dlr-vsdc/ieee-mvc-2023

IEEE Motor Vehicles Challenge 2023

IEEE VTS Motor Vehicles Challenge 2023: A Multi-physical Benchmark Problem for Next Generation Energy Management Algorithms

Introduction

The competitors are invited to develop the energy management algorithm (EMA) for the vehicle (cf. Figure 1). The EMA determines the operating conditions for the two energy storage devices and the three electric motors; minimization of the energy consumption and battery degradation are some of the main goals of the EMA.

Announcement

Dear competitors,

we are happy to announce that the team
EDLab Sharks team from University of Padova won this year’s edition of the IEEE VTS Motor Vehicles Challange 2023.
2nd place: Ricercatori Polimi TEAM 2 from Politecnico di Milano
3rd place: NDS strategy 1 from Politecnico di Milano

Congratulations!

All rankings and details on the assessment process can be found here.

Many thanks to all competitors and their valuable input during the development process of the challenge.
We are looking forward to meet you in person at the IEEE VPPC 2023 in Milan!

Release Notes

Please refer to the change log.
Latest: 17th of Feb. 2023 - Final Release (i.a. 30 s preview horizon).
Remarks:

• Please take notice of the discussion board, with a lot of solved Q&A.
• Moreover, it is worthwhile to have a look at the solved issues section.

Important Links

• How to get ready in MATLAB/Simulink, please refer to installation readme.
• For additional information please view presentation slides of the paper *.pdf.
• The submitted version of the publication, incl. fixed errata can be found in our elib repository.
• For information on the given tracks, please refer to tracks readme.

THE MVC 2023 Benchmark Problem

In Figure 1 the MVC 2023 challenge model and it's components are shown.
The competitors are invited to develop the top red block, the energy management algorithm (EMA).

Figure 1: Block diagram of the MVC 2023 benchmark problem.

Bibliography

Brembeck, J.; de Castro, R.; Tobolar, J. & Ebrahimi, I. IEEE VTS Motor Vehicles Challenge 2023: A Multi-physical Benchmark Problem for Next Generation Energy Management Algorithms 19th IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), 2022

Link to reference *.bib file.

License

Copyright © 2022-2023 DLR & UCM. The code is released under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license. Link to short summary of CC BY-NC 4.0 license. For attribution see also license file.

ieee-mvc-2023's Issues

Wrong signal names from vehicle model

Hello,
we have just noticed that some motors' output signals from the Modelica vehicle model may have an improper name. In particular, the power balance for each motor seems not correct: apart for the sign, the losses (Ploss) are sometimes greater than the absorbed electrical power (ePower); then, the mechanical output power (mechPower) is too small when compared with the input electrical power, resulting in an impractical efficiency.

We think that the names of these signals are somehow reversed.

Moreover, we would like to point out that the signs of some quantities seems strange according to the common convention. For example, the current (Iq) is negative when the machine is motoring, as well as the electrical power and the mechanical power. Can you explain us the convention you adopted in your model, please?

Kindly,

Elia

Fuel Cell Model: wrong SI-units in H2 consumption

  @MrKrabb you are right, we are aware of this issue (there is a unit confusion already in the referenced paper) and we are preparing an update model with a different parameterization of the fuel cell. At the moment we are testing the new release (beta 2) and hope we can bring it online the next days.  Here already a preliminary screenshot what will be changed:

Fuel cell consumption:

In the model we introduce a missing multiplicator:

Originally posted by @JBRDLR in #4 (comment)

Derating and temperature violation cost functions

Discussed in #22

^{Originally posted by mariagrazia-tristano February 1, 2023}
Hello,

While looking at scores from some preliminary simulations I came across something odd. Looking at the baseline scores file, for some of the tracks the velocity derating cost function J_v and the temperature violation cost function J_T are zero, which is perfectly plausible when no derating is necessary and no temperature violation occurs. On the other hand, the two corresponding competitor cost functions can be bigger than 0, in case of temporary violation of the battery temperature constraint or in case derating is deemed necessary in some time instants.

However, looking at how the normalisation is performed, the score-checking MATLAB function seems to "punish" the competitor by setting the normalised cost to be infinite when the baseline cost is zero and the competitor one is bigger than zero. So if the competitor incurs in that second "if" case of the score-checking function, essentially the entire cost function becomes infinite. Is there a reason why it was set that way?

Moreover, since the temperature violation cost function in the Simulink file saves the maximum temperature without any following integration, wouldn't this imply that say a 1°C temperature violation for 1s would affect the cost function in the same way as if one kept the battery temperature constantly at 1°C above the maximum for the whole duration of the simulation?

Many thanks.

New/different input quantites/signals for EMA

Hi,
is it allowed to use quantites not inside vehiclebus as input for the EMA?
Are we allowed to add some other outputs to the FMU model and use them in our EMA?

Elia

Extend state vector in the EMA

One of the competitors would like to access more vehicle states, including

• lateral acceleration
• torque/force requested by the velocity controller.

This is a reasonable request. We can also add longitudinal acceleration.

Side slip angle issue

Discussed in #23

^{Originally posted by woojmn February 2, 2023}
Hello,

I have a question about the side slip angle.

As you can see the picture, in the cycle #4, the steer and yaw rate are almost zero but the side slip angle is large value.

I think it is weird, so I wonder your idea for this issue.

battery aging cost question

    Hello,

I have a question about battery aging cost.

The battery aging cost is shown as follow picture at the cycle #4.

In the picture, there is a section where the battery aging cost decreases while driving. Is it possible?

I think that it require to be integrated.

Originally posted by @woojmn in #26

Question Regarding to Preview Information in Final Release

Discussed in #38

^{Originally posted by Fantasydog05 February 24, 2023}
Hello,

I’d like to ask if this is correct. In the changelog of the final release, preview horizon is extended to 30 seconds with sampling time of 1 second. The way I understand it is that the time difference between each signal is 1 second. However, the time difference from the simulation seems to be 2.5 seconds, which means the total preview horizon is 2.5(seconds)*30(windows) = 75 seconds.

Thank you for your reply.

Lateral acceleration issue

Hi! I noticed that the model has a saturation on the maximum lateral acceleration and equals to "ay_max"=3. But if I plot V^2/R against the output of the model "ay", it is clearly seen that "ay" is limited and V^2/R is sometimes bigger than 3. Why is that constraint there? In order to follow the reference curvature, "ay" should be equal V^2/R, right?
Image reference: Yellow (ay model output) Blue (calculated V^2/R)

“testEnergyManagementAlgorithm”is not a valid simulink model file: could not open source package.

There are an error " 'testEnergyManagementAlgorithm.slx' is not a valid simulink model file: could not open source package. " when I open the testEnergyManagementAlgorithm.slx.

Values of motors' parameters

Hi,
can you provide to the participants the values of motors' parameters?
I am referring to the machine parameters in the paper equations, i.e. resistances, inductances, coefficients to compute losses.
We don't know how to open the Modelica model and look for these values and we didn't find them in the documentation so far.

Elia (EDLab Sharks)

Discrepances in electric motor losses

From #14 (comment):

Hi, after some simulations and tries, I noticied that the power losses measured from electricMotorBusFM.Ploss is not equal to the calculated by eq:

Ploss = Pinv + Pcu + Piron + Pfric
Pcu = 1.5 Iq^2rs;
Piron = 0.095*(wm) + 0.00009*(wm)^2;
Pinv = 95 + 5Iq;
Pfric = 0.155 wm;

being:

Iq = electricMotorBusFM.I_q
wm = electricMotorBusFM.angVel

for a given instant of time.

I have a smaller value with the equation. Do you know where could be the problem or what am I missing?

Thanks!

Access violation

  We are experiencing the same issue.

It is a fresh Matlab installation: 9.13.0.2126072 (R2022b) Update 3.

The PC is an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7800X CPU @ 3.50GHz 3.50 GHz, 64-bit operating system, x64-based processor.
Windows specification:
Edition Windows 10 Pro
Version 21H2
OS build 19044.2486
Experience Windows Feature Experience Pack 120.2212.4190.0

We tried on two different PCs, and the same error occurs.

Originally posted by @grisamgit in #7 (reply in thread)