1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems
  4. Volume 5, 2022
  5. Article

Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems

Volume 5, 2022

Control as an Enabler for Electrified Mobility

Abstract

This article outlines the importance of electrified mobility (e-mobility) in modern transport. One key goal of this review is to illustrate the role that control has played, and must continue to play, as e-mobility grows. The coordination of power in multiple modes (mechanical, electrical, and thermal) requires sophisticated controller algorithms. This review advocates for model-based approaches to control since there may not be readily available physical systems from which to gather data and do data-based control. A second goal of the article is to present methods for modeling these powertrain systems that are modular, scalable, flexible, and computationally efficient. A graph-based approach satisfies many of the desired criteria. The third goal is to review control approaches for these classes of systems and detail a hierarchical approach that makes trades across different domains of power. Optimization-based approaches are well suited to achieving the regulation and tracking goals, along with the minimization of costs and the satisfaction of constraints. Multiple examples, within this article and the references therein, support the presentation throughout. This field of e-mobility is rapidly growing, and control engineers are uniquely positioned to have an impact and lead many of the critical developments.

Keyword(s): electrified mobility, graph-based modeling, hierarchical control, multidomain modeling
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513
2022-05-03
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/control/5/1/annurev-control-042920-012513.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1. 
    Sovacool BK. 2016. How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics or energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13:202–15
     [Google Scholar]
  2. 2. 
    Chan CC. 2007. The state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles. Proc. IEEE 95:704–18
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3. 
    Enang W, Bannister C. 2017. Modelling and control of hybrid electric vehicles (a comprehensive review). Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 74:1210–39
     [Google Scholar]
  4. 4. 
    Ali AM, Soffker D 2018. Towards optimal power management of hybrid electric vehicles in real-time: a review on methods, challenges, and state-of-the-art solutions. Energies 11:476
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 5. 
    Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med 2016. Commercial Aircraft Propulsion and Energy Systems Research: Reducing Global Carbon Emissions Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  6. 6. 
    Gnadt AR, Speth RL, Sabnis JS, Barrett SR. 2019. Technical and environmental assessment of all-electric 180-passenger commercial aircraft. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 105:1–30
     [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. 
    Wheeler P, Bozhko S. 2014. The more electric aircraft: technology and challenges. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 2:46–12
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. 
    Alleyne AG. 2018. Power density as the key enabler for electrified mobility. Polytechnica 1:10–18
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 9. 
    Williams MA. 2017. A framework for the control of electro-thermal aircraft power systems PhD Thesis Univ. Ill. Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL:
  10. 10. 
    Madonna V, Giangrande P, Galea M 2018. Electrical power generation in aircraft: review, challenges, and opportunities. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 4:646–59
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 11. 
    Brelje BJ, Martins JRRA. 2019. Electric, hybrid, and turboelectric fixed-wing aircraft: a review of concepts, models, and design approaches. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 104:1–19
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 12. 
    Cano TC, Castro I, Rodriguez A, Lamar DG, Khalil YF, Albiol-Tendillo L et al. 2021. Future of electrical aircraft energy power systems: an architecture review. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 7:1915–29
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 13. 
    Ni K, Liu Y, Mei Z, Wu T, Hu Y et al. 2019. Electrical and electronic technologies in more-electric aircraft: a review. IEEE Access 7:76145–66
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 14. 
    Cao W, Mecrow BC, Atkinson GJ, Bennett JW, Atkinson DJ. 2012. Overview of electric motor technologies used for more electric aircraft. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 59:3523–31
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 15. 
    Doerry N, Amy J, Krolick C 2015. History and the status of electric ship propulsion, integrated power systems, and future trends in the U.S. Navy. Proc. IEEE 103:2243–51
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. 
    Nguyen HP, Hoang AT, Nizetic S, Nguyen XP, Le AT et al. 2021. The electric propulsion system as a green solution for management strategy of CO2 emission in ocean shippping: a comprehensive review. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 31:e12580
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. 
    Geertsma RD, Negenborn RR, Visser K, Hopman JJ. 2017. Design and control of hybrid power and propulsion systems for smart ships: a review of developments. Appl. Energy 194:30–54
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 18. 
