Impact of Hybridization on Hydrogen Consumption …Impact of Hybridization on Hydrogen Consumption of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle 1Aditi Swarnkar, 2Jai Kumar Maherchandani 1Research

© 2018 JETIR September 2018, Volume 5, Issue 9 www.jetir.org (ISSN-2349-5162)

JETIR1809709 Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (JETIR) www.jetir.org 418

Impact of Hybridization on Hydrogen Consumption

of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle

1Aditi Swarnkar, 2Jai Kumar Maherchandani 1Research Scholar, 2Assistant Professor

1Department of Electrical Engineering, 1College of Technology and Engineering, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Engineering, Udaipur, India

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract : This paper presents the impact of hybridization on the hydrogen consumption of fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) by

comparing the fuel cell/battery (FC/BATT) and fuel cell/battery/supercapacitor (FC/BATT/SC) configurations in terms of

hydrogen consumption and overall fuel consumption. The frequency splitting operational state control strategy (FSOSCS) is used

for the energy management of both the configurations. Simulation is carried out in MATLAB/Simulink environment using

standard ECE-15 driving cycle. The results indicate that there is significant reduction in hydrogen consumption for FC/BATT/SC

in comparison to the FC/BATT configuration and also the overall fuel consumption is reduced for FC/BATT/SC configuration.

IndexTerms – Driving cycle, fuel cell electric vehicle, hydrogen consumption. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I. INTRODUCTION

In the modern world, the transportation sector accounts for the maximum energy consumption from the fossil fuel among all

other different energy sources. This is due to the fact that continues growing population has led to the increase in the number of

conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles resulting in the drastic change in the climatic conditions such as increase

in the CO2 emissions thereby resulting in the global warming. In this favor the worldwide Kyoto protocol (1997) and Paris

agreement (2015) was executed to reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions [1, 2]. Thus both government and automakers are

concerned to improve the transportation scenario [3]. Moreover the continuous depletion of fossil fuels and resulting environment

pollution has called an urgent need to explore the alternative source of energy. The fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) is one of the

most favorable and emerging vehicular technology which is comparable to the ICE in terms of performance, better efficiency and

zero greenhouse gas emission [4, 5, 6].

The fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) are gaining a tremendous attention in the vehicular transportation. In this regard, the

automakers like Honda have made a wide-scale commercialization of fuel cell electric vehicle a reality in countries like California

[7, 8]. The proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) is the most desirable type of fuel cell for electric vehicle applications

[9].The efficiency of fuel cell electric vehicle is high because of direct conversion of the chemical energy of hydrogen and oxygen

into the electrical energy without any combustion. The by-products produced due to this electrochemical reaction are clean i.e.

water and heat with no greenhouse gas emission [3]. Moreover the energy density of fuel cell is also high thus provides continues

supply of power for the longer duration.

However in order to become comparable with ICE, the efficiency and the zero greenhouse emission are not only the

comparison criteria. The power density and the dynamic response also plays major role in deciding an alternative source of

energy. Because of poor power density of fuel cell, FCEV lacks in these features. The slow electrochemical reaction occurring in

the fuel cell leading to the fuel cell starvation as a result of which fuel cell cannot withstand the sudden transients present in the

load. These transients greatly affect the catalyst present in the fuel cell thereby causing harm to health and lifetime of the fuel cell

[10, 11]. Moreover the fuel cell also cannot absorb the braking energy. Hybridization of fuel cell with battery or/and

supercapacitor as the secondary energy storage sources (ESSs) helps to effectively satisfy the sudden transient load demand with

improved dynamic response and also absorbs the braking energy. In such hybrid conditions fuel cell supplies steady state power

with reduced stress; battery having high energy density and supercapacitor having high power density operates when the sudden

load transients of the longer and shorter duration of time occurs respectively [12, 13]. The amount of power sharing between fuel

cell, battery and supercapacitor is controlled by the energy management strategy (EMS) [6, 11, 14-19].

The various hybrid combinations such as fuel cell/battery (FC/BATT), fuel cell/supercapacitor (FC/SC), and fuel

cell/battery/supercapacitor (FC/BATT/SC) have been studied by the various authors to define the behavior of the hybrid energy

sources (HESs) [5, 6, 20]. From these studies it is known that the key benefits of hybridization are reduced stress on the fuel cell,

increased lifetime of the fuel cell and battery, energy recovery through regenerative braking and hydrogen consumption reduction.

