Longitudinal Control Strategy for Connected Electric Vehicle with Regenerative Braking in Eco-Approach and Departure
, Renato Galluzzi 1, Zhaobin Mo 2, Yongjie Fu 2, Rogelio Bustamante-Bello 1 and Xuan Di 2,3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper proposes the rule and fuzzy inference system-based strategy for a coupled eco-approach and departure regenerative braking system to solve the energy management problem for connected electric vehicles. The simulation result shows that the vehicle is able to yield safe navigation while focusing on energy regeneration through different navigation conditions. In general, this is a good paper dealing with the timely subject.
The following comments and recommendations may be helpful to improve the paper:
Q-1: In the introduction, the development from single vehicles to connected vehicles should be discussed when investigating regenerative braking in eco-approach and departure, which is the future tendency: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.05665.
Q-2: In Section 2 for powertrain modeling, the motor modelling is essential for the overall control framework, so the physical characteristics of the motor should be discussed: a hierarchical energy efficiency optimization control strategy for distributed drive electric vehicles; comprehensive chassis control strategy of FWIC‐EV based on sliding mode control.
Q-3: In the Section 4 for the Table 3, the performance of rule-based longitudinal navigation systems is better than the FIS-based due to the extreme situations, where the vehicle dynamics is changeable, the control for the extreme situation should be discussed in the introduction: dynamic drifting control for general path tracking of autonomous vehicles, which make the paper reasonable.
Q-4: Vehicle velocity and acceleration states could not be obtained directly. But these states are pretty important for the performance of your model. Usually, scholars would design robust estimation algorithms to obtain these states by integrating GPS, camera, and IMU equipped on autonomous vehicles. As a result, some related references should be added to make the proposed method more readable: automated vehicle sideslip angle estimation considering signal measurement characteristic; vision‐aided intelligent vehicle sideslip angle estimation based on a dynamic model.
Q-5: In Section 4, it is better to provide the environment set diagram to briefly describe the street layout and vehicle layout as you mentioned in the Environment setting, which makes the paper more readable.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article describes the rule and fuzzy inference-based algorithms rule for a coupled eco-approach and departure regenerative braking system. Some simulation studies have been conducted to show the performance of proposed strategies; however, the results are not compared with the existing works. This manuscript needs major technical improvements before going to review.
- At some points, the article could be clearer due to language acquaintance. Also, check the grammatical problems.
- The paper's contributions to the existing research should be clearly stated. The reviewer suggests that the novelties of the paper have been added at the end of the Introduction section. I think the existing contribution is not the novelty of the paper.
- The authors VERY briefly discuss the previously developed methods/algorithms in the introduction. The authors are strongly recommended to describe more than their methods, e.g., accuracy and computation.
- Check Eq. (3). Why don't you use the rear longitudinal forces?
- How did you model the longitudinal forces?
- Why did you use the linear lateral model for tires? Is this a good assumption for fundamental strategies?
- Check Eqs. (6) and (7). arctan(*) should be used.
- How have you defined the fuzzy rules? Is there any expert knowledge about it? If yes, please write something about it; otherwise, describe why you have defined such rules. The boundary and the shape of membership functions are also questionable.
- Section 4: Do you have Experiments tests? I think it should be mentioned simulation studies.
- Why don't you use a simulator such as CarSim or a complex nonlinear model as the simulator? Using the simulator or even a nonlinear dynamical model as a simulator will be a good choice.
- The results should be compared with the existing works. The proposed method's improvement, advantages, and disadvantages concerning the comparison method should be clearly stated.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
After revising the paper, it is ready to publish in Applied Science Journal.