    Nyland M. 2016. Construction of a hardware-in-the-loop simulator for Azipod control system testing MS Thesis Aalto University Espoo, Finl:.
  19. 19. 
    He X, Jiang Y. 2018. Review of hybrid electric systems for construction machinery. Autom. Constr. 92:286–96
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 20. 
    Andwari AM, Pesiridis A, Rajoo S, Martinez-Botas R, Esfahanian V. 2017. A review of battery electric vehicle technology and readiness levels. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 78:414–30
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21. 
    Zhang X, Bowman CL, O'Connell TC, Haran KS. 2018. Large electric machines for aircraft electric propulsion. IET Electr. Power Appl. 12:767–79
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22. 
    Sarlioglu B, Morris CT. 2015. More electric aircraft: review, challenges, and opportunities for commercial transport aircraft. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 1:54–64
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 23. 
    Bandhauer TM, Garimella S, Fuller TF 2011. A critical review of thermal issues in lithium-ion batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 158:R1–25
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 24. 
    Brahma A, Buezennec Y, Rizzoni G. 2000. Optimal energy management in series hybrid electric vehicles. 2000 American Control Conference 160–64 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25. 
    Lin CC, Peng H, Grizzle JG, Kang JM. 2003. Power management strategy for a parallel hybrid electric truck. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 11:839–49
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26. 
    Cao Y, Williams MA, Alleyne AG, Krein PT. 2016. 20x-real time modeling and simulation of more electric aircraft electrical and thermal power systems. 2016 International Conference on Electrical Systems for Aircraft, Railway, Ship Propulsion and Road Vehicles and International Transportation Electrification Conference Piscataway, NJ: IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/ESARS-ITEC.2016.7841416
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  27. 27. 
    Plett GL. 2004. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs: part 2. Modeling and identification. J. Power Sources 134:262–76
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 28. 
    Plett GL. 2004. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs: part 3. State and parameter estimation. J. Power Sources 134:277–92
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29. 
    Chaturvedi NA, Klein R, Christensen J, Ahmed J, Kojic A 2020. Algorithms for advanced battery management systems. IEEE Control Syst 30:49–68
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 30. 
    Moura S, Stein J, Fathy H. 2013. Battery-health conscious power management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles via electrochemical modeling and stochastic control. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 21:679–94
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 31. 
    Li J, Adewuyi K, Lotfi N, Landers RG, Park J. 2018. A single particle model with chemical/mechanical degradation physics for lithium ion battery State of Health (SOH) estimation. Appl. Energy 212:1178–90
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32. 
    Hu Y, Yurkovich S, Guezennec Y, Yurkovich B. 2011. Electro-thermal battery model identification for automotive applications. J. Power Sources 196:449–57
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33. 
    Aksland CT. 2019. Modular modeling and control of a hybrid unmanned aerial vehicle's powertrain MS Thesis Univ. Ill. Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL:
  34. 34. 
    Rugh JP, Pesaran A, Smith K 2011. Electric vehicle battery thermal issues and thermal management techniques Paper presented at the SAE Alternative Refrigerant and Systems Efficiency Symposium Phoenix, AZ: Sept. 27–29
  35. 35. 
    Chen Y, Yuan Z, Luo F. 2018. A model-based multi-objective optimization for high efficiency and high power density motor drive inverters for aircraft applications. NAECON 2018: IEEE National Aerospace and Electronics Conference36–42 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 36. 
    Hegazy O, Van Mierlo J, Lataire P. 2012. Analysis, modeling, and implementation of a multidevice interleaved DC/DC converter for fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 27:4445–58
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 37. 
    Mantooth HA, Heffner AR. 1997. Electro-thermal simulation of an IGBT PWM inverter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 12:474–84
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 38. 
    van der Broeck C, Ruppert L, Hinz A, Conrad M, Doncker R 2018. Spatial electro-thermal modeling and simulation of power electronic modules. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 54:404–15
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 39. 
    Tannous PJ, Peddada SRT, Allison JT, Foulkes T, Pilawa-Podgurski RCN, Alleyne AG. 2017. Dynamic temperature estimation of power electronics systems. 2017 American Control Conference3463–69 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 40. 
    Krause PC, Wasynczuk O, Sudhoff SD. 2002. Analysis of Electric Machinery and Drive Systems New York/Piscataway, NJ: Wiley-IEEE, 2nd ed..