The reduction in the hydrogen consumption is vital for the widespread commercialization of FCEV. This is due to the fact that

though the hydrogen is abundant in nature, but not present in the usable form for the vehicular application. Moreover, the hydrogen

required for propulsion has many limitations such as cost of manufacturing, difficulty in generation and distribution of hydrogen as

a fuel. In addition to this the problem of on-board hydrogen storage is more complex [20, 21]. Hence the hybridization and the

selection of the best configuration play an important role in reducing the hydrogen consumption [5, 6, 11, 18, 22-25].

This paper focusses on the comparison between FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configuration in terms of the hydrogen

consumption and the overall fuel consumption to study the impact of hybridization on hydrogen consumption of FCEV. The

frequency splitting operational state control strategy (FSOSCS) is used for the energy management of both configurations. The

http://www.jetir.org/



simulation is carried out in Matlab/Simulink environment for Standard ECE-15 driving cycle. The paper is organized as follows:

section 2 presents the system description and modeling of the various components of hybrid system; section 3 explains the energy

management and control strategy; section 4 describes the simulation result and finally the section 5 summarizes the conclusion of

the presented work.

II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND MODELING

A. Description of Fuel cell/Battery and Fuel cell /Battery/Supercapacitor Configuration

The Fig. 1 shows the fuel cell/battery (FC/BATT) configuration in which the fuel cell is connected to the boost converter to

boost up the fuel cell voltage equal to the dc bus voltage. The battery is connected to the buck-boost converter to perform both

charging and discharging operation.

Fig. 1 Block diagram of FC/BATT configuration

In the FC/BATT/SC configuration, the fuel cell is connected to the boost converter, battery is connected to the buck-boost

converter and the supercapacitor is connected directly to the dc bus as shown in Fig. 2. It is noted that battery cannot be connected

directly to the dc bus so as to prevent the high current produced during charge and discharge cycle which greatly influence the

capacity of the battery. The supercapacitor is connected directly as it handles the transient load and allows the fast charging and

discharging operation, hence reducing the stress on the battery. Moreover, the supercapacitor is used frequently, thus the losses

related to the buck boost dc-dc converter is less [5, 22]. The supercapacitor also handles the sudden peak load demand which both

the fuel cell and battery cannot provide. In addition to this during braking supercapacitor absorbs the high charging current

quickly which otherwise the battery has to handle. Hence the fuel cell power is controlled by the boost converter and the battery

power is controlled by the buck-boost converter. The difference between the load power and sum of the power of the fuel cell and

battery is the amount of power delivered by the supercapacitor. Hence the supercapacitor power is controlled indirectly through

the battery buck-boost converter.

Fig. 2 Block diagram of FC/BATT/SC configuration.

B. Modeling of Fuel Cell

The fuel cell is modeled using MATLAB/Simulink. The following are the modeling equations [26]:

OC Nernst

E N E (1)

whereOC

E is the open circuit voltage of fuel cell, N is the number of cells in the stack, Nernst

E is the internal voltage of fuel

cell.

2 2

2

0.5

0ln

H O

Nernst

H O

P PRTE E

nF P

(2)

where0

E is the reference potential, 2

HP ,

2O

P and 2

H OP are the partial pressures of hydrogen, oxygen and steam respectively.

R denotes the gas constant, T is operating temperature (kelvin) and n is number of participating electrons, F is faraday constant.

The individual cell voltage cellV is calculated as shown below:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )cell OC cell act cell ohm cell conc cellV E V V V (3)

where ( )act cell

V is activation voltage drop,( )ohm cell

V is ohmic voltage drop, ( )conc cell

V is concentration voltage drop.




Hence overall output voltage of Fuel cell ( )FC

V is:

FC cell

V N V (4)

C. Modeling of Battery

To study the dynamic characteristics of Li-ion battery, a generic model of battery available in MATLAB/Simulink is used [27]. The discharging equation (i*>0) is given by:

0* expQ Q

Q it Q itBattE E K i K it A B it (5)

Similarly battery charging equation (i*<0) is expressed as:

whereBatt

E is nonlinear voltage (volts),0

E is constant voltage (volts), *i is filtered battery current (ampere), i is the

battery current (amperes), it is available battery charge (ampere-hours), A is the exponential region amplitude (volts), B is the

exponential region time constant inverse (Ah-1), *Q

Q itK i

is the polarization voltage, Q

Q itK

is the polarization resistance

(in ohms) and K is the polarization constant (in A.h-1).

