel Economy [mpg]

2006 Honda Insight

40
35 2009 Toyota Prius
30 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid
25
2009 Nissan Altima Hybrid
20
15 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid
10
2009 Lexus GS 450h
5
0
City Highway

Figure 7.9 – Fuel economy for selected production HEVs

46
Figure 7.10 – ANSYS chassis model key point locations

Figure 7.11 – ANSYS chassis model loading for condition 1

47
 (Initial – black, displaced – blue)

Figure 7.12 – ANSYS chassis model displacement under condition 1

Figure 7.13 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 1

48
Figure 7.14 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 2

Figure 7.15 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 3

49
Figure 7.16 – ANSYS chassis model stress distribution under condition 4

50
7.2 Tables

Table 7.1 – Comparative engine specifications for gasoline and diesel powered vehicles [62] [63]

2009 Volkswagen Jetta 2009 Volkswagen Jetta

Parameter Units 2.0L TSI 2.0L TDI
Engine type - SI (gasoline) CI (diesel)
Displacement L 1.984 1.968
Cylinders - 4 4
Bore mm 82.5 81
Stroke mm 92.8 95.5
Compression ratio - 9.6 16.5
Valves per cylinder - 4 4
Maximum power output kW 147 125
Rev @ max. power rpm 5100-6000 4000
Maximum torque N-m 281 319
Rev @ max. torque rpm 1700-5000 1750-2500
Acceleration (0-100 km/h) s 7.2 8.4
Top speed km/h 209 209
CO2 emissions kg/km 0.181 0.143
City fuel economy L/100 km 10.7 8.1
Highway fuel economy L/100 km 8.1 5.9
Combined fuel economy L/100 km 9.3 6.9
Operating Cost $/42 km 2.1 1.7
Curb weight distribution - 61/39 61/39
Curb weight kg 1460 1465
Drag coefficient - 0.31 0.31

51
Table 7.2 – Typical performance attributes of various battery types [64] [65] [66]

Parameter Units Lead-Acid Li-ion Ni-Cd Ni-MH

Capacity (D cell) A-h 2.5 7.5 4 6.5
Cell voltage (D cell) V 2 3.6 1.2 1.2
$CAN/
Cost kWh 8.5 24 7.5 18.5
Cycle life (@ 80% DOD) cycles 900 300 2000 1500
3
Energy density MJ/m 960 360 1200 1800
Fast charge time hrs 8 to 16 1 1 2 to 4
Max C rate (D cell) C 40 40 25 11
Max Operating Temp deg C 60 60 60 60
Min Operating Temp deg C -20 -20 -40 -20
Normal charge time h 8 5 5 10
Normal life yrs 4.5 5 5 5
Power capacity Wh 5 27 4.8 7.8
Self discharge (month) % 5 10 20 30
Specific energy Wh/kg 50 150 55 75
Specific power W/kg 150 500 200 200
Storage efficiency % 77 95 75 75
Low toxicity,
Toxic lead can be Relatively low
and acids, disposed of in Highly toxic, toxicity,
harmful to small harmful to should be
Toxicity - environment quantities environment recycled

Table 7.3 – Average values for tractive effort coefficient [67]

Surface Peak Values, µp Sliding Values, µs

Asphalt and concrete (dry) 0.8 – 0.9 0.75
Concrete (wet) 0.8 0.7
Asphalt (wet) 0.5 – 0.7 0.45 – 0.6
Gravel 0.6 0.55
Earth road (dry) 0.68 0.65
Earth road (wet) 0.55 0.4 – 0.5
Snow (hard packed) 0.2 0.15
Ice 0.1 0.07

52
Table 7.4 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing road grade

Acceleration Time (s)

Grade
[%] 0‐60 km/h 60‐100 km/h 0‐100 km/h 100‐120 km/h Top Speed [km/h]
‐5 2.4 3.9 6.6 3.1 205
‐2 2.6 4.7 7.4 3.8 185
0 2.7 5.3 8.0 4.5 170
2 2.8 6.1 8.8 5.5 160
5 3.1 7.8 10.5 8.4 140

Table 7.5 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing vehicle mass

Acceleration Time (s)

Mass [kg] 0‐60 km/h 60‐100 km/h 0‐100 km/h 100‐120 km/h Top Speed [km/h]
1300 2.5 5.0 7.5 4.2 170
1400 2.7 5.4 8.2 4.6 170
1500 3.0 5.8 8.8 5.0 170
1600 3.2 6.3 9.4 5.4 165
1700 3.4 6.7 10.1 5.8 165

