March 09, 2023

Battery Electric SUV Design

Christopher Akinboyewa
Edvin Ahmetovic
Prabhu Bernard

Date: March 09, 2023

Author(s): Christopher Akinboyewa, Edvin Ahmetovic, Prabhu Bernard
Course: EDS600 Electrical Drive Systems
Examiner: Boel Ekergård
University West, Department of Engineering Science, S-461 86 Trollhättan, SWEDEN

PROJECT REPORT
EDS600 Electrical Drive Systems
Department of Engineering Science
 Battery Electric SUV Design

1 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem Formation ........................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Design Specification ......................................................................................................... 2

2 Methods 3
2.1 Vehicle Selection .............................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Motor Selection ................................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Cell & Battery Pack Selection ........................................................................................... 5
2.4 Drive Cycle Selection ....................................................................................................... 7
2.5 Simulink Model Overview ................................................................................................. 7
2.6 Simulink Model in detail .................................................................................................... 8
2.7 Optimization ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.7.1 Tires – Rolling resistance. ...................................................................................... 9
2.7.2 Battery Selection .................................................................................................. 10

3 Results 11
3.1 Driving Range based on Drive cycle. ............................................................................. 11
3.2 WLTP Vs ARTEMIS Comparison ................................................................................... 12
3.3 Total Losses with different drive cycle ............................................................................ 13
3.4 Improving the rolling resistance ...................................................................................... 14
3.5 State of Charge simulation ............................................................................................. 14

4 Analysis 15
4.1 Impact of drive cycle on Driving range ........................................................................... 15
4.2 Closer look at the drive cycle WLTP and ART M150 ..................................................... 15
4.3 Losses in the system ...................................................................................................... 16
4.4 Battery selection and the effect on state of charge ........................................................ 16

5 Conclusions 17
5.1 Secondary Effects .......................................................................................................... 17

PROJECT REPORT
EDS600 Electrical Drive Systems
Department of Engineering Science
 Battery Electric SUV Design

Figures
Figure 1.1 To select our vehicle parameters, we considered before selecting vehicle
parameters. .............................................................................................................................. 1
Figure 2.1 Vehicle & parameter selection [6] ........................................................................... 3
Figure 2.2 Acceleration Calculation ......................................................................................... 3
Figure 2.3 Matlab Script ........................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2.4 Matlab Result .......................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2.5 Motor Data .............................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2.6 Vehicle Layout ........................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2.7 Cell Data [7] ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2.8 Assumptions and Calculations ................................................................................ 6
Figure 2.9 NEDC and WLTP [8] ............................................................................................... 7
Figure 2.10 Simulink Model...................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2.11 Simulink Drive Cycles ........................................................................................... 8
Figure 2.12 Tire friction coefficient as a function of the vehicle speed and variations of
the tire pressure ....................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2.13 Radar chart of different cathode active materials in a Li-ion battery [13] ........... 10
Figure 3.1 NEDC, WLTP, FTP & Artemis Drive cycle [4]....................................................... 11
Figure 3.2 NEDC, WLTP, FTP & Artemis Distance driven [4] ............................................... 11
Figure 3.3 WLTP & Artemis ................................................................................................... 12
Figure 3.4 Losses due to different drive cycles ...................................................................... 13
Figure 3.5 State of charge from (90% to 0%) ........................................................................ 14
Figure 4.1 Energy Consumption for different drive cycles. .................................................... 15
Figure 4.2 Power, torque, and speed requirement at 100 km/h. ........................................... 15
Figure 4.3 Efficiency map of the Electric motor ..................................................................... 16

Tables
Table 3.1 Energy consumption as a result of changing tire rolling resistance ....................... 14

PROJECT REPORT
EDS600 Electrical Drive Systems
Department of Engineering Science
 Battery Electric SUV Design

1 Introduction
An electric drive system is a critical component of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and
hybrid-electric vehicles (HEVs). Electric drive system includes several components such as
electric motors, power electronics, inverters and batteries which work together to provide
power and control to the vehicle. The electric drive system is responsible for controlling the
speed, torque, and direction of the electric motor, which generates zero local CO2 emissions
and provides full torque right from the start [1]. MATLAB and Simulink are powerful tools
for modelling, simulating, and optimizing electric drive system vehicle parameters. They can
be used can be used for a wide range of electric vehicle development related tasks such a
modelling of the vehicle dynamics, transmissions performance and electric vehicle battery to
acquire the power requirements of the battery and afterwards deduce the best types of battery
to use for such applications [2]. The comprehensive features offered by MATLAB and
Simulink make them popular simulating and optimizing electric drive system vehicle
parameters.
The drive system consists of the transmission (Gearbox & Differential), electric motor,
power electric converter and RESS (battery). The driver or driving style are outside the scope
of this report.

