Energy Analysis of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEVs) under European Weather Conditions and Various Driving Behaviors

Abstract

Due to the auxiliary loads' increasing influence on the overall energy consumption of electrified vehicles, a holistic tank‐to‐wheel analysis is necessary. To do so, the impact of the auxiliary load on the energy consumption of a fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) drivetrain is investigated by taking different driving behaviors and three European environmental conditions (Spanish, German and Norwegian weather profiles) into account. The driving pattern is analyzed with the study ‘Mobilität in Deutschland' [1] and represented with the Artemis driving cycles [2]. To match various situations of the everyday life, realistic boundary conditions are determined by five starting times. The corresponding weather conditions are obtained and five weather profiles for every meteorological season including the ambient temperature, solar flux and humidity are considered. By using a complete FCEV simulation model, a realistic energy consumptions is simulated and the impact of different climate conditions as well as driving behaviors is investigated. As a result, a significant influence of the auxiliary load on the overall energy consumption is detected and the need to consider the overall energy demand is demonstrated.

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

“…A non-aggressive driving style is more suitable for NEVs because NEVs need to store braking energy [93,99,122], while a more aggressive driving style will increase energy consumption by 47% [94]. Compared with ICEVs, EVs are more suitable for urban environments [123] or driving environments with short distance distributions [67], while PHEVs [102] or EVs loaded with larger batteries [113] are more suitable for driving environments with large slopes [120]. However, the user driving mode of ICEVs is not subject to the change of mileage limit [102] and single driving distance [123].…”

“…Compared with ICEVs, EVs are more suitable for urban environments [123] or driving environments with short distance distributions [67], while PHEVs [102] or EVs loaded with larger batteries [113] are more suitable for driving environments with large slopes [120]. However, the user driving mode of ICEVs is not subject to the change of mileage limit [102] and single driving distance [123].…”

Design and Realization of a Stacked Interleaved DC–DC Step‐Down Converter for PEM Water Electrolysis with Improved Current Control

“…The discontinuous character of the renewable energy sources (RES) makes hydrogen production and storage an interesting and efficient solution. This consideration is justified by the fact that the classical storage devices, such as lithiumion batteries, have lower specific energy than hydrogen (respectively 0.540-0.648 MJ kg -1 vs. 143 MJ kg -1 ) [1][2][3]. The useful resources for hydrogen production, which are available on Earth are RES (e.g., wind, photovoltaic, and biomass), and fossil fuels (e.g., coal and natural gas).…”

Passive and Active Coupling Comparison of Fuel Cell and Supercapacitor for a Three‐Wheel Electric Vehicle

“…Among the existing technologies, such as electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles etc., FC vehicle is one of the most auspicious due to zero-local emissions, high level of driving autonomy, and fast refueling time [3]. However, FC systems cannot tolerate sudden and significant fluctuations in the load which are normal in vehicular applications [4]. The load peaks can cause air/fuel starvation in the FC system resulting in serious power drop [5,6].…”