Table 7.6 – Acceleration and maximum speed performance with changing maximum available power

Acceleration Time (s)

Power [kW] 0‐60 km/h 60‐100 km/h 0‐100 km/h 100‐120 km/h Top Speed [km/h]
60 3.8 7.8 11.6 7.3 150
70 3.2 6.3 9.5 5.6 160
80 2.7 5.3 8.0 4.5 170
90 2.4 4.6 7.0 3.8 180
100 2.1 4.1 6.2 3.2 185

53
Appendix A: Comparison of 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid and Standard
Gasoline Version [68] [69]

Parameter Unit 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid 2009 Honda Civic DX-G
Vehicle Type Hybrid Standard
Base Retail Price (MSRP) $ (CAN) $ 27,350.00 $ 19,480.00

Gas Engine
Displacement cm3 1339 1799
Cylinders 4 4
Valves per Cylinder 2 4
Valve Configuration SOHC SOHC
Bore cm 7.29 8.10
Stroke cm 8.00 8.74
Compression Ratio 10.8:1 10.5:1
Horsepower kW 69.4 104.4
Torque N-m 120.7 173.5

Electric Engine
Peak Horsepower kW N/A N/A
Peak Torque N-m 166.8 N/A
Output V 158 N/A

Net Power
Peak Horsepower kW 82.0 104.4
Peak Torque N-m 166.8 173.5

Battery
Type NiMH N/A
Peak Horsepower kW N/A N/A
Voltage V 158 N/A

Fuel Economy
City L/100 km 4.7 8.2
Highway L/100 km 4.3 5.7
Combined L/100 km 5.6 8.1
Tank Capacity L 46.6 50.0

54
Parameter Unit 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid 2009 Honda Civic DX-G
Transmission
Type CVT AT
Final Drive Ratio 4.94 4.44
0.525 (5 ), 0.721 (4th),
th

Gear Ratio (high) 0.421 1.022 (3rd), 1.534 (2nd)

Gear Ratio (low) 2.526 2.666 (1st)

Vehicle Properties
Wheelbase mm 2700 2700
Length mm 4504 4504
Width mm 1752 1752
Height mm 1430 1435
Front Track mm 1501 1499
Rear Track mm 1529 1528
Ground Clearance mm 145 154
Passenger Volume L 2574 2574
Cargo Volume L 294 340
Curb Weight kg 1305 1239
Tires 195/65/R15 195/65/R15
Aerodynamic Drag (Cd) 0.28 0.31
Acceleration (0-60 mph) s 10 8.6

55
Appendix B: ANSYS Code for Chassis Loading Analysis

/title, Chassis Design – Standard loading, gross vehicle mass

/units, SI

/PREP7 ! Pre-processor stage

! Define keypoints (keypoint, x, y, z) [meters]

K, 1, 0.33,0,1.12
K, 2, 0.3,0.3,1.05
K, 3, 0.2,0.65,0.8
K, 4, 1.37,0,1.12
K, 5, 1.4,0.3,1.05
K, 6, 1.5,0.65,0.8
K, 7, 0.85,0,1.3
K, 8, 0.85,0.3,1.25
K, 9, 0.85,0.55,1.10
K, 10, 0.3,0,1.05
K, 11, 0.3,0,0.4
K, 12, 0,0.83,-1.30
K, 13, 0.3,0,0
K, 14, 1.4,0,1.05
K, 15, 0.85,0,0
K, 16, 1.4,0,0.4
K, 17, 1.7,0.83,-1.30
K, 18, 1.4,0,0
K, 19, 0,0,0
K, 20, 0,0.8,0
K, 21, 0.85,0.8,0
K, 22, 1.7,0,0
K, 23, 1.7,0.8,0
K, 24, 0.14,1.29,-0.64
K, 25, 0.15,1.4,-1.3
K, 26, 0,0,-1.3
K, 27, 1.56,1.29,-0.64
K, 28, 1.55,1.4,-1.3
K, 29, 1.7,0,-1.3
K, 30, 0.85,0,-1.3
K, 31, 0,0,-2.2
K, 32, 0.3,0,-2.2
K, 33, 0.85,0,-2.2
K, 34, 1.7,0,-2.2
K, 35, 0.1,1.28,-1.77
K, 36, 0,1,-2.2
K, 37, 0.85,1,-2.2
K, 38, 1.6,1.28,-1.77
K, 39, 1.7,1,-2.2
K, 40, 0.3,0,-2.6
K, 41, 0.1,0,-2.6
K, 42, 0.3,0,-2.7
K, 43, 0.45,0,-2.9
K, 44, 0.85,0,-3.0