Figure 1.1 To select our vehicle parameters, we considered before selecting vehicle parameters.

Improvement of the electric power system is one of the main challenges to make electric
cars competitive with gas powered cars. The main energy storage system of electric vehicles
nowadays is the battery. The improvements of energy density are being largely researched
but range and lifetime are still low compared to combustion engine vehicles. Hence need to
minimize the number of charge/discharge cycles of the battery. The battery operates under
optimal conditions (steady and smooth discharging), mainly in urban traffic decreasing the
number of charge/discharge cycles, hence increase in battery life.

1
 Battery Electric SUV Design

1.1 Problem Formation

The driving strategy is an important part of the energy consumption of a vehicle. A
common way to minimize this is to design an efficient driveline system. Although we got
some parameters from an existing SUV but in other to design for this electric SUV to
minimize energy consumption, we need to redesign the electric driveline system to be
sustainable. This report compares and combines the techniques to create a driving strategy
optimized for this electric vehicle.

1.2 Design Specification

The driveline systems are made up of subsystems that need to be well defined to
obtain an optimal performance of the system. Specification and dynamics of the vehicle are
used to obtain the optimal power delivered by the battery, the power delivered at high voltage
side and the remainder of the driveline components are obtained by maximizing the overall
efficiency of the system.
The peak and average power consumption depends on the characteristics and
applications of the vehicle. Sizing of the system is made through optimization of the
performance of the vehicle in standard drive cycles. To select our vehicle parameters, we
considered the following.
a. Determine the performance requirements of the vehicle: it was important to
understand the desired performance of the vehicle. factors such as maximum speed,
acceleration and climbing ability. An electric vehicles motor drive system requires
high torque at low-speed, high power at high speed, and wide speed control range
[3]. Hence these factors were important to consider when we selected the vehicle
parameters.
b. Determine the weight of the vehicle: The weight of the vehicle is also an important
factor to consider when selecting the parameters for the electric drive system. The
typical weight of the EV powertrain is between 100 - 150 kg range [4]. Hence the
weight of the SUV was considered while selecting the parameters for the vehicle
parameters.
c. Determine the number and placement of the motors: Since we selected an SUV, it
was important for us to determine the placement of the motors. The design of
electric motors and drive systems for EVs is based on the demand for electric drive
systems, acceleration and driving range [5] Therefore, the number and the placement
of motors must be selected in a way that satisfies these demands, hence it was decided
to have two motors with each been placed at each axle of the vehicle. (300 - 400
km/range).
d. Selecting the battery pack capacity: The battery pack capacity is a vital parameter that
determines the range of the electric vehicle. Battery pack is an important component
of the electric drive system. Therefore, the battery pack capacity must be selected in
a way that provides the desired range for the SUV. (60 kWh bp) which is a Lithium-
ion battery type.
e. Select the inverter and on-board charger: The inverter and On-board charger are
also the components of the electric drive system to be considered. These
components are essential for the operation of an electric vehicle. Therefore, the
selection of the inverter and on-board charger must be made carefully considering
the demands of the electric drive system.

2
 Battery Electric SUV Design

2 Methods
Methodology followed during the vehicle and component selection is detailed in this chapter.

2.1 Vehicle Selection

Vehicle chosen for the project is an SUV. A comparable dimension of the vehicle
was obtained from the datasheet of an existing passenger car.

Figure 2.1 Vehicle & parameter selection [6]

To obtain a performance of 0 to 100 km/h in 8 seconds. We have to choose an

electric motor that has a very high power and torque capabilities. The first step was to
calculate the acceleration required to obtain this performance.

Figure 2.2 Acceleration Calculation

Figure 2.3 Matlab Script

3
 Battery Electric SUV Design

Figure 2.4 Matlab Result

Once the required acceleration for the vehicle is set. A Matlab script was written for
initial sizing of the motor. A gear ratio of 8 was assumed for initial calculation between the
wheels and the electric motor. Result of the script calculates the torque and power required
for selecting the electric motor.
• Electric Motor Power Required = 224 kW
• Motor Torque Required = 350 Nm

2.2 Motor Selection

For selecting the electric motor, the motor CAD data of the E-machine used during
the course was selected. The data exported from the Motor cad, was plotted using Matlab to
find the maximum speed, torque, and power available for the motor.

Figure 2.5 Motor Data

The selected motor has

• Maximum Speed = 10000 rpm
• Maximum Power = 138 kW
• Maximum Torque = 280 Nm
However, the selected motor does not meet the criteria required to fulfill the
performance that is expected from the vehicle. To match the design specification, the layout
of the vehicle had to be modified. Two separate motors on each axle would give the power
required to meet the performance of 0 to 100 km/h in 8 seconds. The layout of the proposed
solution is illustrated in the Figure 2.6.

4
 Battery Electric SUV Design

Figure 2.6 Vehicle Layout

The proposed dual motor layout will give a combined output with
• Motor power = 276 kW
• Motor torque = 560 Nm

2.3 Cell & Battery Pack Selection

The first step in the selection process is the cell selection. It was decided to use the
Molicel Lithium-ion battery with a high continous C-Rate for peak acceleration power.

Figure 2.7 Cell Data [7]

5
 Battery Electric SUV Design

The data from Molicel was used for battery calculation. For initial sizing of the
battery pack, the energy consumption for the electric powertrain and auxiliary applications
are assumed.

Figure 2.8 Assumptions and Calculations

Molicel was selected since the cell had a high discharge C rate, which can draw a peak
current of 20 Amps. During acceleration, the motor will draw a peak power of 224 kW. The
battery pack designed can withstand that high discharge rate with a peak power of 279kW.
The C-Rate is updated in the Simulink model to avoid the over current issues during
the high discharge rate during the acceleration phase of the vehicle.

6
 Battery Electric SUV Design

2.4 Drive Cycle Selection

The next step in the process was to create a simulation model of the SUV in Simulink
to calculate the losses and energy consumption of the vehicle. The intention is to further use
that data to re-iterate the design parameters to optimize the battery pack, electric motor, and
gearbox ratios. WLTP & NEDC cycle was considered for this project during the initial sizing
of the machine.

Figure 2.9 NEDC and WLTP [8]

2.5 Simulink Model Overview

A simulation model was created which is used to feed the drive cycle above. The
drive cycles were used to do a comparative report between the energy consumption and
range of vehicle based on driving scenarios.

Figure 2.10 Simulink Model.

1. Updated the model with the possibility of choosing different drive cycles.
2. Wheel torque was split to share between two motors on both axles.
3. Motor torque and power from dual motor is added to get the resultant plot.
4. Separate models are created to evaluate the impact of losses in the vehicle.
5. One battery pack is used with the voltage level of 400V.

7
 Battery Electric SUV Design

2.6 Simulink Model in detail

Figure 2.11 Simulink Drive Cycles

1. The battery pack designed for the vehicle is approximately 66 kWh.

2. 96 cells in series and 40 cells in parallel was arranged to form the battery pack.
3. The total weight of the battery pack comes to around 261 kg.
4. Discharge always starts from 90% SOC to 10% SOC for comparison and report.
5. Both drive cycles NEDC and WLTP are set to run the battery is completely drained.
6. From preliminary investigation that the energy consumption is less for NEDC
7. WLTP includes a more realistic driving scenario, the consumption is 123 Wh/km.
8. Which is approximately equivalent to the assumption of 140Wh/km that was used
primarily in designing the battery pack and cell selection.
9. A gear ratio of 8 was maintained in both the axles, to have the optimum speed and
torque in the motors.
10. The rolling friction coefficient of 0.009 was considered for this model when the
above-mentioned energy consumption was obtained from NEDC and WLTP cycle.

8
 Battery Electric SUV Design

2.7 Optimization
A few of the parameters and drive cycles are modified to optimize the vehicle model
which is discussed further in this chapter.

2.7.1 Tires – Rolling resistance.

The rolling friction coefficient, defined as parameter cr in Figure 2.12, depends on
many variables, e.g. vehicle speed, tire pressure and road surface conditions. If you put it in
a perspective a wet road can increase cr by 20%, driving in sand compared to concrete can
1
double the value and the tire pressure is approximately proportional to where p is the tire
√𝑝
pressure. In figure 2.12 a typical example of these relationships is shown.