D. Modeling of Supercapacitor

The generic model of supercapacitor is studied using MATLAB/Simulink Software. This model is based on the Stern model which combines both the Helmholtz and Gouy-Chapman model [17]. The capacitance of the supercapacitor or electrochemical double layer capacitors is given by:

1

1 1

H GC

CC C

(7)

0e i

H

N AC

d

(8)

2

0

sinh2 8

C C

GC

e e i

CFQ Q

N RT N A RT c

(9)

where H

C and GC

C are the Helmholtz and Gouy-Chapman capacitance (in farads), eN is the number of electrode layers, and

0 are the permittivity values (in farads per meter) of the electrolyte material and free space,

iA is the interfacial area between

electrodes and electrolyte (in square meters), d is the Helmholtz layer length (or molecular radius) (in meters), C

Q is the cell

electric charge (in coulomb), c is the molar concentration (in mol·m-3).

III. ENERGY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Energy management strategy plays an important role in effectively deciding the power shared by different energy sources of a

hybrid configuration. The Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show the control scheme of fuel cell, battery and supercapacitor for the FC/BATT and

FC/BATT/SC configuration respectively. The energy management is carried out with the help of frequency splitting operational

state control strategy (FSOSCS) for both FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configurations. DC bus regulation for both configurations

is also explained.

A. Frequency Splitting Operational State Control Strategy

The frequency splitting operational state control strategy (FSOSCS) is the hybrid control strategy which is the combination of

low pass filter and the operational state control strategy (OSCS). The low pass filter divides the load power into high and low

frequency component. Since the fuel cell has the dynamic limitation, it cannot handle the high frequency component of load

which are basically the transients present in the load. Thus the low frequency component of load power (PLLF) is send to the

OSCS for the control of fuel cell to produce steady state fuel cell reference power. The high frequency component is handled by

the battery in case of FC/BATT configuration and by both battery and supercapacitor in case of FC/BATT/SC configuration. Thus

it reduce the stress on fuel cell, as the fuel cell handles the steady state portion of load and the transient load demand is fulfilled

by energy storage sources (ESSs).

The frequency operational state control strategy (FSOSCS) determines the fuel cell reference power depending on the operating

conditions i.e. load power and battery state of charge (SOC) levels. The strategy used in the present work is the modification of

0.10* expQ Q

it Q Q itBattE E K i K it A B it (6)




those mentioned in [28, 29]. The FSOSCS includes certain constraints to avoid continuous changes in the fuel cell and battery

power which affects the system efficiency. The constraints are: minimum, optimum, and maximum fuel cell power values (Pfcmin,

Pfcopt, Pfcmax), the maximum battery charging power and maximum battery power values (Pbattchar, Pbattmax) and the minimum and

maximum battery SOC (SOCmin, SOCmax). Moreover the hysteresis control is used to avoid the continuous switching of states

when system operates at the boundary of the SOC levels [17].

Fig. 3 Control strategy of FC/BATT configuration.

Fig. 4 Control strategy of FC/BATT/SC configuration.




Thus the FSOSCS decide the corresponding states considering two operating conditions i.e. load power (PLLF) and battery SOC

levels based on which the fuel cell reference power (P*FC) is obtained as shown in Table 1. Both Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show that fuel

cell reference power (P*FC) so obtained is divided by the fuel cell voltage to produce fuel cell current (I*fc). The rate limiter sets

the maximum and minimum limits on this current that fuel cell can generate. The fuel cell reference current (Ifcref) is sent to the

fuel cell converter control where this reference current is compared with the actual fuel cell current to produce the duty cycle for

the fuel cell converter which controls the fuel cell.