56
K, 45, 1.25,0,-2.9
K, 46, 1.4,0,-2.7
K, 47, 1.4,0,-2.6
K, 48, 1.6,0,-2.6
K, 49, 1.4,0,-2.2
K, 50, 1.7,0.9,-2.85
K, 51, 0,0.9,-2.85
K, 52, 0.06,1.15,-1.30
K, 53, 1.64,1.15,-1.30
K, 54, 0.04,0.74,0.38
K, 55, 0.67,0.55,1.08
K, 56, 1.03,0.55,1.08
K, 57, 1.66,0.74,0.38
K, 58, 0.43,0,-0.65
K, 59, 1.27,0,-0.65
K, 60, 0.43,0,-1.75
K, 61, 1.27,0,-1.75
K, 62, 0.85,0,-1.75
K, 63, 0.85,0,0.60
K, 64, 0.85,0,-2.6

! Defines straight lines (line, start, end) [meters]

L, 19,20
L, 21,15
L, 22,23
L, 19,31
L, 22,34
L, 31,36
L, 34,39
L, 25,28
L, 26,30
L, 30,29
L, 30,15
L, 26,15
L, 33,37
L, 18,16
L, 16,14
L, 13,11
L, 11,10
L, 42,40
L, 40,32
L, 46,47
L, 47,49
L, 19,13
L, 13,15
L, 15,18
L, 18,22
L, 31,32
L, 32,33
L, 33,49
L, 49,34
L, 26,12
L, 29,17
L, 33,39

57
L, 37,34
L, 31,37
L, 36,33
L, 20,15
L, 19,21
L, 15,23
L, 21,22
L, 26,58
L, 58,15
L, 30,58
L, 19,58
L, 30,59
L, 59,22
L, 15,59
L, 59,29
L, 31,60
L, 60,30
L, 26,60
L, 60,33
L, 33,61
L, 61,29
L, 30,61
L, 61,34
L, 33,62
L, 62,30
L, 15,63
L, 63,7
L, 11,63
L, 63,16
L, 33,64
L, 64,44
L, 40,64
L, 64,47
L, 20,21
L, 21,23
L, 36,37
L, 37,39

! Defines curved lines (line, start, end, 3rd point) [meters]

Larc, 10,3,2
Larc, 14,6,5
Larc, 7,9,8
Larc, 20,3,54
Larc, 3,9,55
Larc, 23,6,57
Larc, 6,9,56
Larc, 20,25,24
Larc, 23,28,27
Larc, 10,7,1
Larc, 14,7,4
Larc, 36,43,51
Larc, 45,39,50
Larc, 42,44,43
Larc, 46,44,45

58
Larc, 36,25,35
Larc, 39,28,38
Larc, 12,25,52
Larc, 17,28,53

! Element definition

ET, 1, PIPE16 ! Element type; #1; straight elastic pipe element

R, 1, 0.1, 0.025 ! Real constant; #1; Outer diameter = 0.1 m, Thickness = 0.025m
MP, EX, 1, 7.3e10 ! Material property; #1; Young’s modulus = 7.3e10 Pa
LESIZE, ALL, , 1, 1,1,1 ! Divisions on unmeshed lines
LMESH, ALL ! Mesh all lines

FINISH ! Finish pre-processor

/SOLU ! Solution phase

DK, 30, ALL, 0 ! Apply constraints

! Apply loads [N]

FK, 11, FY, 2861 ! Standard driving condition (gross maximum weight)
FK, 16, FY, 2861
FK, 40, FY, 4169
FK, 47, FY, 4169
FK, 58, FY, -785
FK, 59, FY, -785
FK, 60, FY, -1112
FK, 61, FY, -1112
FK, 62, FY, -1112
FK, 63, FY, -1308
FK, 64, FY, -1472

SOLVE ! Solves system of equations

FINISH ! Finishes solutions

/POST1 ! Post-processing phase

ETABLE, Force, SMISC, 1 ! Creates a table of element axial forces

ETABLE, Stress, LS, 1 ! Creates a table of element stress values
ETABLE, Strain, LEPEL, 1 ! Creates a table of element strain values

PRRSOL, F ! List Reaction Forces

PLDISP, 2 ! Plot Deformed shape
PLNSOL, U, SUM, 0,1 ! Contour Plot of deflection

ETABLE, SAXL, LS, 1 ! Axial Stress

PRETAB, SAXL ! List Element Table
PLETAB, SAXL, NOAV ! Plot Axial Stress

59