MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108991943 · doi:10.1109/vppc.2008.4677706

A novel design and feasibility analysis of a fuel cell plug-in hybrid electric vehicle

2008· article· en· W2108991943 on OpenAlexaff
Di Wu, Sheldon S. Williamson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringMiles per gallon gasoline equivalentPowertrainElectric vehicleCommercializationHybrid vehiclePropulsionDriving rangeEngineeringGreen vehicleComputer scienceFuel efficiencyPower (physics)Torque

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) are receiving global attention, stimulated by the urgent need for more fuel-efficient vehicles. However, current challenges for fuel cells such as high cost, sizing problem, and limited driving range, greatly affect the pace of FCV development. At the same time, domestic and renewable energy resource usage is frequently being encouraged for future electric propulsion applications. This philosophy has lead auto manufacturers to investigate the potential of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). In this paper, a fuel cell based PHEV (FC-PHEV) configuration, powered by combining an on-board regenerative fuel cell (RFC) and down-sized Ni-MH batteries, is modeled and investigated in detail. This configuration prospectively points towards remarkable advantages from the point of view of both environmental as well as cost friendliness. In addition, an FC-PHEV will also depict longer life span, while maintaining good vehicle performance, compared to regular plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) or fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles (FC-HEVs). This paper will present a power train configuration of a FC-PHEV, developed for a family sedan. A suitable power management approach has been developed, which considers fuel economy, component efficiency, and driving pattern. The vehicle performance and feasibility are also investigated based on the modeling and simulation studies. A detailed comparison and discussion from the point of view of fuel economy, drive train efficiency, as well as practical cost and commercialization issues will also be presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207