Table 1 Various Operating State in Frequency Splitting Operational State Control Strategy

Operating conditions States Fuel cell reference power

(P*FC)

Battery SOC levels Load Power

High

(SOC > 90%)

PLLF<PFCmin 1 PFCmin

PFCmin≤PLLF<PFCmax 2 PLLF

PLLF≥ PFCmax 3 PFCmax

Normal

(60%≤SOC≤85%)

PLLF<PFCmin 4 PFCmin

PFCmin≤PLLF<PFCopt 5 PFCopt

PFCopt≤PLLF<PFCmax 6 PLLF

PLoad≥ PFCmax 7 PFCmax

Low

(SOC<60%)

PLoad<PFCmin 8 PLLF+Pbattchar

PFCmin≤PLLF<PFCopt 9 max(PLLF+Pbattchar,PFCopt)

PFCopt≤PLLF<PFCmax 10 PLLF+Pbattchar

PLLF≥ PFCmax 11 PFCmax

B. DC bus regulation in FC/BATT Configuration

In FC/BATT configuration the dc bus is maintained constant at reference voltage (270V) through the battery control. The

battery control is done by the controlling the duty cycle of the buck-boost converter. Hence the dc bus regulation generates the

duty cycle of the buck-boost converter. The Fig. 3 shows the dc bus regulation in which the reference dc bus voltage is compared

with the actual dc bus voltage to generate the error signal which is sent to the PI regulator to produce both charging and

discharging battery reference currents. This battery reference current is sent to battery converter control where it is compared with

the actual battery current; the error signal so produced is send to the PI regulator to generate the duty cycle of the battery

converter.

C. DC bus regulation in FC/BATT/SC Configuration

In FC/BATT/SC configuration, the supercapacitor is connected directly to the dc bus. So, the variation in dc bus voltage is

directly proportional to the change in the supercapacitor voltage as shown in Fig. 4. Thus supercapacitor is responsible for

maintaining the dc bus voltage constant. Hence in order to limit the voltage fluctuation in the dc bus, the supercapacitor voltage

limit is maintained in the range (270 to 280V). However due to the direct connection of supercapacitor to the dc bus, it is

controlled indirectly by the battery converter. Thus control of duty cycle of buck boost converter will control the supercapacitor

and its voltage (or dc bus voltage) along with battery. The supercapacitor is free to operate that means during acceleration it

delivers the power to the load as long as the voltage of supercapacitor is above the reference voltage (270 V). However when the

voltage across the supercapacitor is below the reference value then it immediately absorbs the energy from the battery and gets

recharged above its limit. Moreover the battery delivers the power to the load when the transient are present for the longer

duration and also when the fuel cell cannot supplies the steady state power. Similarly during braking supercapacitor is charged

first above its reference voltage thus the dc bus voltage regulator provides the negative current (i.e. the discharging current) to the

battery converter control which generates the duty cycle of battery converter to charge the battery.

IV. RESULTS

The comparison of hydrogen consumption between FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configurations is carried using ECE-15

driving cycle of 195 seconds duration with the help of MATLAB/Simulink.

The Fig. 5 shows that the FC/BATT/SC configuration consumes less hydrogen as there are two auxiliary sources (battery and

supercapacitor) to support the fuel cell. Moreover the low pass filter used in the frequency splitting operational state control

strategy (FSOSCS) allows the fuel cell to operate at steady state power. The supercapacitor is used to handle the transient load.

Thus, the supercapacitor reduces stress on the fuel cell and also prolongs the life of the battery as it handles fast charging and

discharging current cycle during acceleration and deceleration. Since FSOSCS has the restriction on the maximum battery

charging and delivering power, when sudden transients are above this maximum power then fuel cell has to power the transient

load in case of FC/BATT configuration thereby increasing hydrogen consumption.




Fig. 5: Comparison of hydrogen consumption for FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configurations.

The comparative results of FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configuration are given in Table 2. The energy of the corresponding

hybrid energy sources (HESs) i.e. fuel cell, battery and supercapacitor is obtained by the integration of power of corresponding

HESs. Overall fuel consumption is calculated as given in reference [22].

Table 2 Comparative study between FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC configuration.

Configurations FC/BATT FC/BATT/SC

Hydrogen consumption (g) 18.46 11.92

Energy of the HESs (kWs) 763.58 (FC)

143.60 (BATT)

652.64 (FC)

66.34 (BATT)

-34.014 (SC)

Per unit hydrogen consumption rate (g/kWs) 0.02417 0.01826

Equivalent hydrogen consumption (g) 3.4708 (BATT) 1.2339 (BATT)

Overall fuel consumption (g) 21.94 13.11

It is noted from the above table that for FC/BATT/SC configuration the supercapacitor energy is negative this means that the

equivalent fuel consumption is not calculated for the supercapacitor because it is actually the energy stored not delivered at the

end of the cycle. The Fig. 6 shows the comparison of overall fuel consumption of FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC hybrid

configuration which reveals that FC/BATT/SC outscores the FC/BATT in terms of hydrogen consumption. It reveals that

FC/BATT/SC consumes 35.4% less hydrogen in comparison to the FC/BATT; which eventually extends the lifetime and

efficiency of the fuel cell and thereby reducing the overall running cost of fuel cell electric vehicle.