  41. 41. 
    Tapia A, Tapia G, Ostolaza JX, Saenz JR. 2003. Modeling and control of a wind turbine driven doubly fed induction generator. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 18:194–204
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42. 
    Tikadar A, Johnston D, Kumar N, Joshi Y, Kumar S. 2021. Comparison of electro-thermal performance of advanced cooling techniques for electric vehicle motors. Appl. Therm. Eng. 183:116182
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43. 
    Yi X, Sanchez R, Haran K, Veres J, Perry A, Ansell P 2018. Self-pumped air-cooling design for a high-speed high-specific-power motor. 2018 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo274–79 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 44. 
    Bailey C. 2008. Thermal management technologies for electronic packaging: current capabilities and future challenges for modelling tools. 2008 10th Electronics Packaging Technology Conference527–32 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 45. 
    Rao Z, Wang S. 2011. A review of power battery thermal energy management. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15:4554–71
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 46. 
    Tong W. 2014. Mechanical Design of Electric Motors Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis
  47. 47. 
    Powell B, Bailey K, Cikanek S 1998. Dynamic modeling and control of hybrid electric vehicle powertrain systems. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 18:717–33
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 48. 
    Markel T, Brooker A, Hendricks T, Johnson V, Kelly K et al. 2002. ADVISOR: a systems analysis tool for advanced vehicle modeling. J. Power Sources 110:255–66
     [Google Scholar]
  49. 49. 
    Langland B, Leonard R, Smart R, Dougal RA 2015. Modeling and data exchange in a concurrent and collaborative design environment for electric ships. 2015 IEEE Electric Ship Technologies Symposium388–94 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 50. 
    Soman R, Steurer MM, Toshon TA, Faruque MO, Cuzner RM. 2017. Size and weight computation of MVDC power equipment in architectures developed using the smart ship systems design environment. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron. 5:40–50
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 51. 
    Welstead JR, Caldwell D, Condotta R, Monroe N. 2018. An overview of the Layered and Extensible Aircraft Performance System (LEAPS) development. 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting pap. 2018-1754 Reston, VA: Am. Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 52. 
    Motapon SN, Dessaint LA, Al-Haddad K. 2014. A comparative study of energy management schemes for a fuel-cell hybrid emergency power system of more-electric aircraft. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 61:1320–34
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 53. 
    Lawhorn D, Rallabandi V, Ionel D. 2019. Electric aircraft system co-simulation including body, propeller, propulsion, and energy storage models. 2019 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo Piscataway, NJ: IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/ITEC.2019.8790529
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  54. 54. 
    Kania M, Koeln J, Alleyne A, McCarthy K, Wu N, Patnaik S. 2012. A dynamic modeling toolbox for air vehicle vapor cycle systems Tech. Pap. 2012-01-2172 SAE Int. Warrendale, PA:
  55. 55. 
    McCarthy P, Niedbalski N, McCarthy K, Walters E, Cory J, Patnaik S 2016. A first principles based approach for dynamic modeling of turbomachinery. SAE Int. J. Aerosp. 9:45–61
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 56. 
    Williams M, Sridharan S, Banerjee S, Mak C, Pauga C et al. 2015. PowerFlow: a toolbox for modeling and simulation of aircraft systems Tech. Pap. 2015-01-2417 SAE Int. Warrendale, PA:
  57. 57. 
    Ilic MD, Jaddivada R. 2018. Multi-layered interactive energy space modeling for near-optimal electrification of terrestrial, shipboard and aircraft systems. Annu. Rev. Control 45:52–75
     [Google Scholar]
  58. 58. 
    van der Schaft A. 2020. Port-Hamiltonian modeling for control. Annu. Rev. Control Robot. Auton. Syst. 3:393–416
     [Google Scholar]
  59. 59. 
    Karnopp DC, Margolis DL, Rosenberg RC. 1990. System Dynamics: A Unified Approach New York: Wiley, 2nd ed..
  60. 60. 
    Controllab Prod 2021. Bond graphs. 20-sim. . https://www.20sim.com/features/model-libraries/bondgraphs
  61. 61. 