Figure 2.12 Tire friction coefficient as a function of the vehicle speed and variations of the tire pressure

As shown in Figure 2.12 the vehicle speed has a small influence on the rolling
friction coefficient cr in lower speeds and the tires reach their thermal equilibrium after a
relatively long period (a few ten minutes). This means that the coefficient cr is dependent on
several factors but for many applications the coefficient may be assumed to be constant. In
this report the used rolling friction coefficient is 0.009 which is in between the minimum and
average graphs shown in Figure 2.12. By taking the different variables into consideration the
energy consumption could be optimized if lowering the value of cr. [10]

9
 Battery Electric SUV Design

2.7.2 Battery Selection

Some desirable attributes of a battery used in electric vehicles are high specific
energy, high specific power, long calendar life, long cycle life and wide range of operating
temperatures. The specific energy is the amount of useful energy that could be stored in the
battery per unit mass (Wh/kg). It also takes into account that not the whole capacity of the
battery can actually be used, typically the operation range is defined by a certain SoC range.
This parameter is important for the range of an electric vehicle. The specific power is the
term that determines the acceleration and top speed that the vehicle can achieve.
Lithium-ion batteries are commonly used in electric vehicles because of their high
specific energy and specific power. The specific energy of the battery cell is mainly limited
by the cathode which usually is made of lithium cobalt oxide (LCO). This material is mainly
used for its relatively high energy density. However, there’s several disadvantages with this
technology, there’s the high cost of raw materials and a fast ageing that shortens the cycle
life which is caused by the increased internal resistance. Due to the disadvantages new types
of cathodes have been introduced. The choices of cathode material are more often driven by
cost, life span and environmental friendliness. A feasible choice would be the lithium iron
phosphate (LFP) battery. [10]
For everyday use, the li-ion batteries should not be charged up to 100% and neither
should the SoC go down close to 0% to prevent damage to battery and to not shorten the
calendar life of the battery. For everyday use the battery’s SoC should stay within the range
of 20-80% to not shorten the life of the battery. The LFP battery can be charged up to 100%
for everyday use due to its capability to handle a greater number of cycles compared to the
li-ion battery. In Figure 2.13 the different cathode active materials in a Li-ion battery is
presented and seeing in this radar chart the LCO cathode has a higher specific energy
compared to the LFP cathode. This means from a performance perspective the LCO cathode
is better but from the cost, safety and life perspective the LFP cathode is a better choice. [11]

Figure 2.13 Radar chart of different cathode active materials in a Li-ion battery [13]

10
 Battery Electric SUV Design

3 Results
3.1 Driving Range based on Drive cycle.

Figure 3.1 NEDC, WLTP, FTP & Artemis Drive cycle [4]

Figure 3.2 NEDC, WLTP, FTP & Artemis Distance driven [4]

1. The NEDC cycle is more optimized urban driving which gives a range of 516 km.
2. WLTP is a more realistic urban and highway driving system which gives a range of
439 km.
3. FTP is a city drive cycle, which gives a range of 659 km.
4. ART MW150, is a high acceleration/speed drive cycle that has a range of 272 km.

11
 Battery Electric SUV Design

3.2 WLTP Vs ARTEMIS Comparison

Figure 3.3 WLTP & Artemis

12
 Battery Electric SUV Design

1. WLTP even with a combination of highway and urban, draws a maximum power of
approximately 55 kW from the battery and peak torques are in the range of 175Nm.
2. Motor reaches a speed of 8000 rpm during WLTP operation where are close to 9000
at ARTM150
3. Artemis with high acceleration and high speed, pushes more regenerative power into
the battery during deceleration phase which comes to around -150 kW. The motor
torque during the motor braking phase is around -300Nm.

3.3 Total Losses with different drive cycle

Figure 3.4 Losses due to different drive cycles

1. The battery is drained from 90% to 10%

2. Losses are given in kWh instead of kW to compare it with a 66 kWh battery pack.
3. Electric Motor has the highest losses of all the drive cycles.
4. Transmission losses accounts for the second highest losses in the system
5. The power converter switching losses and the battery losses comes next.
6. Battery losses are almost constant despite the different driving cycle followed.

13
 Battery Electric SUV Design

3.4 Improving the rolling resistance

When focusing on improving the tires’s rolling resistance, by changing the value of
parameter cr, we can see through the simulations how much of an impact it has on the energy
consumption. In table 3.1 the effect on energy consumption is presented by changing the
rolling resistance.

Table 3.1 Energy consumption as a result of changing tire rolling resistance

Tire rolling resistance, cr Energy consumption [Wh/km]

0.008 117.5
0.009 123.6
0.010 130.1

3.5 State of Charge simulation

The state of charge of the vehicle was always set to start discharging from 90% to
0%. The Figure 3.5 shows that as the state of charge drops below 10% there is a significant
voltage drop which affects the performance of the vehicle.

Figure 3.5 State of charge from (90% to 0%)

14
 Battery Electric SUV Design

4 Analysis
4.1 Impact of drive cycle on Driving range
The results in chapter 3.1 discuss the impact that four drive cycles have on the range
of the electric vehicle. The most important factor that determines the range of the vehicle is
the energy consumed per kilometer.

Figure 4.1 Energy Consumption for different drive cycles.

From the results it is evident that the consumption is dependent on the acceleration and
deceleration times and the top speed of the car. If the intention was to develop an SUV for
urban driving, the same vehicle with a battery pack of approximately 66 kWh can have a
range of 659 km. Instead, the industry focuses on developing cars with more performance.
The result also shows that the impact that driving behavior has on efficiency is much more
for an electric vehicle. The change should start with being a responsible driver.

4.2 Closer look at the drive cycle WLTP and ART M150
The results in chapter 3.2 discuss WLTP being a combination of both urban and
highway driving. However, Artemis 150 is more focused on high speeds and acceleration at
highway driving. The most evident factor from the result is that even with these high-speed
driving cycles, we never reach the maximum potential of the motor which is a peak power
of 276kW and 560 Nm. Then the question is why we have a bigger motor when we can
achieve approximately the same performance with a motor that is a bit more than half the
size of the one selected?
If you replace the drive cycles to
achieve a 0 to 100km/h speed in 8
seconds. Then we need a motor that
can draw 240kW from the battery and
deliver a torque of 358 Nm to the
wheels. This is the reason we chose a
bigger motor. However, the rationale
behind the choice is a questionable one.

Figure 4.2 Power, torque, and speed requirement at 100 km/h.

15
 Battery Electric SUV Design

4.3 Losses in the system

The results in chapter 3.3 discuss about an interesting phenomenon on the impact
of drive cycles on losses. When the battery is drained from 90% to 10% by repeatedly running
the drive cycle. The electric motor in an SUV that followed a more urban driving style with
low speeds and acceleration like NEDC and FTP had more losses than driving the SUV at
high speed. This clearly illustrates that the efficiency of the electric motor is low at lower
speeds and high at higher speeds as shown in Figure 4.3. The SUV when driving at highway
speeds will always have higher motor speed and will in turn show higher motor efficiency.
This pattern of efficiency is the same for the gearboxes as well. Even though it only changes
by a small amount. The gear boxes are also more efficient at higher speeds than lower speeds.
The loss in kWh shows that out of a battery pack that has approximately 66kWh 10-15 kWh
will be losses when you drain the battery from driving continuously from 90% to 10%. Even
though it’s not the correct representation. It makes it easier to put things into perspective.

Figure 4.3 Efficiency map of the Electric motor

4.4 Battery selection and the effect on state of charge

From the results in the chapter 3.5. we can see a significant voltage drop when the
state of charge goes below 10% which is effecting the performance of the vehicle. LCO has
higher specific energy than LFP battery. LCO has high energy density than the LFP which
is better for the performance. That is the reason the state of charge should always be above
10% to stay within the performance envelope. By changing the type of battery, using a battery
with a different cathode, the user can charge the battery to a higher SoC for everyday use
which optimizes the vehicles range. However, the change of battery may affect the
performance of the vehicle due to the LFP battery having a lower specific energy. This means
that for the same battery capacity the amount of battery cells must increase, which affects
the total weight of the vehicle.

16
 Battery Electric SUV Design

5 Conclusions
The first part of the conclusion contains the result from the report and the seconds part
deals with the secondary effects that are not considered in this report.
It was concluded that the driving cycle as well as driver behavior has a significant impact
on the range of the electric vehicle.
The Increase in weight leads to increase vehicle weight resulting in more energy
consumption which negatively impact the vehicles overall efficiency and range. Heavier
battery can impact handling and maneuverability of the vehicle. The battery with a higher
energy density will have a higher capacity to weight ratio which means it can provide more
power for its weight.
A larger battery will generally have a higher capacity which can improve the range of the
vehicles. As the battery size increases, the weight of battery can also increase drastically and
there are diminishing returns in terms of range for larger batteries.

5.1 Secondary Effects

By having more losses, a more advanced cooling system might be needed. The design of
electric drive system is important to achieve optimal cooling system. The pin fin design is
particularly important for directing cooling and the number of fins should be optimised to
balance thermal resistance and pressure loss in power electronics [12]. Advanced cooling
systems of modern electrical machines include open ventilated cooling, housing water jacket,
direct stator cooling and flooded stator cooling, oil spray cooling/oil jets/oil dripping
cooling, and supercritical CO 2 cooling.
Another secondary effect is the environmental conditions. However, that is not
considered in the simulations of this report. It is commonly known that with lower
temperature the viscosity of the oil rises which result in more drag in the transmission and
increase the losses. Cold environmental conditions also effect the battery capability and
performance. We also do not have the same regenerative capability, which means that if we
run the WLTP cycle during cold start, the battery will not allow any current to charge it with
regenerative braking. This will result in the increase in consumption and drop in the range
of the vehicle. The rolling resistance will also increase in cold temperature due higher friction
caused by winter tires. While in the hot climate, the viscosity of the issues will not be there,
however the heating issues will come back which means the cooling requirement for the
vehicle goes up which consumes more power.
The resistance in the Electric motor is temperature dependent. This will result in higher
winding temperature that leads to a less efficient motor and more losses. Which means that
available charge and discharge power from the battery will drop significantly if the
temperatures drop approximately below 25 °C and above 40°C. this might result in
maintaining an active colling system for battery pack alone.

17
 Battery Electric SUV Design

References

1. Bosch (2022). The electric drive, efficient, dynamic and with zero local CO2
emissions. https://www.bosch-mobility-
solutions.com/en/solutions/powertrain/battery-electric/electric-drive/ Accessed
2023-03-08
2. Al Halabi, M. and Al Tarabsheh, A., (2020). "Modelling of Electric Vehicles Using
Matlab/Simulink," SAE Technical Paper 2020-01-5086, ,
https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-5086.
3. Cai Chi-lan, Wang Xiao-gang, Bai Yue-wei, Xia Yan-chun and Liu Kai, "Motor drive
system design for electric vehicle," 2011 International Conference on Electric
Information and Control Engineering, Wuhan, 2011, pp. 1480-1483, doi:
10.1109/ICEICE.2011.5777955.
4. Hazra, S. (2019). Engine mounting system design approach for electric vehicles (No.
2019-26-0116). SAE Technical Paper.
5. Yuan Cheng, Fuyi Duan and Shumei Cui, (2005) "The design principle of electric
motors and drive systems for electric vehicles," 2005 International Conference on
Electrical Machines and Systems, Nanjing, China, pp. 802-805 Vol. 1, doi:
10.1109/ICEMS.2005.202647
6. https://ev-database.org/car/1559/Mercedes-EQB-300-4MATIC
7. https://www.molicel.com/wp-content/uploads/INR21700M50A-V1-80097.pdf
8. Marotta, A., Pavlovic, J., Ciuffo, B., Serra, S., & Fontaras, G. (2015). Gaseous
Emissions from Light-Duty Vehicles: Moving from NEDC to the New WLTP Test
Procedure. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(14), 8315–8322.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01364
9. https://dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/artemis.php
10. Guzzella, L., & Sciarretta, A. (2013). Vehicle Propulsion Systems: Introduction
to modeling and Optimization. Springer.
11. https://volts.ca/blogs/educational/li-ion-vs-lithium-iron-phosphate-lifepo4
12. Kimura, T., Saitou, R., Kubo, K., Nakatsu, K., Ishikawa, H., & Sasaki, K. (2014).
High-power-density inverter technology for hybrid and electric vehicle applications.
Hitachi Review, 63(2), 41-46.
13. Andrea Davide, Li-Ion Batteries and Applications, Volume 1: Batteries. Artech
House Publishers, 2020, 1

18