Fig. 6: Overall fuel consumption comparison between FC/BATT and FC/BATT/SC.

FC/BATT FC/BATT/SC

Hydrogen Consumption

(g)18.46 11.92

Equivalent Fuel

Consumption by ESS (g)3.476 1.2117

Total Fuel Consumption

(g)21.94 13.11

0

5

10

15

20

25

Hy

dro

gen

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n (

g)




V. CONCLUSION

The impact of hybridization on the hydrogen consumption of the fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) is presented in this paper.

The study is carried out in MATLAB/Simulink environment using standard ECE-15 driving cycle. Frequency splitting

operational state control strategy (FSOSCS) is used for the energy management. The comparison between FC/BATT and

FC/BATT/SC for hydrogen consumption reveals that FC/BATT/SC configuration consumes 35.4% less hydrogen in comparison

to FC/BATT configuration and the reduction in overall fuel consumption is also achieved. Thus FC/BATT/SC configuration

significantly causes reduction in the hydrogen consumption of FCEV.

REFERENCES

[1] J. Kim and S. Kim, “Obstacles to the Success of Fuel-Cell Electric Vehicles: Are They Truly Impossible to Overcome?,” IEEE Electrification

Magazine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 48-54, March 2018. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8303859/

[2] B. M. Reddy, P. Samuel and N. S. M., “Government Policies Help Promote Clean Transportation in India: Proton-Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells for

Vehicles,” IEEE Electrification Magazine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 26-36, March 2018. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8303847/

[3] C. C. Chan, “The State of the Art of Electric, Hybrid, and Fuel Cell Vehicles,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 704-718, April 2007.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4168013/

[4] M. Zandi, A. Payman, J. P. Martin, S. Pierfederici, B. Davat and F. Meibody-Tabar, “Energy Management of a Fuel Cell/Supercapacitor/Battery Power

Source for Electric Vehicular Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 433-443, Feb. 2011.


[5] J. Bauman and M. Kazerani, “A Comparative Study of Fuel-Cell–Battery, Fuel-Cell–Ultracapacitor, and Fuel-Cell–Battery–Ultracapacitor Vehicles,”

IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 760-769, March 2008. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4357341/

[6] P. Garcia, J. P. Torreglosa, L. M. Fernandez and F. Jurado, “Control strategies for high-power electric vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cell, battery

and supercapacitor,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 4791-4804, Sept. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.02.028

[7] A. Martinez, “Update to "The Future Is Present in California: Delivering on the Promise of Fuel Cell-Powered Transportation" [Addendum],” IEEE

Electrification Magazine, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 108-108, Jun. 2018. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8303848/

[8] Martinez, “The Future Is Present in California: Delivering on the Promise of Fuel Cell-Powered Transportation,” IEEE Electrification Magazine, vol.

6, no. 1, pp. 37-47, Jun. 2018. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8369455/

[9] S. Mekhilef, R. Saidur and A. Safari, “Comparative study of different fuel cell technologies,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 16, no.

1, pp. 981-989, Jan. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.09.020

[10] P. Thounthong, B. Davat and S. Rael, “Drive friendly,” IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 69-76, Feb. 2008.


[11] Geng, J. K. Mills and D. Sun, “Two-Stage Energy Management Control of Fuel Cell Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Considering Fuel Cell

Longevity,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 498-508, Feb. 2012. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6087294/

[12] A. Khaligh and Z. Li, “Battery, Ultracapacitor, Fuel Cell, and Hybrid Energy Storage Systems for Electric, Hybrid Electric, Fuel Cell, and Plug-In

Hybrid Electric Vehicles: State of the Art,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 2806-2814, July 2010.


[13] E. Schaltz, A. Khaligh and P. O. Rasmussen, “Influence of Battery/Ultracapacitor Energy-Storage Sizing on Battery Lifetime in a Fuel Cell Hybrid

Electric Vehicle,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 3882-3891, Oct. 2009.


[14] P. Thounthong, S. Rael and B. Davat, “Energy management of fuel cell/battery/supercapacitor hybrid power source for vehicle applications,” Journal

of Power Sources, vol. 193, no. 1, pp. 376-385, Aug. 2009. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6847162/

[15] A. Tani, M. B. Camara and B. Dakyo, “Energy Management Based on Frequency Approach for Hybrid Electric Vehicle Applications: Fuel-

Cell/Lithium-Battery and Ultracapacitors,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 3375-3386, Oct. 2012. .


[16] H. E. Fadil, F. Giri, J. M. Guerrero and A. Tahri, “Modeling and Nonlinear Control of a Fuel Cell/Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System for

Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 3011-3018, Sept. 2014.


[17] S. N. Motapon, L. A. Dessaint and K. Al-Haddad, “A Comparative Study of Energy Management Schemes for a Fuel-Cell Hybrid Emergency Power

System of More-Electric Aircraft,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 1320-1334, March 2014.


[18] Z. Hong, Q. Li, Y. Han, W. Shang, Y. Zhu and W. Chen, “An energy management strategy based on dynamic power factor for fuel cell/battery hybrid

locomotive,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 3261-3272, Feb. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.12.117

[19] Bendjedia, N. Rizoug, M. Boukhnifer, F. Bouchafaa and M. Benbouzid, “Influence of secondary source technologies and energy management

strategies on Energy Storage System sizing for fuel cell electric vehicles,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 43, no. 25, pp. 11614-

11628, Jun. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.03.166







https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.02.028



https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.09.020








https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.12.117




[20] P. Thounthong, V. Chunkag, P. Sethakul, B. Davat and M. Hinaje, “Comparative Study of Fuel-Cell Vehicle Hybridization with Battery or

Supercapacitor Storage Device,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 3892-3904, Oct. 2009.


[21] N. Sulaiman, M. Hannan, A. Mohamed, E. Majlan and W. W. Daud, “A review on energy management system for fuel cell hybrid electric vehicle:

Issues and challenges,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 52, pp. 802-814, Dec. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.132

[22] B. Vural, S. Dusmez, M. Uzunoglu, E. Ugur and B. Akin, “Fuel Consumption Comparison of Different Battery/Ultracapacitor Hybridization

Topologies for Fuel-Cell Vehicles on a Test Bench,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 552-561,

Sept. 2014. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6701339/

[23] Q. Li, W. Chen, Y. Li, S. Liu and J. Huang, “Energy management strategy for fuel cell/battery/ultracapacitor hybrid vehicle based on fuzzy logic,”

International Journal of Electrical Power \& Energy Systems, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 514-525, Dec. 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.06.026

[24] J. Bernard, S. Delprat, F. N. Buchi and T. M. Guerra, “Fuel-Cell Hybrid Powertrain: Toward Minimization of Hydrogen Consumption,” IEEE

Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 3168-3176, Sept. 2009. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4776430/

[25] H. Marzougui, M. Amari, A. Kadri, F. Bacha and J. Ghouili, “Energy management of fuel cell/battery/ultracapacitor in electrical hybrid vehicle,”

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, no. 13, pp. 8857-8869, March 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.09.190

[26] S. N. Motapon, O. Tremblay and L. A. Dessaint, “A generic fuel cell model for the simulation of fuel cell vehicles,” 2009 IEEE Vehicle Power and

Propulsion Conference, 2009, pp. 1722-1729. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5289692/

[27] O. Tremblay, L. A. Dessaint and A. I. Dekkiche, “A generic battery model for the dynamic simulation of hybrid electric vehicles,” 2007 IEEE Vehicle

Power and Propulsion Conference, 2007, pp. 284-289. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4544139/

[28] J. Han, J.-F. Charpentier and T. Tang, “An Energy Management System of a Fuel Cell/Battery Hybrid Boat,” Energies, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 2799-

2820, May 2014. http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/5/2799

[29] P. Garcia, L. M. Fernandez, C. A. Garcia and F. Jurado, “Energy Management System of Fuel-Cell-Battery Hybrid Tramway,” IEEE Transactions on

Industrial Electronics, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 4013-4023, Dec. 2010. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5289980/



https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.132


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.06.026





http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/5/2799


Documents

Impact of Hybridization on Hydrogen Consumption …Impact of Hybridization on Hydrogen Consumption of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle 1Aditi Swarnkar, 2Jai Kumar Maherchandani 1Research