    Filippa M, Mi C, Shen J, Stevenson RC 2005. Modeling of a hybrid electric vehicle powertrain test cell using bond graphs. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 54:837–45
     [Google Scholar]
  62. 62. 
    Gao DW, Mi C, Emadi A 2007. Modeling and simulation of electric and hybrid vehicles. Proc. IEEE 95:729–45
     [Google Scholar]
  63. 63. 
    Cipek M, Pavkovic D, Petric J 2013. A control-oriented simulation model of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle. Appl. Energy 101:121–33
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 64. 
    Rizzoni G, Guzzella L, Baumann B. 1999. Unified modeling of hybrid electric vehicle drivetraings. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 4:246–57
     [Google Scholar]
  65. 65. 
    Xu Q, Wang P, Chen J, Wen C, Lee MY 2017. A module-based approach for stability analysis of complex more-electric aircraft power system. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 3:901–19
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 66. 
    Silva LI, Jaguemont J, De Angelo CH, Boulon L. 2016. Modeling an electric vehicle lithium-ion battery pack considering low temperature behavior. 2016 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference Piscataway, NJ: IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/VPPC.2016.7791727
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  67. 67. 
    Song K, Wang Y, An C, Xu H, Ding Y. 2021. Design and validation of energy management strategy for extended-range fuel cell electric vehicle using bond graph method. Energies 14:380
     [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. 
    Koeln JP, Williams MA, Pangborn HC 2016. Experimental validation of graph-based modeling for thermal fluid power flow systems. Proceedings of the ASME 2016 Dynamic Systems and Control Conference 2 pap. V002T21A008 New York: Am. Soc. Mech. Eng.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. 69. 
    Williams MA, Koeln JP, Pangborn HC, Alleyne AG. 2018. Dynamical graph models of aircraft electrical, thermal, and turbomachinery components. ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 140:041013
     [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. 
    Aksland CT, Bixel TW, Raymond LC, Rottmayer MA, Alleyne AG. 2019. Graph-based electro-mechanical modeling of a hybrid unmanned aerial vehicle for real-time applications. 2019 American Control Conference4253–59 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  71. 71. 
    Aksland CT, Alleyne AG. 2020. Experimental model and controller validation for a series hybrid unmanned aerial vehicle. 2020 American Control Conference4154–60 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  72. 72. 
    Pangborn HC, Koeln JP, Williams MA, Alleyne AG 2018. Experimental validation of graph-based hierarchical control for thermal management. ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 140:101016
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 73. 
    Oltafi-Saber R, Fax JA, Murray RM 2007. Consensus and cooperation in networked multi-agent systems. Proc. IEEE 95:215–33
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 74. 
    Jadbabaie A, Lin J, Morse AS 2003. Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 48:988–1001
     [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. 
    Koeln JP, Pangborn HC, Williams MA, Kawamura MA, Alleyne AG. 2019. Hierarchical control of aircraft electro-thermal systems. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 28:1218–32
     [Google Scholar]
  76. 76. 
    Yu J, Huang H, Tian S. 2005. Survey of clustering algorithms. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 16:645–78
     [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. 
    Ji Y, Geroliminis N 2012. On the spatial partitioning of urban transportation networks. Transp. Res. B 46:1639–56
     [Google Scholar]
  78. 78. 
    Schaeffer SE. 2007. Graph clustering. Comput. Sci. Rev. 1:27–64
     [Google Scholar]
  79. 79. 
    Docimo DJ, Alleyne AG. 2018. Electro-thermal graph-based modeling for hierarchical control with application to an electric vehicle. 2018 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications812–19 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  80. 80. 
    Guenoche A, Hansen P, Jaumard B. 1991. Efficient algorithms for divisive hierarchical clustering with the diameter criterion. J. Classif. 8:5–30
     [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. 
    Riccobono A, Cupelli M, Monti A, Santi E, Roinila T et al. 2017. Stability of shipboard DC power distribution. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 5:355–67
     [Google Scholar]
  82. 82. 
    Emadi A, Kaligh A, Rivetta CH, Williamson GA. 2006. Constant power loads and negative impedance instability in automotive systems: definition, modeling, stability, and control of power electronic converters and motor drives. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 55:1112–25
     [Google Scholar]
  83. 83. 
    Sciarretta A, Guzzella L. 2007. Control of hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Control Syst 27:60–70
     [Google Scholar]
  84. 84. 
    Onori S, Serrao L, Rizzoni G. 2016. Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Energy Management Strategies London: Springer
  85. 85. 
    Kim N, Cha S, Peng H 2011. Optimal control of hybrid electric vehicles based on Pontryagin's minimum principle. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 19:1279–87
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. 
    Moura S, Fathy H, Callaway D, Stein J. 2011. A stochastic optimal control approach for power management in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 19:545–55
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 87. 
    Paganelli G. 1999. Conception et commande d'une chaîne de traction pour véhicule hybride parallèle thermique et électrique PhD Thesis Univ. Valenciennes Valenciennes, Fr:.
  88. 88. 
    Sciarretta A, Back M, Guzzella L. 2004. Optimal control of parallel hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 12:352–63
     [Google Scholar]
  89. 89. 
    Serrao L, Onori S, Rizzoni G 2009. Equivalent consumption minimization strategy as a realization of Pontryagin's minimum principle for HEV control. 2009 American Control Conference3964–69 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  90. 90. 
    Pisu P, Rizzoni G. 2007. A comparative study of supervisory control strategies for hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 15:506–18
     [Google Scholar]
  91. 91. 
    Borhan H, Vahidi A, Phillips A, Kuang M, Kolmanovsky I, DiCairano S 2012. MPC-based energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 20:593–603
     [Google Scholar]
  92. 92. 
    Di Cairano S. 2012. An industry perspective on MPC in large volumes applications: potential benefits and open challenges. IFAC Proc. Vol. 4:17 5 52–59
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 93. 
    Li X, Han L, Liu H, Wang W, Xiang C 2019. Real-time optimal energy management strategy for a dual-mode power-split hybrid electric vehicle based on an explicit model predictive control algorithm. Energy 172:1161–78
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 94. 
    Dunham W, Hencey B, Girard A, Kolmanovsky I. 2020. Distributed model predictive control for more electric aircraft subsystems operating at multiple time scales. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 28:2177–90
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 95. 
    Khalil HK. 2015. Nonlinear Control London: Pearson
  96. 96. 
    Koeln JP. 2016. Hierarchical power management in vehicle systems PhD Thesis Univ. Ill. Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL:
  97. 97. 
    Koeln JP, Alleyne AG. 2017. Stability of decentralized model predictive control of graph-based power flow systems via passivity. Automatica 82:29–34
     [Google Scholar]
  98. 98. 
    Gomez-Exposito A, Abur A, de la Villa Jaen A, Gomez-Quiles C. 2011. A multilevel state estimation paradigm for smart grids. Proc. IEEE 99:952–76
     [Google Scholar]
  99. 99. 
    Tannous PJ, Alleyne AG. 2020. Multilevel hierarchical estimation for thermal management systems of electrified vehicles with experimental validation. ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 142:111004
     [Google Scholar]
  100. 100. 
    Tannous PJ. 2020. Estimation and fault diagnosis for vehicle energy systems PhD Thesis Univ. Ill. Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL:
  101. 101. 
    Liberzon D. 2003. Switching in Systems and Control Boston: Birkhauser
  102. 102. 
    Pangborn HC, Koeln JP, Alleyne AG. 2018. Passivity and decentralized MPC of switched graph-based power flow systems. 2018 Annual American Control Conference198–203 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  103. 103. 
    Pangborn HC, Alleyne AG. 2019. Cooperativity and hierarchical MPC of state-constrained switched power flow systems. 2019 American Control Conference4245–52 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  104. 104. 
    Atkeson A, Kehoe P. 2001. The transition to a new economy after the second industrial revolution Work. Pap. 606 Fed. Reserve Bank Minneap. Minneapolis, MN:
  105. 105. 
    Lukic M, Hebala A, Giangrande P, Klumpner C, Nuzzo S et al. 2018. State of the art of electric taxiing systems. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Electrical Systems for Aircraft, Railway, Ship Propulsion and Road Vehicles and International Transportation Electrification Conference Piscataway, NJ: IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/ESARS-ITEC.2018.8607786
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513
Loading
Control as an Enabler for Electrified Mobility
Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems 5, 659 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-control-042920-012513
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error