Feasibility Study of an Innovative Urban Electric-Hybrid Microcar

  • Alessandro Ferraris
  • Federico Micca
  • Alessandro Messana
  • Andrea Giancarlo Airale
  • Massimiliana CarelloEmail author


This paper presents the feasibility study of a new platform for electric-hybrid quadricycles, developed by addressing important concepts like passive safety and comfort, which often represent a shortcoming in this vehicle category. Starting from packaging of energy storage system and macroscopic subsystems as the main technological constraint, the study has been entirely developed in a virtual environment, with finite element verifications on preliminary models, and a subsequent cooperation phase between computer aided design and finite element analysis softwares, with a guideline for the main tests being that each could feasibly be carried out on a complete vehicle model in order to validate the original assumptions. The resulting design, with a body curb mass of less than 100 kg, was capable of integrating optimal static stiffness characteristics and crash performance, together with improved vehicle dynamics thanks to an innovative suspension archetype.

Key Words

Hybrid vehicle Finite element analysis Urban mobility Passive safety 



electric vehicle


plug-in hybrid electric vehicle


computer aided design


finite element analysis


new European driving cycle


New York city cycle


electric motor


internal combustion engine


internal permanent magnet synchronous machines


surface-mounted permanent magnet


anti-blocking system


one pedal feeling


carbon fiber reinforced plastic


motor generation unit


battery management system


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Airale, A. G., Carello, M. and Scattina, A. (2011). Carbon fiber monocoque for a hydrogen prototype for low consumption challenge. Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik 42, 5, 386–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boria, S., Maccagnani, S., Giambò, R. and Giannoni, F. (2015). Crashworthiness and lightweight design of an innovative microcar. Int. J. Automotive Composites 1, 4, 313–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brusaglino, G., Buja, G., Carello, M., Carlucci, A. P., Onder, C. H. and Razzetti, M. (2009). New technologies demonstrated at Formula Electric and Hybrid Italy 2008. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 3, 1, 160–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carello, M. and Airale, A. G. (2014)d. Composite suspension arm optimization for the city vehicle XAM 2.0. Design and Computation of Modern Engineering Materials, 54, 257–272.Google Scholar
  5. Carello, M. and Messana, A. (2015a). IDRApegasus: A fuelcell prototype for 3000 km/L. Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 12, Supplement 1, 56–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carello, M., Airale, A. G. and Ferraris, A. (2014c). City vehicle XAM 2.0: Design and optimization of the composite suspension system. SAE Paper No. 2014-01- 1050.Google Scholar
  7. Carello, M., Airale, A. G., Ferraris, A., Messana, A. and Sisca, L. (2017). Static design and finite element analysis of innovative CFRP transverse leaf spring. Applied Composite Materials, 24,6, 1493–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carello, M., Andrea, S., Airale, A. G. and Ferraris, A. (2015b). Design the city vehicle XAM using CFD analysis. SAE Paper No. 2015-01-1533.Google Scholar
  9. Carello, M., Ferraris, A., Airale A. G. and Fuentes, F. (2014b). City vehicle XAM 2.0: Design and optimization of its plug-in E-REV powertrain. SAE Paper No. 2014-01-1822.Google Scholar
  10. Carello, M., Filippo, N. and D’Ippolito, R. (2012). Performance optimization for the XAM hybrid electric vehicle prototype. SAE Paper No. 2012-01-0773.Google Scholar
  11. Carello, M., Airale, A. G., Ferraris, A. and Messana, A. (2014e). XAM 2.0: From student competition to professional challenge. Computer-Aided Design and Applications 11, Supplement 1, S61—S67.Google Scholar
  12. Carello, M., Airale, A. G. and Messana, A. (2014a). IDRApegasus: A carbon fiber monocoque vehicle prototype. Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik 45, 5, 397–405.Google Scholar
  13. Chindamo, D., Gadola, M. and Romano, M. (2014). Simulation tool for optimization and performance prediction of a generic hybrid electric series powertrain. Int. J. Automotive Technology, 15,1, 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Code of Federal Regulations (2003). Title 40, Protection of Environment, Parts 85–86, Sections 86.115-86.130-86.159-86.160.Google Scholar
  15. Commission Directive 2001/116/EC (2001). 20 December 2001 Adapting to Technical Progress Council Directive 70/156/EEC on the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Relating to the Type-approval of Motor Vehicles and Their Trailers.Google Scholar
  16. Cubito, C., Rolando, L., Ferraris, A., Carello, M. and Millo, F. (2017). Design of the control strategy for a range extended hybrid vehicle by means of dynamic programming optimization. Proc. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symp. (IV), Los Angeles, California, USA.Google Scholar
  17. E/ECE/324/Rev.2/Add.100/Rev.3 or E/ECE/TRANS/505/Rev.2/Add.100/Rev.3 (2013). Agreement Concerning the Adoption of Uniform Technical Prescriptions for Wheeled Vehicles, Equipment and Parts Which Can be Fitted and/or be Used on Wheeled Vehicles and the Conditions for Reciprocal Recognition of Approvals Granted on the Basis of These Prescriptions; Addendum 100: Regulation No. 101.Google Scholar
  18. Euro NCAP (2014a). L7e Frontal Impact Testing Protocol. Version 1.1.Google Scholar
  19. Euro NCAP (2014b). L7e Side Impact Testing Protocol. Version 1.1.Google Scholar
  20. Fasana, A., Carello, M., Ferraris, A., Airale, A. G. and Bertipolato, D. (2016). NVH analysis of automotive components: A carbon fiber suspension system case. Advances in Italian Mechanism Science, 47, 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ferraris, A., Airale, A. G., Messana, A., Xu, S. and Carello, M. (2018). The regenerative braking for a L7e range extender hybrid vehicle. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Environment and Electrical Engineering, Palermo, Italy.Google Scholar
  22. Ferraris, A., Xu, S., Airale, A. G. and Carello, M. (2017). Design and optimisation of XAM 2.0plug-in powertrain. Int. J. Vehicle Performance, 3,3, 273–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Filippo, N., Carello, M., D’Auria, M. and Marcello, A. (2013). Optimization of IDRApegasus: Fuel cell hydrogen vehicle. SAE Paper No. 2013-01-0964.Google Scholar
  24. Frost and Sullivan (2010). Impact of Urbanization and Development of Megacities on Personal Mobility and Vehicle Technology Planning.Google Scholar
  25. Hodkinson, R. and Fenton, J. (2001). Lightweight Electric/Hybrid Vehicle Design. Butterworth Heinemann. Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  26. ISO 13063 (2012). Electrically Propelled Mopeds and Motorcycles — Safety Specifications.Google Scholar
  27. Kim, B. J., Kim, M. S. and Heo, S. J. (2005). Aluminum space frame B.I.W. optimization considering multidisciplinary design constraints. Int. J. Automotive Technology, 6,6, 635–641.Google Scholar
  28. McKinsey & Company (2017). Electrifying Insights: How Automakers Can Drive Electrified Vehicle Sales and Profitability. Advanced Industries Report.Google Scholar
  29. Morello, L. (2011a). The Automotive Body. Volume I: Components Design. Springer. London, UK.Google Scholar
  30. Morello, L. (2011b). The Automotive Body. Volume II: System Design. Springer. London, UK.Google Scholar
  31. Moriarty, P. and Honnery, D. (1999). Slower, smaller and lighter urban cars. Proc. Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: J. Automobile Engineering, 213, 1, 19–26.Google Scholar
  32. Mundo, D., Donders, S., Hadjit, R., Stigliano, G., Mas, P. and Van Der Auwaraer, H. (2010). Concept modelling of automotive beams, joints and panels. Proc. WSEAS Int. Conf. Finite Differences - Finite Elements - Finite Volumes - Boundary Elements. Bucharest, Romania.Google Scholar
  33. Piano, L. (2009). La Sicurezza Passiva Degli Autoveicoli. Hoepli. Milan.Google Scholar
  34. Regulation EU 168/2013 (2013). No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the Approval and Market Surveillance of Twoor Three-wheel Vehicles and Quadricycles.Google Scholar
  35. Richard, D. (2003). Automotive suspension systems benefit from composites. Reinforced Plastics, 47,11, 18–21.Google Scholar
  36. SAE J1052 (2002). Motor Vehicle Driver and Passenger Head Position.Google Scholar
  37. SAE J211/1 (1995). Instrumentation for Impact Test-Part 1-Electronic Instrumentation.Google Scholar
  38. SAE J826 (1995). Devices for Use in Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating Accomodation.Google Scholar
  39. Sheng, G. (2012). Vehicle Noise, Vibration and Sound Quality. SAE International. Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA.Google Scholar
  40. Shin, M.-K., Shin, J.-K., Hwang, S.-J. and Park, G.-J. (2007). Structural analysis and optimization of a lowspeed vehicle body. Proc. Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: J. Automobile Engineering, 221,3, 313–326.Google Scholar
  41. Tanik, E. and Parlaktas, V. (2015). Design of a very light L7E electric vehicle prototype. Int. J. Automotive Technology, 16,6, 997–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xu, S., Ferraris, A., Airale, A. G. and Carello, M. (2017). Elasto-kinematics design of an innovative composite material suspension system. Mechanical Sciences, 8,1, 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© KSAE 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Ferraris
    • 1
  • Federico Micca
    • 2
  • Alessandro Messana
    • 1
  • Andrea Giancarlo Airale
    • 1
  • Massimiliana Carello
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering DepartmentPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly
  2. 2.BeonDTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations