Next Article in Journal
Velocity Prediction Based on Map Data for Optimal Control of Electrified Vehicles Using Recurrent Neural Networks (LSTM)
Previous Article in Journal
Severity Analysis of Large-Truck Wrong-Way Driving Crashes in the State of Florida
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Vehicles
Volume 4
Issue 3
10.3390/vehicles4030044
vehicles-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Off-Road Construction and Agricultural Equipment Electrification: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities

by
Fuad Un-Noor
1,*,
Guoyuan Wu
1,
Harikishan Perugu
2,
Sonya Collier
3,
Seungju Yoon
3,
Mathew Barth
1 and
Kanok Boriboonsomsin
1
1
College of Engineering—Center for Environmental Technology and Research, University of California, Riverside, 1084 Columbia Avenue, Riverside, CA 92507, USA
2
California Department of Transportation, 703 B St, Marysville, CA 95901, USA
3
Research Division, California Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vehicles 2022, 4(3), 780-807; https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4030044
Submission received: 30 June 2022 / Revised: 29 July 2022 / Accepted: 1 August 2022 / Published: 6 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Topic Decarbonised Powertrains and Emission Control in Transportation)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Though the current wave of electric vehicles is transforming the on-road passenger and commercial vehicle fleets, similar attempts in the off-road equipment sector appear to be lacking. Because of the diverse equipment categories and varied applications, electrifying off-road equipment requires significant research and development. A successful electrification of such equipment can offer an array of benefits, including reduced air and noise pollution, higher energy efficiency, and increased productivity. This paper provides a review of the current state of technology in off-road equipment electrification, with a focus on the equipment used in construction and agricultural applications. The paper also discusses advantages of, and challenges associated with, electrifying off-road construction and agricultural equipment. In addition, potential solutions for overcoming these challenges as well as opportunities to facilitate the electrification of off-road construction and agricultural equipment are identified.

1. Introduction

Electric vehicles (EVs) have become a symbol for emissions reduction in the on-road transportation sector. The superior torque and lower emissions of these vehicles as well as other advantages they offer have generated significant interest in them [1]. Though passenger EVs have faced challenges of limited driving range and insufficient charging infrastructure, those have been gradually overcome. To date, much work has been conducted on the electrification of on-road vehicles [1,2,3]—from light-duty passenger cars and sports utility vehicles (SUVs) to medium- and heavy-duty commercial trucks—many of which have become commercially available [4,5,6,7]. However, pieces of off-road equipment such as those used in construction and agricultural applications have not been given the same level of attention.
Construction and agricultural equipment can be a major source of air pollution in many areas [8], and electrifying a large number of them holds significant promise not only in improving local air quality but also for reducing fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions [9]. Increasingly stringent regulations aimed at reducing these emissions are one of the primary reasons that prompted off-road equipment manufacturers to explore electrification [10]. In the United States, off-road diesel engines over 50 horsepower (hp)/37 kW were first brought under federal emission standards in 1994. These very first standards were called the Tier 1 standards. Tier 1 was subsequently succeeded by Tiers 2, 3, and 4; each more stringent than the former. These emission standards essentially dictate the amounts (gram/kWh) of emissions such as carbon monoxide (CO), nonmethane hydrocarbon (NHMC), oxides nitrogen (NOx), and particulate matter (PM) allowed for different engine power levels. Up until Tier 3, advanced engine designs along with some use of exhaust gas aftertreatment were adopted to meet these emission limits. Tier 4 standards were introduced in 2004, requiring almost a 90% reduction in NOx and PM emissions. Manufacturers implemented control techniques such as advanced exhaust aftertreatment in the equipment they produced to attain that goal. Tier 5 was presented to the public in 2021 to further reduce NOx and PM emissions [11]. Emission standards at the European Union (EU) followed a similar pattern. The first of EU legislations, the Stage I/II regulations for off-road equipment, were put into effect in 1997. Stage III/IV were introduced in 2005. Then came Stage V, made effective for engines above 130 kW and below 56 kW from 2019; the engines within the 56–130 kW range were brought under Stage V restrictions from 2020. Similar to the United States Tiers, the EU Stages also dictated permissible emission quantities (gram/kWh) for off-road diesel engine exhaust gases—CO, hydrocarbon (HC), NOx, and PM—for different engine power levels [12]. With ever-tightening emission limits, manufacturers have been pushed to develop increasingly advanced engine technologies. Now, as the limits have started stretching the limits of diesel engine technology, different electrification approaches such as mild hybridization and battery electrification has been picked up by manufacturers to comply with the future emission regulations. The state of California has even stated a goal to make all heavy-duty vehicles zero-emission by 2045 for feasible operational cases [13]. Off-road equipment is a major portion of these heady-duty vehicles, and thus it is now essential to start developing electric heavy-duty equipment to have working products on the market by 2045.
To date, much of the electrification efforts for off-road construction and agricultural equipment has focused primarily on the use of diesel-electric and hybrid powertrains, although there have been efforts towards battery electrification. However, due to the unique usage and working conditions of off-road equipment, the electrification technologies used in on-road vehicles may not be directly transferable to off-road equipment [14,15]. For example, hybrid systems from on-road EVs are not directly applicable to hybrid excavators because of the dissimilar working environments [16]. Moreover, the components of off-road electric equipment have to withstand a higher level of impact and vibration compared to those of on-road EVs. For example, the power electronics must be capable of withstanding elements such as mud and water, and the hydrogen tanks of off-road fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) must be rugged enough to maintain integrity upon impact.
Previously, research on off-road equipment electrification has been conducted on some specific equipment types (e.g., excavators and tractors) or components (e.g., drivetrain and energy storage system (ESS)), as summarized in Table 1. However, there is an absence of comprehensive review on the state of technology of off-road equipment electrification.
Table
Table 1. Examples of previous works on off-road construction and agricultural equipment electrification.
Table 1. Examples of previous works on off-road construction and agricultural equipment electrification.
ReferenceYearTopic
Yang et al. [17]2009
  • Analysis of emission from transportation sector in California and their mitigation
Parsons et al. [18]2014
  • Off-road drivetrain and battery technologies
Aydin et al. [19]2014
  • Permanent magnet synchronous generators for off-highway heavy-duty series hybrid application
Wang et al. [16]2017
  • Hybrid excavators developed by different organizations
  • ESS configurations and control strategies
  • Energy savings and challenges of different ESS configurations
Kwon et al. [20]2010
  • Hybrid excavators employing supercapacitors
Wang et al. [21]2009
  • Powertrain and performance analysis of hybrid hydraulic excavators
Zhang et al. [22]2019
  • Configurations and energy management strategies of hybrid construction equipment
Moreda et al. [23]2016
  • Electrification of agricultural tractors
This paper is aimed at bridging that gap by reviewing the electrification of off-road equipment in construction and agricultural sectors. There are a variety of equipment types and sizes in these two sectors [24], but this paper is focused primarily on those with power ratings of 75 horsepower or more. Off-road equipment generally employs power takeoff (PTO), which is the process of driving accessories using power from the engine. Electrification of PTO is also included in this review as it can result in less use, or more efficient use of the internal combustion engine (ICE), which would reduce emissions [25]. This claim was supported by Wagh et al. [26] who pointed out that alongside the drivetrain, accessories as well as safety and control features could be electrified to provide notable benefits. Along with the configurations of electric off-road equipment presented in previous works, this paper also reviews the energy recovery techniques employed. In addition, the advantages of electric off-road equipment, their technical and operational challenges, and potential solutions are discussed. Lastly, opportunities to facilitate the electrification of off-road construction and agricultural equipment are identified.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the vehicle configurations presented in previous works. Section 3 studies the energy recovery techniques for construction and agricultural equipment. The advantages and challenges of off-road equipment electrification are discussed in Section 4, along with potential solutions. The outcomes of this study and future research topics are delineated in Section 6. Finally, the conclusions are drawn in Section 7.

2. Electric Powertrain Architectures in Different Off-Road Equipment Categories

While many publications focus on specific equipment types (e.g., tractors, excavators) or categories (e.g., construction, agriculture), several others are geared toward general, multi-purpose off-road equipment. This section provides an overview of notable works conducted on construction and agricultural equipment electrification, with the additional inclusion of some general off-road equipment types. Each subsection covers different hybrid and battery electric powertrain configurations. A hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) uses electric motor(s) alongside an ICE, while a battery electric vehicle (BEV) employs electric motor(s) exclusively. A separate classification worth mentioning is fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV), which uses fuel cells to generate electricity for running its electric powertrain. Partial or full electrification of equipment attachments, which conventionally is powered by ICE through PTO, is also discussed in this section. In addition, the maturity level of technology development—software-based simulation or hardware implementation (either on test bench or in vehicle)—is also noted.

2.1. General Off-Road Equipment

A variety of EV architectures can be applied to electrify construction and agricultural equipment. Zhang et al. [27] showed the design of a battery management system (BMS) [28] for a light-duty off-road parallel plug-in hybrid (PHEV) vehicle, where they employed fuzzy programming to accomplish the task. Parsons et al. [18] showed the design of a heavy military vehicle employing a series hybrid configuration with hub-mounted electric motors utilizing a two-speed transmission. They stated that the design is scalable to vehicles requiring an individual motor capacity up to 400 kW, so it might be possible to adopt this design for heavy construction equipment. A concept similar to that proposed in Parsons et al. [18] was previously presented by Jackson et al. [29], and a two-speed transmission was also used for hybrid heavy off-road machinery by Sinkko et al. [30]. With sufficiently mature battery technology, the ICE might be discarded to move towards the BEV architecture, especially in applications where duty cycles do not demand power exceeding the battery capacity. Baronti et al. [31] proposed a BMS for lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) batteries intended for off-road BEV usage, considering battery modules with four cells. Their goal was to design a system that did not require any bespoke hardware, and could serve a wider range of applications. Employing hydrogen fuel cells to power an electric drivetrain represents another possibility for electrifying off-road construction and agricultural equipment. It would be faster to refuel FCEVs than BEVs in remote locations, provided that hydrogen fuel storage can be made available on or near those sites. An off-road FCEV configuration is presented by Saeks et al. [32], where a flywheel energy storage system [1] was used to recover energy and to aid in acceleration. The system had four motors in each of the four wheels to provide four-wheel drive, and employed adaptive controllers with interconnections to facilitate front- and rear-wheel steering as well as energy management and acceleration–deceleration. The works reviewed in this subsection are summarized in Table 2.

2.2. Construction Equipment

This subsection is focused on electrification efforts on construction equipment. Special attention is paid to construction equipment with higher population or carbon dioxide (CO2) emission contribution in California, USA, according to data from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) [24]. The lists of construction equipment types in 2018 as sorted by population and CO2 emission are shown in Figure 1. These two lists are not necessarily the same, as some types of equipment tend to have larger engine sizes, which produce more CO2 emission per hour. Moreover, some equipment types are used more than others. It is notable that off-highway trucks had a small population (ranked 12th) but were the third largest contributors of CO2 emission among all the construction equipment types. Thus, efforts to electrify this type of construction equipment could yield significant CO2 emission reduction. In this subsection, the review will concentrate on the top equipment types in terms of CO2 emission contribution, namely, loader, tractor–loader–backhoe, excavator, off-highway truck, and scraper.
Tractor–loader–backhoe (also known as backhoe–loader) is a tractor with a loader at the front and a backhoe at the back (Figure 2). Escorts [33] proposed a concept of an electric backhoe–loader, but details are currently limited [34]. Skid steer loaders are generally small, and can be tracked or wheeled. On the other hand, rubber-tired loaders are typically larger, and have articulate frames to allow the front wheels to pivot relative to the rear. Hybrid rubber-tired loaders are already available commercially [35,36,37,38], while BEV versions of skid steer loaders have also been introduced [38]. An example of hybrid rubber-tired loaders is the Caterpillar® 988K XE [39,40], which combines a switched reluctance electric drive with a Tier 4 diesel engine [41] for increased efficiency and convenience. It utilizes the switched reluctance machines as a generator and pump drive. Additional hybrid loader designs were reported in Achten et al. [42]. In addition, there has been development of BEV loaders, such as the Caterpillar R1300G LHD [43], which uses electric motors and lithium ion batteries to run the mechanical drivetrain with gears. Caterpillar also developed a commercial product, the R1700 XE LHD, which is shown in Figure 3.
Vehicles 04 00044 g002 550
Figure 2. Tractor–loader–backhoes are tractors with a front-mounted loader and a back-mounted backhoe as attachments.
Figure 2. Tractor–loader–backhoes are tractors with a front-mounted loader and a back-mounted backhoe as attachments.
Vehicles 04 00044 g002
Vehicles 04 00044 g003 550
Figure 3. Caterpillar R1700 XE LHD which uses battery-powered electric motors for propulsion [44].
Figure 3. Caterpillar R1700 XE LHD which uses battery-powered electric motors for propulsion [44].
Vehicles 04 00044 g003
Excavators are fitted with digging equipment using a boom, and can be wheeled or tracked. Figure 4 shows an excavator. In [45,46], electric systems were successfully integrated into excavator booms for energy recovery, resulting in less energy consumption, and hence lower CO2 emissions. Wang et al. [16] studied different drivetrain configurations for hybrid excavators. They found that a combination of electric motor with battery was most frequently used for small hybrid excavators, whereas medium hybrid excavators favored supercapacitors (SC) (also known as ultracapacitors) instead of battery as the ESS. The superior power density of SC and its faster power transfer in larger amounts as compared to battery might have driven this choice. The use of battery in hybrid excavators was also documented in Xiao et al. [47], while the use of hybrid ESS comprised both battery and SC was also proposed [16,48,49]. Yao and Wand [50] proposed a hybrid excavator using a supercapacitor to power its electric swing system. Kwon et al. [20] classified hybrid excavators in three configurations: series (electric motor controls all movements, powered by ICE), parallel (both ICE and motor powers the system), and compound (electric motor replaces the hydraulic swing motor facilitating energy recovery). They determined the compound system to be superior because of its greater reliability and shorter anticipated payback period. They also proposed a power control algorithm for compound hybrid excavators, which was claimed to reduce fuel consumption by 24% as compared to conventional excavators. This algorithm works by balancing power demand between the supercapacitor and the engine at each instance. In this hybrid configuration, the supercapacitor, the swing motor, and the generator (powered by the engine) are all connected to a pulse width modulation (PWM) converter (Figure 5). The power balance is attained by controlling this converter’s DC-link voltage. The generator maintains a constant DC-link voltage utilizing a feedback mechanism, and the supercapacitor voltage is kept in a certain range through a feed-forward mechanism while the engine speed is kept almost constant. The hydraulic pump is driven by the generator, which is run by the engine. According to some operational set points, the system power is supplied or absorbed (during swing regeneration) by either the generator or the supercapacitor. When the supercapacitor voltage is within its rated operational range, it is used to power the swing, and the generator charges the supercapacitor. In such a scenario, the supercapacitor also absorbs any regeneration from the swing. If the supercapacitor voltage is higher than the rated value (indicating that it cannot absorb any more energy), regeneration from the swing is used to run the generator in motoring mode, thus sharing the hydraulic load with the engine. In cases of zero swing power with a high supercapacitor voltage, the supercapacitor is discharged to share the hydraulic load with the engine by running the generator in motoring mode.
Wang et al. [21] also conducted a comparative study of hybrid excavator configurations, and identified the parallel system to be the best based on cost and performance considerations. Although they did not explicitly consider a compound system, the compound hybrid configuration in Kwon et al. [20] can be considered as a part of the parallel configuration set in Wang et al. [21], thus supporting the argument about the superiority of this configuration. A similar conclusion was made by Lin et al. [51] as well. Lee et al. [52] simulated a plug-in hybrid excavator in series, parallel, and compound modes, and the model showed that the compound mode could exploit the benefits of both series and parallel configurations but with higher cost and complexity. Yoo et al. [53] developed a hybrid control system with SC to operate in series, parallel, and compound modes, and then implemented the control system in a mid-sized excavator successfully. Xiao et al. [54] presented a control strategy for a parallel hybrid excavator employing ICE and SC to dynamically control the ICE’s operating region for better overall system operation with little effect on performance. Ge et al. [55] used a variable speed electric motor to drive a variable displacement pump to meet the dynamic energy demand of excavators, which resulted in 1.35 kW less power consumption during idling and around 30% energy savings as compared to a pure displacement variable design.
Off-highway trucks (Figure 6) are also known as mining haul trucks [56]. Many them use diesel-electric drivetrains (electric drivetrains without high-voltage storage, powered by diesel engines [23]) with dynamic braking that employs AC wheel motors [56,57,58]. Efforts have been made to recover the braking energy, which is generally sent to brake resistors to be dissipated as heat (hence, the term dynamic braking) by adding ESS. This essentially transforms the diesel-electric architecture into a series hybrid one. Such an attempt was made by Richter et al. [56], where they successfully implemented a Sodium-Nickle-Chloride (NaNiCl2) battery ESS in a Komatsu 830E [55]. Mazumdar [59] presented a truck trolley system where the trucks were provided with electricity from a dedicated substation through an overhead line to make the vehicles all-electric, thus reducing the fuel consumption even more by transferring the ICE’s power generation operation to a more efficient system (the electrical grid). In this work, the use of supercapacitors was also proposed to capture regenerated energy for use in stretches of track where overhead lines could not be placed. Esfahanian et al. [57] proposed the use of road-grade data to dynamically control the energy management system (EMS) of a hybrid mining haul truck with ESS. This approach allowed the battery level to drop below safe state of charge (SoC) limits if there were downhill slopes within reach, which could replenish the battery and bring the SoC level back within the safe operating window through regenerative braking. The use of an AC–AC converter to run the AC motors in off-highway trucks without an intermediate DC converter was proposed by Kwak et al. [60], where they presented a matrix converter architecture with phase redundancy that came with fault detection capabilities. There have also been pilot projects demonstrating battery electric mining haul trucks. An example is a Komatsu 605-7 truck retrofitted with a 700 kWh Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (LiNiMnCo) (called NMC in industry-standard nomenclature) battery pack and a synchronous motor [61]. Additionally, Mirzaei et al. [62] presented software and hardware solutions for improved electric braking in such trucks, where the hardware solution was proved to be more reliable but more costly than the software one. From the review of literature, it is evident that the diesel-electric powertrain has been widely used in off-highway trucks. Recent research in this area has focused on technologies to further electrify these trucks, such as integrating ESS for capturing energy from regenerative braking, and employing overhead power lines for full-electric operation.
According to the literature reviewed in this subsection, a significant amount of effort has already been made in hybridizing excavators, as evidenced by a large body of research work reviewed in Section 2.2. The reason behind there being this much interest in hybrid excavators is comprehensible. Hydraulic excavators are one of the most used pieces of construction equipment [63]. Their energy consumption is vast, yet the efficiency of converting that energy to useful work is quite low—less than 30% if fuel-to-actuator efficiency is calculated. Pollutant emissions including particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from this type of equipment is very high as well. The primary reason behind these is that the ICE is often operated near its rated speed, as opposed to in the high-efficiency region, so that the hydraulic pressure stays at a sufficient level to facilitate smooth transition from light to heavy load [20]. Moreover, the hydraulic system itself has an average efficiency of around 54% [55]. Thus, hybridization can significantly improve fuel efficiency and reduce the emission of hydraulic excavators, as the electric motor can help supply the instantaneous power required, letting the ICE operate in its most efficient region. In addition, the electric motor coupled with ESS can capture and store regenerative power, which is wasted as heat in excavators with ICE [20,64]. A similar observation can be made for off-highway trucks where the diesel-electric system has become mainstream, and series hybrid as well as battery electric options are being considered. On the other hand, the electrification of other major types of construction equipment, such as tractor–loader–backhoes, rubber-tired loaders, and scrapers, has not received the same level of attention. As they are major emitters of CO2, PM, and NOx, increased research and development effort to electrify these types of construction equipment is warranted. The academic and industrial works reviewed in Section 2.2 are summarized in Table 3 and Table 4, respectively.
Table
Table 3. Academic literature on electric off-road construction equipment.
Table 3. Academic literature on electric off-road construction equipment.
ReferenceYearEV TypeComponents of InterestControl AlgorithmImplementation LevelEquipment Type
Kwon et al. [20]2010HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Hydraulic pump
Balancing power demand between a supercapacitor and the engine at each instance.SimulationExcavator
Yao et al. [50]2013HEV
  • ICE
  • Permanent magnet synchronous motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Electric swing system
Combination of proportional (P) controller and mixed sensitivity controller.Simulation and
Hardware implementation		Excavator
Xiao et al. [54]2008Parallel HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Hydraulic pump
Dynamic work point.SimulationExcavator
Lin et al. [51]2008Parallel HEV,
Series HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric motor
  • Hydraulic pump
Dynamic multi work point controller comprising of direct torque control, and closed loop proportional-integral (PI) control.SimulationExcavator
Lee et al. [52]2013Parallel, series, and dual mode power split PHEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Battery
  • Hydraulic pump
Electric motor drives hydraulic pump, powered by battery; battery is charged by the generator run by ICE.SimulationExcavator
Yoo et al. [53]2009Parallel, series, and compound HEV
  • Diesel ICE
  • Electric motor
  • Electric generator
  • Electric swing motor
  • Supercapacitor
Electric swing system, electric power assistance of ICE, regenerated energy stored in SC.Simulation and hardware implementationExcavator
Ge et al. [55]2017HEV
  • ICE
  • Speed variable electric motor
  • Variable pump
Variable speed electric motor drives a variable displacement pump to meet the dynamic energy demand.Simulation and hardware implementationExcavator
Wang et al. [65]2013HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Potential energy recovery system
  • Electric swing system
Energy regeneration from swing system and boom.SimulationExcavator
Mazumdar [59]2013BEV
  • Electric drivetrain
  • Overhead power line
  • Regenerative braking
  • Battery or SC energy storage system (ESS)
Driven by overhead power supply. Regenerated energy stored in ESS to use in short driving distances.SimulationOff-highway truck
Esfahanian et al. [57]2013HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric motor
  • Battery
  • Regenerative braking
Road grade data used for dynamic
energy management.		-Off-highway truck
Table
Table 4. Industrial research on electric off-road construction equipment.
Table 4. Industrial research on electric off-road construction equipment.
ReferenceManufacturerModelEV TypeComponents of InterestControl StrategyEquipment TypeImplementation Level
[36,66]John Deere644K Hybrid Wheel LoaderHEV
  • Interim tier 4 diesel engine
  • 3-phase alternating current (AC) motor/generator
  • Water-cooled inverter
  • Water-cooled brake resistor
  • Battery
No reverse gear as electric motor can perform this shift in direction, brake resistor consumes and dissipates excess energy generated during regenerative braking.Skid steer loader/rubber-tired loaderHardware implementation
[37,38]John Deere318E
320E
326E
328E
332E		HEV
  • Final/Interim tier 4 diesel engine
  • Electrohydraulic powertrain
-Skid steer loader/rubber-tired loaderHardware implementation
[39]Tobroco-GiantGIANT E-skid steerBEV
  • Hydraulic wheel motor
  • Battery
-Skid steer loader/rubber-tired loaderHardware implementation
[44]CaterpillarR1300G LHDBEV
  • Lithium battery pack
  • Electric motor
  • Mechanical axles and drive-shafts
Electric motor used to run mechanical drivetrain through electric motor.Rubber-tired loaderHardware implementation
[40,41]Caterpillar988K XEHEV
  • Tier 4 diesel engine
  • Switched reluctance electric machine for drivetrain, pump drive, and generator
  • Specialized power electronics
-Rubber-tired loaderHardware implementation
[16]Kobelco (modified)70SRHEV
  • 288 Volt Li-ion battery set
  • 20 kW electric motor/generator
  • Electric swing
Energy supplied to the electrical load from the battery when needed, and absorbed during braking.Excavator-
[16,67]KobelcoSK80HHEV
  • 288 Volt nickel metal hydride battery set
  • 20 kW electric motor/generator
  • 10 kW electric swing motor
Battery charging and discharging limit set according to concurrent state-of-charge to ensure maximum efficiency and lifetime.ExcavatorSimulation
[16]Caterpillar-Parallel HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric motor/generator
  • Battery
Operating mode and torque set according to load variation and SOC.Excavator-
[16]Komatsu-HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Electric swing system
Separate use of hydraulic motor and generator.Excavator-
[16,67]Hitachi-Parallel HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
  • Electric swing system
Control system comprised of master and slave controllers where the slave is used to monitor and govern the SC charge-discharge.Excavator-
[16]Doosan-HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • Electric motor
  • Supercapacitor
-Excavator-
[16,48,49]Kobelco-Series HEV
  • ICE
  • Hybrid ESS (288 V, 6.5 Ah Ni-MH battery + 304 V, 11.4 F SC)
ESS assists during heavy load and stores surplus energy under light loads.
Engine works in high efficiency region all the time, even stops when ESS energy is sufficient to drive loads.		Excavator-
[16]Sumitomo-HEV
  • ICE
  • Supercapacitor
  • Electric motor
SC SoC set to a higher value to drive load at higher voltage with better efficiency.Excavator-
[56]Komatsu830E (modified)Series HEV
  • ICE
  • NaNiCl2 battery
  • Wheel motor
Battery used to recover braking energy to be deployed for power boost or enhanced engine efficiency.Off-highway truckSimulation and hardware implementation
[58]Komatsu830E-1ACSeries HEV
  • Tier 2 Diesel engine
  • Electric generator
  • Wheel motor
  • Electric retarder (dynamic)
-Off-highway truckCommercially available
[68]Komatsu930E-4Diesel-electric with dynamic braking
  • Tier 2 Diesel engine
  • Electric generator
  • Wheel motor
  • Electric retarder (dynamic)
-Off-highway truckCommercially available
[69]Caterpillar795F AC Mining TruckDiesel-electric with dynamic braking
  • ICE
  • Electric generator
  • AC induction wheel motor
  • Electric retarder (dynamic)
-Off-highway truckCommercially available
[60]Komatsu605-7 (modified)BEV
  • LiNiMnCo battery pack
  • Synchronous motor
  • Regenerative braking
The battery powers the motor and stores regenerative energy.Off-highway truckHardware implementation

2.3. Agricultural Equipment

This subsection focuses on electrification attempts on agricultural equipment. Similar to construction equipment, special attention is paid to equipment with higher population or carbon dioxide (CO2) emission contribution in California, USA, according to data available from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) [24]. Agricultural equipment types recorded in the CARB database are shown in Figure 7, sorted by population and CO2 emission in 2018. As mentioned in the previous subsection, these two lists showing population and emission are not necessarily the same, because of larger engine sizes and/or higher use of some equipment types—which led to greater CO2 emission per hour despite their lower population. It can be seen from Figure 7 that agricultural tractors have much smaller population than tillers, but supersede them in terms of CO2 emission. Tractors are also identified as the most fuel-consuming mobile agricultural equipment [70], which provides some explanation of their higher CO2 emission. Thus, electrifying the agricultural tractors could yield significant CO2 emission reduction, and this subsection will concentrate on this single agricultural equipment type. Figure 8 shows an agricultural tractor.
Vehicles 04 00044 g007 550
Figure 7. (a) Population and (b) CO2 emission of various agricultural equipment types in California in 2018 (adapted from [24]).
Figure 7. (a) Population and (b) CO2 emission of various agricultural equipment types in California in 2018 (adapted from [24]).
Vehicles 04 00044 g007
Vehicles 04 00044 g008 550
Figure 8. Agricultural tractor. Series hybrid concept for this type of equipment was presented in [71] with electric drivetrain and PTO.
Figure 8. Agricultural tractor. Series hybrid concept for this type of equipment was presented in [71] with electric drivetrain and PTO.
Vehicles 04 00044 g008
Previously, Usinin et al. presented a series hybrid electric drivetrain for tractors, having an engine, generator, two traction motors, and required power electronics [72]. Gas turbine and diesel engines were proposed as the engine choices; while electric machines and power electronics were designed to reduce cost [72]. Mousazadeh et al.’s design employed two solar panels on their tractor, which was capable of meeting 18% of the energy demand, and the rest was obtained from the grid to charge its valve-regulated lead acid (VRLA) battery pack [73]. This tractor successfully carried out several common light agricultural tasks, including plowing, mowing, and towing. This equipment was mentioned as a PHEV, but based on the definitions used in this paper, it was a BEV because of its sole use of electric drivetrain and absence of ICE. It is categorized accordingly in Table 5. Mousazadeh et al. conducted a comparative study on different battery technologies best suited for their solar-assisted tractor in [74]. They concluded that the VRLA technology was the best considering the regional manufacturing capabilities. Ueka et al.’s design used an electric motor to drive a rotary tiller and employed four wheel drive in a battery electric tractor [70]. An electronically controlled continuously variable transmission (e-CVT) with PTO capabilities was designed and implemented by Rossi et al. for a parallel hybrid agricultural tractor [75]. Florentsev et al. presented a pre-production version of a series hybrid tractor. It used an asynchronous traction motor and electricity-driven PTO [71]. A similar work was shown by Puhovoy et al. in [76]. To enable high-voltage PTO capabilities, Moreda et al. proposed installing a PTO-dedicated high voltage generator on tractors [23]. Gonzalez-de-Soto et al. presented a hydrogen-fuel-cell-powered PTO system for an ICE-driven tractor [25]. Their system comprised a fuel cell stack and a solar photovoltaic (PV) system for power generation, and batteries for storage. A fuel cell electric tractor was also demonstrated previously [77]. Additionally, Zhitkova et al. designed an electric motor for agricultural tractor use. This motor was suited for both low speed off-road operation and higher speed produce-transportation work [78].
The academic and industrial works reviewed in Section 2.3 are summarized in Table 5 and Table 6, respectively. Figure 9 shows an infographic of the works reviewed in different subsections of Section 2.

3. Energy Recovery

In addition to the commonly used regenerative braking employed for on-road electric vehicles [1], off-road equipment can utilize other methods for energy recovery, such as regeneration in excavators from the swing and boom movement [43]. This section describes the regeneration methods observed for the studied equipment types.
Loaders stop abruptly during operation for piling material, then lifting, moving, and dropping those. These stops can generate electricity through regenerative braking [79,80]. This strategy was implemented in the John Deere 644K Hybrid Wheel Loader [36,66]. Kinetic energy recovery in loaders through regenerative braking is less compared to on-road vehicles as loaders operate with greater rolling resistance. Electric retarders in off-highway trucks conduct braking by dissipating energy as heat; capturing this energy in ESS was proposed in [58,59]. Potential energy can be used to generate electricity to be stored in ESS while lowering forklift-type systems [81].
Potential energy can be captured while lowering the boom of an excavator. Yoon et al. proposed an ESS consisting of battery and capacitors to capture this energy [45]. Ge et al.’s method could capture energy as hydraulic energy [46]. Another hydraulic energy capture system was presented by Ho et al. in [82]. Xia et al. also presented a hydraulic potential energy recovery method applicable to machines with hydraulic cylinders [83]. Though such methods do not generate electric energy directly, these can still be useful in hybrid equipment where hydraulic systems work alongside the electrical powertrain. Lin et al. noted that with an electric recuperation system directly coupled with an excavator boom, the regeneration time-window got directly related to the duration of lowering the boom, which could be too short for a battery to capture all the available energy; moreover, the electric generator had to work at different efficiency points if the load point shifted, lowering overall efficiency. To counter this, they proposed using a hydraulic cylinder for the fast capture of the potential energy, and then used it to run a generator to efficiently store the electricity energy in an ESS. They used supercapacitors for this purpose, but mentioned that the use of batteries was also possible, as the intermediate hydraulic cylinder can facilitate the fast-capture of energy and then run the generator for a period best-suited for the battery to charge properly [84]. These justifications were supported in [85], where a hydraulic motor/generator was used to capture energy from a parallel hybrid excavator’s boom and store in an ESS. It also pointed out that without the intermediate hydraulic system, even using supercapacitors as ESS would be unwise, as the instantaneous large changes in power could affect the lifetime of the supercapacitors used. It was also identified there that the boom was the major source for regenerative energy in the 7-ton excavator used in that work, as 67% of total recapturable energy came from its movements. Wang et al.’s method also proposed to couple an electric generator with hydraulic cylinders for electricity generation from cylinder pressure, which could be consumed instantly by some other operating components, or stored in ESS for future use [86]. Chen et al. showed a method for capturing gravitational energy from excavator booms by running a permanent magnet brushless direct current (DC) motor, and storing the energy in supercapacitors [87]. Yoo et al. proposed energy regeneration and subsequent storage in supercapacitor from the swing movement in [53], whereas Wang et al. opted for recuperation from both swing and boom [65].
Other than these, generation of electricity by recapturing heat from turbocharged engines could be achieved by running the exhaust gas leaving the turbocharger through a second turbine-generator system, or by using thermoelectric generators—which do not require any moving parts for the generation [23,79,88]. Therefore, such techniques can potentially be applied to any construction or agricultural equipment employing a turbocharger. Additionally, electro-hybrid actuators for off-highway equipment were proposed by Åman et al. to replace hydraulic pipelines with electric wiring, thus enhancing reliability, and also facilitating regeneration from hydraulic systems [89].
The key technologies reviewed in this section are listed in Table 7. From this section, it is evident that most of the studies conducted were on excavators—consistent with the findings in Section 2. Other equipment types (tractor–loader–backhoe, loader, off-highway truck, scraper, and agricultural tractor) received limited or no attention.

4. Promises and Concerns of Off-Road Equipment Electrification

This section looks into the advantages and existing challenges of off-road construction and agricultural equipment electrification. Some benefits and issues are shared with the on-road vehicle segment, but there exist some unique ones because of the equipment’s unique activity demands.

4.1. Advantages

Compared to ICEs, electric motors are more capable to meet high torque demands [26,29]. This can be useful for off-road equipment applications. Electric drivetrains usually have fewer moving parts than traditional ICE systems [1]. Regenerative braking also reduces wear on mechanical brakes [61]. Because of this, electric drivetrains experience less wear and reduced maintenance costs. Combined with reduced fuel consumption, this results in lower operating costs. An electric drivetrain increases the powertrain efficiency overall, for both hybrid and full electric configurations. It also allows for the decoupling of loads from the ICE in some vehicles, such as agricultural tractors [23]. ICEs tend to lose power at high altitude because of insufficient oxygen required to burn fuel and generate power. Pieces of electric equipment do not suffer from this drawback. This can facilitate easier operation, better efficiency, and lower fuel cost in such operating conditions. The reduced downtime from lower maintenance requirement can result in higher productivity [80]. Electric vehicles also allow for more flexible design options [23], offering more space and better utilization of it. Vehicle electrification is facilitating unique operational and economic benefits as well. One such possibility is operating the equipment closer to emission-and-noise-sensitive areas and hours. This cannot be achieved with ICE equipment, and the use of electric ones can increase operating flexibility and productivity for such cases. Lower emissions can also be beneficial for underground operating scenarios, such as mines, where the air quality can be significantly improved if the equipment causes less air pollution [44]. These advantages, and their effects, are listed in Table 8.

4.2. Limitations and Solutions

Major drawbacks of EVs include long charging time and short range [1]. These can cause shortened operating time and increased downtime for construction and agricultural equipment. Moreover, as the off-road equipment have far superior and dynamic power requirements, sizing of motor and ESS considering design constraints (e.g., weight) becomes a major design concern [16,26]. Facilitating charging for electric off-road equipment can also be challenging. For construction equipment, jobsites can be temporary and can move around. For agricultural equipment, wide operating areas can demand strategic placement of charging stations. However, recent technological developments improved range and reduced charging time. Moreover, though downtime for charging is a concern for operators, this can be compensated by the reduction in maintenance downtime. Designing off-road EV powertrains to meet the dynamic power needs has already been tackled in several studies—the most common approach being the use of gears to satisfy the varying power demand with smaller motor sizes [18].

4.3. Current Barriers

The high price of EVs, and strong competition from conventional ICE-driven equipment can be considered as probable barriers for electrification in the off-road segment [80]. However, the trend towards partial electrification for some equipment types (e.g., excavators, off-highway trucks) can change that paradigm. Beyond these shortcomings inherent to the early stages of EV adoption, the lack of research for multiple equipment types can be considered as a major impediment for electrifying this sector. However, the commercial use of electric drives in off-highway trucks provides an example of electric powertrains’ capability for off-highway applications. Now, increased research and development for electrification is required for other equipment categories (e.g., loaders, scrapers). Along with industry interest, government efforts in the form of regulations, incentives, and grants can play a major role in increasing electrification in these sectors. Such actions can compensate the higher cost of EVs. A nascent electric off-road equipment sector is likely to face difficulties with inadequate charging infrastructure as well. This can be addressed by manufacturers investing in developing charging infrastructure while marketing their products. Table 9 sums up the concerns surrounding off-road equipment electrification and their potential solutions.

5. Proposals for Off-Road Equipment Electrification

The pieces of off-road equipment studied have varied work environments and activity demands. In general, the use of these pieces of equipment depends a lot on respective duty cycles—which can vary for different jobsites. Because of this, it is not possible to make an individual optimal electrification recommendation that will be the most efficient for all off-road equipment. Moreover, as the jobsites vary in condition and duty cycles, equipment within the same category may benefit from different technologies depending on their intended use. This section thus lays out the general possibilities that can facilitate off-road equipment electrification by overcoming the current limitations, but it is possible that effective application of these techniques can vary for each use-case.
Construction and agricultural equipment tend to have a significantly long service life, and fleet operators may not want to retire conventional equipment before its typical service lifespan. A plausible solution for such scenarios can be retrofitting the existing vehicles with an electric powertrain to utilize the remaining service life. One approach to retrofitting can be the use of range extenders [1] to act as an on-board generator. The use of the existing Tier 4 diesel engines as range extenders operating within optimal regions can maximize efficiency and minimize emissions while utilizing the existing lifecycle of these engines.
Operating PHEV or BEV equipment may require on-site charging facilities. One way to facilitate this can be to use renewable energy sources (RES) to power the chargers. Redpath et al. demonstrated the charging of light agricultural vehicles through solar energy [90], and similar scaled-up approaches can appear beneficial for heavy-duty agricultural equipment as well. The use of wind power for such cases can also appear useful [91]. Employing solar PV to charge EVs is a popular idea [92,93,94]. Bhatti et al. conducted a thorough study on this topic [95], where various such configurations were listed, including PV-fed EV charging stations with connection to the grid, with intermediate ESS, and dedicated fuel-cell generators. Robalino et al. proposed using PV to charge EVs while generating hydrogen at the charging station for FCEVs [96]. Such charging stations, equipped with ESS, and a hydrogen generating mechanism, can serve BEVs, PHEVs, and FCEVs, while utilizing all the generated electricity from the RES. Kam et al.’s proposed smart charging system with vehicle-to-grid (V2G) facility [97] can prove useful to realize energy-independent self-sustaining small agricultural farms. Second-life batteries (SLB) [98,99] can be employed in such charging stations as ESS to lower the cost. In the long term, this can become more efficient and cost-effective if SLBs from off-road equipment are used, extending the value of initial investments. Proper placement of charging stations, and the use of mobile chargers—which can power vehicles from energy stored in mobile ESS—can prove useful in cases where equipment cannot return to charging bases. This technology is currently available for passenger vehicles [100,101], with more expected to enter the consumer market soon [102]. Scaled-up versions of such devices can cater to heavy-duty equipment. Employing the FCEV architecture for off-road equipment can prove beneficial as well, as that will provide short refueling times similar to conventional vehicles—resulting in shortened downtimes. Some major reservations against fuel cells have been high price, and safety concerns regarding the on-board hydrogen tanks [1]. However, as the technology is getting more mature, and more commercial FCEVs are emerging [103,104], successful implementation of this technology in off-road equipment can be expected. Figure 10 presents the major proposals made in this section.

6. Outcomes and Future Works

The existing work in the off-road equipment sector addressed certain niches, and additional research is needed to facilitate electrification. The following points summarize the major findings of this paper to indicate the current state of this field, and the areas needing attention:
  • Among the pieces of construction equipment, excavator and off-highway truck electrification attracted the most attention; efficiency gains and cost reduction have driven the commercialization of diesel-electric off-highway trucks.
  • Tractors were studied in a number of reviewed studies on agricultural equipment.
  • Tractor–loader–backhoes, loaders, and scrapers in the construction equipment category, and tractors from the agricultural equipment sector demand increased research on electrification potential due to their high population and impact on emissions.
  • With current technology, hybrids can appear useful for immediate implementation.
  • Along with batteries, supercapacitors attracted significant attention, as the equipment tends to have a high power requirement. For the same reason, intermediate hydraulic energy storage and hybrid energy storage employing batteries and supercapacitors can prove beneficial for heavy-duty equipment usage.
  • Along with the braking system, there are opportunities for energy regeneration from power tools employed by off-road equipment; prominent examples being the boom and swing of excavators.
  • Electrification of off-road equipment can offer significant benefits in terms of increased efficiency and lower operating cost.
  • The general shortcomings of EVs, including short range and long charging time, can translate into concerns about decreased downtime for off-road equipment. The higher cost further challenges their acceptance in a competitive market. However, increased research and development can aid in overcoming the current issues.
  • An immediate solution to facilitating successful electrification of off-road equipment is retrofitting along with the use of range extenders, on-site power generation, and mobile chargers.
Future work can be conducted on:
  • Feasible existing and emerging technologies, and approaches for off-road equipment electrification considering the duty cycles, load factors, use case, and infrastructure requirement of different pieces of equipment.
  • Ways to efficiently recapture energy in off-road equipment.
  • Feasibility of mobile ICE and fuel cell generators for off-road equipment charging.
  • Impact of regulations and incentives on the off-road equipment market.

7. Conclusions

The electrification of off-road construction and agricultural equipment is expected to improve operating efficiency while reducing operating cost and emissions. To provide a clear picture of the current state of these pieces of equipment, existing notable studies have been reviewed in this paper. The advantages and limitations for off-road equipment electrification have been discussed along with possible solutions. Proposals have been made to facilitate electrification attempts in this sector while underscoring the major findings and future research directions.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.B., H.P., S.C. and S.Y.; Methodology, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Validation, K.B., G.W., H.P., S.C., S.Y. and M.B.; Formal Analysis, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Investigation, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Data Curation, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Writing—Review and Editing, K.B., G.W., H.P., S.C. and S.Y.; Visualization, K.B. and F.U.-N.; Supervision,: K.B., G.W., H.P., S.C., S.Y. and M.B.; Project Administration,: K.B., G.W., H.P., S.C., S.Y. and M.B.; Funding Acquisition,: K.B., G.W., H.P., S.C. and S.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was conducted in fulfillment of Agreement No. 18RD016 by the University of California, Riverside under the sponsorship of the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful for the inputs from Christopher Weaver and Evan Powers of CARB. The statements and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of CARB. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with material report herein is not to be construed of as actual or implied endorsement of such products.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Un-Noor, F.; Padmanaban, S.; Mihet-Popa, L.; Mollah, M.N.; Hossain, E. A comprehensive study of key electric vehicle (EV) components, technologies, challenges, impacts, and future direction of development. Energies 2017, 10, 1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Kast, J.; Vijayagopal, R.; Gangloff Jr, J.J.; Marcinkoski, J. Clean commercial transportation: Medium and heavy duty fuel cell electric trucks. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42, 4508–4517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Zhao, Y.; Onat, N.C.; Kucukvar, M.; Tatari, O. Carbon and energy footprints of electric delivery trucks: A hybrid multi-regional input-output life cycle assessment. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 47, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bollinger Motors. Introducing the B2 Pickup Truck. Available online: https://www.bollingermotors.com/ (accessed on 24 February 2019).
  5. Rivian R1S. Available online: https://rivian.com/r1s (accessed on 21 July 2022).
  6. Rivian R1T. Available online: https://rivian.com/r1t (accessed on 21 July 2022).
  7. Mousazadeh, H.; Keyhani, A.; Mobli, H.; Bardi, U.; Lombardi, G.; el Asmar, T. Technical and economical assessment of a multipurpose electric vehicle for farmers. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17, 1556–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sharrard, A.L.; Matthews, H.S.; Roth, M. Environmental implications of construction site energy use and electricity generation. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2007, 133, 846–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Mousazadeh, H.; Keyhani, A.; Javadi, A.; Mobli, H.; Abrinia, K.; Sharifi, A. Life-cycle assessment of a Solar Assist Plug-in Hybrid electric Tractor (SAPHT) in comparison with a conventional tractor. Energy Convers. Manag. 2011, 52, 1700–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Monnay, C. Potential and Trends in Off-Highway Vehicles’ Electrification; Semcon: Vasteras, Sweden, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  11. DieselNet United States: Nonroad Diesel Engines. Available online: https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/nonroad.php#tier3 (accessed on 20 July 2022).
  12. DieselNet EU: Nonroad Engines. Available online: https://dieselnet.com/standards/eu/nonroad.php (accessed on 20 July 2022).
  13. Executive Department State of California. Executive Order N-79-20. Available online: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/9.23.20-EO-N-79-20-Climate.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2022).
  14. Lin, T.; Wang, Q.; Hu, B.; Gong, W. Development of hybrid powered hydraulic construction machinery. Autom. Constr. 2010, 19, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Yoo, B.S.; Cho, J.; Hwang, C.M.; Joh, J. Development of a simulation program for conceptual design of hybrid excavators. In Proceedings of the SICE Annual Conference 2011, Tokyo, Japan, 13–18 September 2011; pp. 318–322. [Google Scholar]
  16. Wang, H.; Wang, Q.; Hu, B. A review of developments in energy storage systems for hybrid excavators. Autom. Constr. 2017, 80, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yang, C.; McCollum, D.; McCarthy, R.; Leighty, W. Meeting an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation by 2050: A case study in California. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2009, 14, 147–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Parsons, M.B.; Mepsted, G.O. Development of off-road hybrid-electric powertrains and review of emerging battery chemistries. In Proceedings of the 5th IET Hybrid and Electric Vehicles Conference (HEVC 2014), London, UK, 5–6 November 2014; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  19. Aydin, M.; Guven, M.K. Comparing various PM synchronous generators: A feasible solution for high-power, off-highway, series hybrid, electric traction applications. IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag. 2014, 9, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kwon, T.S.; Lee, S.W.; Sul, S.K.; Park, C.G.; Kim, N.I.; Kang, B.I.; Hong, M.S. Power control algorithm for hybrid excavator with supercapacitor. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2010, 46, 1447–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, D.; Guan, C.; Pan, S.; Zhang, M.; Lin, X. Performance analysis of hydraulic excavator powertrain hybridization. Autom. Constr. 2009, 18, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhang, W.; Wang, J.; Du, S.; Ma, H.; Zhao, W.; Li, H. Energy management strategies for hybrid construction machinery: Evolution, classification, comparison and future trends. Energies 2019, 12, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Moreda, G.P.; Muñoz-García, M.A.; Barreiro, P. High voltage electrification of tractor and agricultural machinery—A review. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 115, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. California Air Resources Board OFFROAD2017—ORION. Available online: https://www.arb.ca.gov/orion/ (accessed on 15 July 2020).
  25. Gonzalez-de-Soto, M.; Emmi, L.; Benavides, C.; Garcia, I.; Gonzalez-de-Santos, P. Reducing air pollution with hybrid-powered robotic tractors for precision agriculture. Biosyst. Eng. 2016, 143, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wagh, R.V.; Sane, N. Electrification of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Transportation Electrification Conference (ITEC), Chennai, India, 27–29 August 2015; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zhang, B.J.; Deng, Y.W.; Yu, D.J. An investigation on energy management system of CJY6470 parallel hybrid electric off-road vehicle with fuzzy logic. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), Harbin, China, 3–5 September 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Cheng, K.W.E.; Divakar, B.P.; Wu, H.; Ding, K.; Ho, H.F. Battery-management system (BMS) and SOC development for electrical vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2010, 60, 76–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jackson, A.; Crolla, D.; Woodhouse, A.; Parsons, M. Improving performance of a 6×6 off-road vehicle through individual wheel control. SAE Technol. Pap. 2002, 2002, 724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sinkko, S.; Montonen, J.; Tehrani, M.G.; Pyrhönen, J.; Sopanen, J.; Nummelin, T. Integrated hub-motor drive train for off-road vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2014 16th European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications, Lappeenranta, Finland, 26–28 August 2014; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Baronti, F.; Fantechi, G.; Roncella, R.; Saletti, R.; Pede, G.; Vellucci, F. Design of the battery management system of LiFePO4 batteries for electric off-road vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics, Taipei, Taiwan, 28–31 May 2013; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Saeks, R.; Cox, C.J.; Neidhoefer, J.; Mays, P.R.; Murray, J.J. Adaptive Control of a Hybrid Electric Vehicle. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2002, 3, 213–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Escorts. Available online: https://www.escortsgroup.com/ (accessed on 1 February 2019).
  34. Escorts Unveils India’s First Electric & Hydrostatic Tractor and 100-HP Backhoe Loader. Available online: https://www.nbmcw.com/equipments/earthmoving-equipment/37066-escorts-unveils-india-s-first-electric-hydrostatic-tractor-and-100-hp-backhoe-loader.html (accessed on 1 February 2019).
  35. John Deere John Deere 644K Hybrid Wheel Loader. Available online: https://www.deere.com/en/loaders/wheel-loaders/644k-hybrid-wheel-loader/ (accessed on 7 February 2019).
  36. John Deere 326E Skid Steer. Available online: http://www.deere.com/en_US/docs/construction/skid_steer/326e/326E_Web_04_16_13_final.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2019).
  37. E-SERIES SKID STEER LOADERS. Available online: https://secure.viewer.zmags.com/services/DownloadPDF?publicationID=239afba9&selectedPages=all&pubVersion=33&print=true (accessed on 7 February 2019).
  38. Rountree, D. Tobroco-Giant gears up for its first CONEXPO-CON/AGG show. Available online: https://www.totallandscapecare.com/landscaping-equipment/tobroco-giant-gears-up-for-its-first-conexpo-conagg-show/ (accessed on 7 February 2019).
  39. Caterpillar New Electric Drive Cat® 988K XE Wheel Loader Offers Higher Fuel Efficiency and Lower Total Cost of Ownership. Available online: https://www.cat.com/en_US/news/machine-press-releases/new-electric-drive-cat-988kxe-wheel-loader-offers.html (accessed on 1 February 2019).
  40. Caterpillar 988K XE Wheel Loader. Available online: ttps://s7d2.scene7.com/is/content/Caterpillar/CM20170815-25630-31787 (accessed on 1 February 2019).
  41. Lion, S.; Michos, C.N.; Vlaskos, I.; Rouaud, C.; Taccani, R. A review of waste heat recovery and Organic Rankine Cycles (ORC) in on-off highway vehicle Heavy Duty Diesel Engine applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 79, 691–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Achten, P.; Bv, I. A serial hydraulic hybrid drive train for off-road vehicles. Proc. Natl. Conf. Fluid Power 2008, 51, 515–521. [Google Scholar]
  43. Caterpillar Caterpillar Developing Battery-Electric Loader. Available online: https://www.constructionequipment.com/caterpillar-developing-battery-electric-loader (accessed on 13 February 2019).
  44. Caterpillar. Caterpillar to unveil new Cat® R1700 XE LHD battery electric vehicle with MEC500 Mobile Equipment Charger at MINExpo. Available online: https://www.cat.com/en_US/news/machine-press-releases/caterpillar-to-unveil-new-Cat-R1700XELHD-battery-electric-vehicle-with-MEC500-Mobile-Equipment-Charger-at-MINExpo.html (accessed on 4 August 2022).
  45. Yoon, J.I.; Truong, D.Q.; Ahn, K.K. A generation step for an electric excavator with a control strategy and verifications of energy consumption. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 2013, 14, 755–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ge, L.; Quan, L.; Li, Y.; Zhang, X.; Yang, J. A novel hydraulic excavator boom driving system with high efficiency and potential energy regeneration capability. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 166, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Xiao, Y.; Guan, C.; Lai, X. Research on the design and control strategy for a flow-coupling-based hydraulic hybrid excavator. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automob. Eng. 2014, 228, 1675–1687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kagoshima, M. Development of hybrid power train control system for excavator. In Proceedings of the Conference on Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, Yokohama, Japan, 19–22 May 2003. [Google Scholar]
  49. Kagoshima, M.; Komiyama, M.; Nanjo, T.; Tsutsui, A. Development of new hybrid excavator. Kobelco Technol. Rev. 2007, 27, 39–42. [Google Scholar]
  50. Yao, H.; Wang, Q. Control strategy for hybrid excavator swing system driven by electric motor. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2013, 46, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lin, X.; Pan, S.X.; Wang, D.Y. Dynamic simulation and optimal control strategy for a parallel hybrid hydraulic excavator. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 2008, 9, 624–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lee, S.; Lee, J.; Lee, H.; Lee, S.H. Modeling and control of Plug-In Hybrid Excavator. In Proceedings of the IECON 2013—39th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Vienna, Austria, 10–13 November 2013; pp. 4653–4659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yoo, S.; An, S.; Park, C.G.; Kim, N. Design and control of hybrid electric power system for a hydraulically actuated excavator. SAE Int. J. Commer. Veh. 2010, 2, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Xiao, Q.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Y. Control strategies of power system in hybrid hydraulic excavator. Autom. Constr. 2008, 4, 361–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ge, L.; Quan, L.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, B.; Yang, J. Efficiency improvement and evaluation of electric hydraulic excavator with speed and displacement variable pump. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 150, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Richter, T.; Slezak, L.; Johnson, C.; Young, H.; Funcannon, D. Advanced Hybrid Propulsion and Energy Management System for High Efficiency, Off Highway, 240 Ton Class, Diesel Electric Haul Trucks; General Electric Co.: Boston, MA, USA, 2008; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  57. Esfahanian, E.; Meech, J.A. Hybrid Electric Haulage Trucks for Open Pit Mining. In Proceedings of the 16th IFAC Symposium on Automation in Mining, Mineral and Metal Processing, San Diego, CA, USA, 25–28 August 2013; Volume 46, pp. 104–109, ISBN 9783902823427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Komatsu Komatsu Electric Drive Truck 830E-1AC. Available online: https://www.komatsuamerica.com/equipment/trucks/electric/830e-1ac (accessed on 12 February 2020).
  59. Mazumdar, J. All electric operation of ultraclass mining haul trucks. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 6–11 October 2013; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kwak, S.; Kim, T.; Park, G. Phase-redundant-based reliable direct AC/AC converter drive for series hybrid off-highway eeavy electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2010, 59, 2674–2688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lambert, F. This dumper truck is the world’s largest electric vehicle with a massive 700 kWh battery pack. Available online: https://electrek.co/2017/09/17/electric-dumper-truck-worlds-largest-ev-battery-pack/ (accessed on 12 February 2019).
  62. Mirzaei, S.; Fernandez, A. Retard system solution on electric mining trucks. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Sensorless Control for Electrical Drives (SLED 2012), Milwaukee, WI, USA, 21–22 September 2012; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Abolhasani, S.; Frey, H.C.; Kim, K.; Rasdorf, W.; Lewis, P.; Pang, S. Real-world in-use activity, fuel use, and emissions for nonroad construction vehicles: A case study for excavators. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2008, 58, 1033–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Mashadi, B.; Emadi, S.A.M. Dual-mode power-split transmission for hybrid electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2010, 59, 3223–3232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, T.; Wang, Q.; Lin, T. Improvement of boom control performance for hybrid hydraulic excavator with potential energy recovery. Autom. Constr. 2013, 30, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Barbaccia, T.G. Deere’s bright ideas: Hybrid diesel-electric wheel loader, new line of skid steers and compact track loaders. Available online: https://www.equipmentworld.com/deeres-bright-ideas-hybrid-diesel-electric-wheel-loader-new-line-of-skid-steers-and-compact-track-loaders/ (accessed on 7 February 2019).
  67. Kagoshima, M. The development of an 8 tonne class hybrid hydraulic excavator SK80H. Kobelco Technol. Rev. 2012, 31, 6–11. [Google Scholar]
  68. Komatsu Electric Drive Truck 930E-4. Available online: https://www.komatsuamerica.com/equipment/trucks/electric/930e-4 (accessed on 12 February 2020).
  69. Caterpillar 795F AC Mining Truck. Available online: https://www.cat.com/en_US/products/new/equipment/off-highway-trucks/mining-trucks/18232553.html (accessed on 12 February 2019).
  70. Ueka, Y.; Yamashita, J.; Sato, K.; Doi, Y. Study on the development of the electric tractor-Specifications and traveling and tilling performance of a prototype electric tractor. Eng. Agric. Environ. Food 2013, 6, 160–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Florentsev, S.; Izosimov, D.; Makarov, L.; Baida, S.; Belousov, A. Complete traction electric equipment sets of electro-mechanical drive trains for tractors. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Region 8 International Conference on Computational Technologies in Electrical and Electronics Engineering (SIBIRCON), Irkutsk, Russia, 11–15 July 2010; pp. 611–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Usinin, U.; Gladyshev, S.; Grigoryev, M.; Shishkov, A.; Bychkov, A.; Belousov, E. Electric drive of an industrial tractor. SAE Technol. Pap. 2013, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Mousazadeh, H.; Keyhani, A.; Javadi, A.; Mobli, H.; Abrinia, K.; Sharifi, A. Optimal power and energy modeling and range evaluation of a solar assist plug-in hybrid electric tractor (SAPHT). Trans. ASABE 2010, 53, 1025–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Mousazadeh, H.; Keyhani, A.; Javadi, A.; Mobli, H.; Abrinia, K.; Sharifi, A. Evaluation of alternative battery technologies for a solar assist plug-in hybrid electric tractor. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2010, 15, 507–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Rossi, C.; Pontara, D.; Casadei, D. e-CVT power split transmission for off-road hybrid-electric vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), Coimbra, Portugal, 27–30 October 2014; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  76. Puhovoy, A.A. Agricultural tractor with pure electromechanical drivetrain. SAE Int. J. Commer. Veh. 2011, 4, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Applications, M. New Holland’s NH2 fuel cell powered tractor to enter service. Fuel Cells Bull. 2012, 2012, 3–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhitkova, S.; Felden, M.; Franck, D.; Hameyer, K. Design of an electrical motor with wide speed range for the in-wheel drive in a heavy duty off-road vehicle. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Electrical Machines (ICEM), Berlin, Germany, 2–5 September 2014; pp. 1076–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Singh, B.N.; Wanner, K.D. Novel and ruggedized power electronics for off-highway vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Dearborn, MI, USA, 7–10 September 2009; pp. 1043–1048. [Google Scholar]
  80. Singh, B. Novel and ruggedized power electronics for off-highway vehicles. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 2014, 2, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Minav, T.A.; Laurila, L.I.E.; Pyrhönen, J.J. Analysis of electro-hydraulic lifting system’s energy efficiency with direct electric drive pump control. Autom. Constr. 2013, 30, 144–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Ho, T.H.; Ahn, K.K. Design and control of a closed-loop hydraulic energy-regenerative system. Autom. Constr. 2012, 22, 444–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Xia, L.; Quan, L.; Ge, L.; Hao, Y. Energy efficiency analysis of integrated drive and energy recuperation system for hydraulic excavator boom. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 156, 680–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Lin, T.; Huang, W.; Ren, H.; Fu, S.; Liu, Q. New compound energy regeneration system and control strategy for hybrid hydraulic excavators. Autom. Constr. 2016, 68, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lin, T.; Wang, Q.; Hu, B.; Gong, W. Research on the energy regeneration systems for hybrid hydraulic excavators. Autom. Constr. 2010, 19, 1016–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Wang, T.; Wang, Q. Efficiency analysis and evaluation of energy-saving pressure-compensated circuit for hybrid hydraulic excavator. Autom. Constr. 2014, 47, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Chen, M.; Zhao, D. The gravitational potential energy regeneration system with closed-circuit of boom of hydraulic excavator. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2017, 82, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Yu, S.; Du, Q.; Diao, H.; Shu, G.; Jiao, K. Effect of vehicle driving conditions on the performance of thermoelectric generator. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 96, 363–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Åman, R.; Handroos Pavel Ponomarev, H.; Pyrhönen, J. Utilisation of Electro - Hydraulic Hybrid Actuator Systems in Off—Highway Working Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Fluid Power Transmission and Control, Hangzhou, China, 9–11 April 2013. [Google Scholar]
  90. Redpath, D.A.G.; McIlveen-Wright, D.; Kattakayam, T.; Hewitt, N.J.; Karlowski, J.; Bardi, U. Battery powered electric vehicles charged via solar photovoltaic arrays developed for light agricultural duties in remote hilly areas in the Southern Mediterranean region. J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19, 2034–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Sujitha, N.; Krithiga, S. RES based EV battery charging system: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 75, 978–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bhatti, A.R.; Salam, Z.; Ashique, R.H. Electric Vehicle Charging Using Photovoltaic based Microgrid for Remote Islands. Energy Procedia 2016, 103, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Fathabadi, H. Novel solar powered electric vehicle charging station with the capability of vehicle-to-grid. Sol. Energy 2017, 142, 136–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Goli, P.; Shireen, W. PV powered smart charging station for PHEVs. Renew. Energy 2014, 66, 280–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Bhatti, A.R.; Salam, Z.; Aziz, M.J.B.A.; Yee, K.P.; Ashique, R.H. Electric vehicles charging using photovoltaic: Status and technological review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 34–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Robalino, D.M.; Kumar, G.; Uzoechi, L.O.; Chukwu, U.C.; Mahajan, S.M. Design of a docking station for solar charged electric and fuel cell vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Clean Electrical Power, Capri, Italy, 9–11 June 2009; pp. 655–660. [Google Scholar]
  97. van der Kam, M.; van Sark, W. Smart charging of electric vehicles with photovoltaic power and vehicle-to-grid technology in a microgrid; a case study. Appl. Energy 2015, 152, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Martinez-Laserna, E.; Sarasketa-Zabala, E.; Sarria, I.V.; Stroe, D.-I.; Swierczynski, M.; Warnecke, A.; Timmermans, J.-M.; Goutam, S.; Omar, N.; Rodriguez, P. Technical viability of battery second life: A study from the ageing perspective. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2018, 54, 2703–2713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Hossain, E.; Murtaugh, D.; Mody, J.; Faruque, H.M.R.; Sunny, M.S.H.; Mohammad, N. A comprehensive review on second-life batteries: Current state, manufacturing considerations, applications, impacts, barriers & potential solutions, business strategies, and policies. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 73215–73252. [Google Scholar]
  100. Freewire Technologies MOBI CHARGER SERIES. Available online: https://freewiretech.com/ev-charging (accessed on 22 July 2022).
  101. Power Mobile. Available online: https://www.nio.com/nio-power (accessed on 31 August 2020).
  102. Volkswagen. Electrifying World Premiere: Volkswagen offers First Glimpse of Mobile Charging Station. Available online: https://www.volkswagen-newsroom.com/en/press-releases/electrifying-world-premiere-volkswagen-offers-first-glimpse-of-mobile-charging-station-4544 (accessed on 22 February 2020).
  103. Robledo, C.B.; Oldenbroek, V.; Abbruzzese, F.; van Wijk, A.J.M. Integrating a hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle with vehicle-to-grid technology, photovoltaic power and a residential building. Appl. Energy 2018, 215, 615–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Hyundai 2022 NEXO Fuel Cell. Available online: https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/vehicles/nexo (accessed on 22 July 2022).
Vehicles 04 00044 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) Population and (b) CO2 emission of various construction equipment types in California in 2018 (adapted from [24]).
Figure 1. (a) Population and (b) CO2 emission of various construction equipment types in California in 2018 (adapted from [24]).
Vehicles 04 00044 g001
Vehicles 04 00044 g004 550
Figure 4. A wheeled excavator shown with its major components. The swing motion allows this equipment to rotate 360 degrees without engaging the drivetrain.
Figure 4. A wheeled excavator shown with its major components. The swing motion allows this equipment to rotate 360 degrees without engaging the drivetrain.
Vehicles 04 00044 g004
Vehicles 04 00044 g005 550
Figure 5. Configuration of compound hybrid excavator [20]. The supercapacitor is used as the electrical energy storage system while the electric drivetrain runs the swing electric motor with engine assistance.
Figure 5. Configuration of compound hybrid excavator [20]. The supercapacitor is used as the electrical energy storage system while the electric drivetrain runs the swing electric motor with engine assistance.
Vehicles 04 00044 g005
Vehicles 04 00044 g006 550
Figure 6. Off-highway truck.
Figure 6. Off-highway truck.
Vehicles 04 00044 g006
Vehicles 04 00044 g009 550
Figure 9. Comparative visualization of major works reviewed in Section 2: in the works conducted so far, emphasis has been given on both simulation and hardware implementation—both of them in many cases. For the construction sector, several commercially available vehicles fell into the interest of this review.
Figure 9. Comparative visualization of major works reviewed in Section 2: in the works conducted so far, emphasis has been given on both simulation and hardware implementation—both of them in many cases. For the construction sector, several commercially available vehicles fell into the interest of this review.
Vehicles 04 00044 g009
Vehicles 04 00044 g010 550
Figure 10. Potential technologies for facilitating off-road equipment electrification.
Figure 10. Potential technologies for facilitating off-road equipment electrification.
Vehicles 04 00044 g010
Table
Table 2. Academic literature overview of general off-road EV architecture.
Table 2. Academic literature overview of general off-road EV architecture.
ReferenceYearEV TypeComponents of InterestControl AlgorithmPotential Vehicle ApplicationImplementation Level
Saeks et al. [32]2002FCEV
  • Fuel cell
  • Flywheel
  • Electric motor
  • Neural adaptive controller
  • Adaptive dynamic programming controller
  • Off-road driving
Simulation
Zhang et al. [27]2008Parallel PHEV
  • Battery
  • Electric motor
  • Fuzzy logic
  • Light off-road driving
Simulation
Baronti et al. [31]2013General
  • LiFeO4 battery management system
-
  • Construction
  • Agriculture
Simulation
Parsons et al. [18]2014Series HEV
  • Diesel generator
  • Hub-mounted electric motor
  • 2-speed transmission
  • Battery
-
  • Military
  • Construction
Simulation andHardware implementation
Sinkko et al. [30]2014HEV
  • Permanent magnet synchronous motor
  • 2-speed transmission
-
  • Construction
  • Agriculture
Simulation
Table
Table 5. Academic literature on electric off-road agricultural equipment.
Table 5. Academic literature on electric off-road agricultural equipment.
ReferenceYearEV TypeComponents of InterestControl AlgorithmImplementation LevelEquipment Type
Usinin et al. [72]2013Series HEV
  • Gas turbine/diesel ICE
  • Synchronous reluctance generator
  • Synchronous reluctance motor
Separate excitation for generator and motor, motor torque control by controlling armature current and magnetic flux. SimulationTractor
Mousazadeh et al. [73]2010BEV
  • VRLA battery pack
  • Electric motor
  • Solar panel
  • Electrically driven PTO
Solar panel supplied 18% of required power, rest taken from grid.Simulation and hardware implementationTractor
Ueka et al. [70]2013BEV
  • Battery pack
  • Electric motor
  • Electrically driven PTO
A rotary tiller along with the four wheels driven by the motor through reduction gear.Simulation and hardware implementationTractor
Rossi et al. [75]2014Parallel HEV
  • ICE
  • Electric motor/generator
  • e-CVT with PTO
Set up for using ICE’s maximum torque operating region.Simulation and hardware implementationTractor
Gonzalez-de-Soto et al. [25]2016ICE vehicle with fuel cell-powered PTO
  • ICE
  • Hydrogen fuel cell
  • Solar photovoltaic system
  • Battery
The fuel cell system powers the PTO, while ICE runs the drivetrain. Battery stores excess energy.Simulation and hardware implementationTractor
Table
Table 6. Industrial research on electric off-road agricultural equipment.
Table 6. Industrial research on electric off-road agricultural equipment.
ReferenceManufacturerModelEV TypeComponents of InterestControl StrategyEquipment TypeImplementation Level
[71]RuselpromBelarus-3023Series HEV
  • ICE
  • Battery
  • Liquid-cooled asynchronous motor/generator
  • Liquid-cooled asynchronous traction motor
  • Liquid-cooled power electronics
  • Electric-powered PTO
ICE powered electric drivetrain, electricity driven PTO.TractorPre-production versions produced
[77]New HollandNH2FCEV
  • Fuel cell stack
  • Electric motors for traction and PTO
Traction and PTO operation handled by separate motors.TractorHardware implementation
Table
Table 7. Energy recovery techniques in reviewed literature for equipment types of interest.
Table 7. Energy recovery techniques in reviewed literature for equipment types of interest.
ReferenceYearRegenerative ComponentVehicle ApplicationImplementation LevelEquipment Type
Minav et al. [81]2013LiftConstructionSimulationForklift
Mazumdar [58]2013BrakeConstructionSimulationOff-highway truck
Esfahanian et al. [57]2013BrakeConstruction-
[60]2017BrakeConstructionHardware implementation
Yoon et al. [45]2013BoomConstructionSimulationExcavator
Wang et al. [86]2014Hydraulic cylinderConstructionSimulation
Lin et al. [84]2016BoomConstructionSimulation and hardware implementation
Lin et al. [85]2010BoomConstructionSimulation
Chen et al. [87]2017BoomConstructionSimulation and hardware implementation
Yoo et al. [53]2009SwingConstructionSimulation and hardware implementation
Wang et al. [65]2013Swing and boomConstructionSimulation
Singh et al. [80]2009TurbochargerConstruction
Agriculture		-All turbocharged equipment
Yu et al. [88]2015TurbochargerConstruction
Agriculture		-
Åman et al. [89]2013Electro-hybrid actuatorConstruction
Agriculture		SimulationOff-highway equipment
Table
Table 8. Advantages of equipment electrification and their implications.
Table 8. Advantages of equipment electrification and their implications.
ImplicationEnvironmentalOperationalEconomic
Advantage
  • Less moving parts
  • Instant bidirectional torque
  • Higher efficiency
  • Electric deceleration
  • No power loss at high altitudes
  • Less emission
  • Ease of operation
  • Simpler drivetrain
  • Less wear
  • Less maintenance
  • Less operating cost
  • Less downtime
  • Increased work efficiency and productivity
  • Less fuel consumption
  • Less emission
  • Improved workplace environment
  • Less dependency on fuel supply
  • Less operating cost
  • Reduced noise
  • Reduced noise pollution
  • More flexibility in choosing operating hours and areas
  • Increased productivity
  • Reduced downtime
  • Flexible design
-
  • More utility
  • Potential reduction in manufacturing cost
Table
Table 9. Concerns surrounding off-road equipment electrification and potential solutions.
Table 9. Concerns surrounding off-road equipment electrification and potential solutions.
ConcernSolution
Technical issuesShort range
  • Better ESS
  • Better energy recuperation techniques
Long charging time
  • High voltage charging
Dynamic and high power requirement
  • Use of transmission
  • Improved ESS
Logistics issuesLack of research
  • Increased funding
  • Regulations
  • Incentives
Inadequate charging infrastructure
  • Development of necessary charging infrastructure while developing any commercial off-road equipment.
Charging station placement
  • Proper planning
  • Mobile charging facilities
Market issuesCost
  • Increased production
  • Lease
  • Incentive
Competition
  • Regulations
  • Incentives
  • Proving superior performance
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Un-Noor, F.; Wu, G.; Perugu, H.; Collier, S.; Yoon, S.; Barth, M.; Boriboonsomsin, K. Off-Road Construction and Agricultural Equipment Electrification: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities. Vehicles 2022, 4, 780-807. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4030044

AMA Style

Un-Noor F, Wu G, Perugu H, Collier S, Yoon S, Barth M, Boriboonsomsin K. Off-Road Construction and Agricultural Equipment Electrification: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities. Vehicles. 2022; 4(3):780-807. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4030044

Chicago/Turabian Style

Un-Noor, Fuad, Guoyuan Wu, Harikishan Perugu, Sonya Collier, Seungju Yoon, Mathew Barth, and Kanok Boriboonsomsin. 2022. "Off-Road Construction and Agricultural Equipment Electrification: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities" Vehicles 4, no. 3: 780-807. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4030044

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop