Formula Hybrid Racing at Illinois Institute of Technology: Design to Implementation

S. G. Wirasingha, J. Sibley, A. I. Antoniou, A. Castaneda, and A. Emadi Grainger Power Electronics and Motor Drives Laboratory Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, Illinois, USA http:// power.iit .ed u/ 1 Outline

Introduction ACE Formula Racing Education Hybrid Design The Competition -Results - Technology Comparison RfltiReflections/S ummary Future/Recommendation Conclusions

2 Formula Hybrid Competition

An en gineering challengeetoto designnandandbuild arace a race car that conforms to aaformulaformulawhich emphasizes hybrid drive train innovation and fuel efficiency in high-performance application. Extension of the Formula SAE Competition Organized by Dartmouth College, NH in conjunction with SAE and IEEE

3 ACE Formula Racing

A team of over 50 students split into three team – Electrical Team – Mechanical Team – Static Team

Obstacles – Start-up logistics – Funding Sponsors: – ACllfEiiArmour College of Engineering – ECE, MMAE and Communications Departments of IIT – Atul and Kalpana Thakkar

4 ACE Formula Racing: Objectives

“The cost of parti ci pati ng i n th e F ormul a H yb rid C ompetiti on i s offset by the immense educational value to students.”

Primary Objective: Education Secondary Objectives: - Vehicle design and dynamics - Project Management - Drive train Configuration - Multidisciplinary Teamwork - Electrical systems design - Awareness of Ethical Concerns - Mechanical system design - Communication

5 Education

Theory on components, Implementation of behavior and simulation advanced systems

Traditional Traditional Education Research

Advanced Integrated Education and Research + Multidisciplinary Interactions, Teamwork, Problem-Solving, Open -Ended problems , Innovation, Management, and Leadership

Formula Hybrid Project 6 Hybrid Design

TfitihTwo configurations chosen

ACE 1: Parallel Hybrid – More technical challenges – Lighter vehicle

ACE 2: Series Hybrid – Easy to implement

7 ACE 1: Parallel Hybrid

Primary Vehicle No Compromises Chassis designed from scratch – Chassis can accommodate the components – Components are lightweight and small Controller is digital and allows for complicated control strategies to be implemented

8 ACE 1: Parallel Hybrid

Component Model Notes

Engine Yamaha YZ250F 250cc four-stroke

Azure Dynamics 300V, 40Hp @ Motor AC24 4,000 RPM

Energy Storage Custom NiMH

Torque Coupling Custom Free rotating Shaft

Controller TI DSP

9 ACE 2: Series Hybrid

Secondary Vehicle Chassis Purchased Main problem : Time & Resources

Chassis was bought used – Affects : Packaging & Drivetrain All components except EM were used – Affects : Reliability Sheet Metal Body Work – Affects : Aerodynamics & Marketing 10 ACE 2: Series Hybrid

Component Model Notes

250cc 4-stroke Engine Kawasaki Ninja Used

Electric Machine AC-24

head belt driver Electric Generator 10 kW generator

Honda Civic 144V 288V bus BiBatteries NiMH Used

Controller Analog electronics

11 Competition Performance

AThidAutocross: Third Car # University Slowest Fastest 18 Dartmouth 1 DNF N/A Acceleration: Third 19 Dartmouth FWD N/A N/A EdEndurance: ThidThird 11 Embry Riddle A.U 73.17 33.17 69 Florida Tech 30.99 29.37 Dynamic Acceleration: Fourth 12 IIT 67.15 32.24 16 MGillUiMcGill Universi ty 30.99 27.74

45 95 Yale University 37.40 34.48

45 Speed [

Spee 30 30 d m [mph] ph]

15 15

0 0 10 2030 40 12 3 6129 time (s) time (s) 2007 Formula Hybrid Score Sheet n s on on e oo ss Total Car # School Hybrid Design Electric Autocro resentati Enduranc Accelerati Accelerati PP Max Possible Score --> 200 100 75 75 150 400 1000 11 Embry-Riddle Aeronautical 180 89 48 21 123 230 692 University 12 Illinois Institute of 75 79 65 44 130 284* 677 Technology 13 Colorado State University 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 McGill University 166 100 70 52 150 400 939 18 Dartmouth College 200 98 0.0 0.0 0.0 108 407 19 Dartmouth College 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 69 Florida Institute of 138 52 0.00 75 145 400 811 Technology 76 Drexel University 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95 Yale University 97 62 75 55 122 265 677

* Points did not count because of off the wall charging 13 Technology Comparison

Florida Tech : Electric car – Simple – Low Cost –Low Voltage Bus

McGill University : Series Hybrid –Simple – Low V olt age B us

14 Technology Comparison

Yale University : Parallel –Simple – Dune Buggy Chassis

Embry-Riddle Aer. Univ. : Series-Parallel Hybrid – Complex – Innovative Design – Ultra Capacitors

15 Technology Comparison

Dartmouth College : Series –Simple – Ultra Capacitors

Primary lesson from other teams = Simple is better

16 Reflections/Summary

Thhe initial d esign is prob abl y not th e most eff icient or f easibl e solution, but it provides a much needed starting point that can/will improved upon

Such a competition is hard to win the first year Simple = Reliable A large team /= A better team NklikNo weak links Multiple people should know each area A team must have a long term plan

17 Future / Recommendation

Selective team

Research and Special projects credits

Plan to have the car moving early

Working to once strengths

Detailed modeling and simulation prior to implementation

18 Conclusion

A t rue passion for designing, impr ov ing, and r acing HEVs has evolved at Illinois Tech

The competition provided students a fun environment to learn about HEVs and what it takes to build one Exposed to what teamwork and steadfast dedication can accomplish Gives students practical experience associated with multidisciplinary teamwork, project management, and communitiication, and allows them towork asasilingle team

19 Student Competitions

Formula Hybrid: http://www.formula-hybrid.org/ IEEE International Future Energy Challenge: http://www.energychallenge.org/ Green Prix: Need Seed Funding

20 Questions?