SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Cukurova University Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences / 2026 / Volume: 5 Issue: 1

Comparative Evaluation of 600 V and 800 V Battery Architectures for Urban Electric Buses: Energy Efficiency and Range Analysis

Yunus Kizilarslan(Ulaşım İç ve Dış Ticaret A.Ş.)0009-0000-5016-8643
Oğuzhan Arı(Ulaşım İç ve Dış Ticaret A.Ş.)0009-0002-4196-9435
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The objective was to comparatively evaluate the effects of 600 V and 800 V battery systems on overall vehicle energy management.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the impact of different battery voltage architectures on energy efficiency, driving range, and charging performance of urban electric buses was analyzed using a MATLAB/Simulink-based simulation model.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The objective was to comparatively evaluate the effects of 600 V and 800 V battery systems on overall vehicle energy management.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings demonstrate that battery voltage level and pack configuration play a critical role in the energy efficiency and operational performance of urban electric buses.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:battery architecture · charging time · driving range

Abstract

In this study, the impact of different battery voltage architectures on energy efficiency, driving range, and charging performance of urban electric buses was analyzed using a MATLAB/Simulink-based simulation model. The objective was to comparatively evaluate the effects of 600 V and 800 V battery systems on overall vehicle energy management. The model consisted of vehicle dynamics, electric motor, battery system, and charging subsystems. Three scenarios were investigated: (S1) a 600 V system with 350 kWh capacity, (S2) an 800 V system with 490 kWh capacity, and (S3) an 800 V system with 352 kWh capacity. All scenarios were simulated under the SORT-1 driving cycle between 100% and 20% state of charge. Results showed that the 800 V architecture achieved approximately 1.1% lower normalized energy consumption (Wh/ton·km) compared to the 600 V system with similar capacity. Increasing battery capacity from 350 kWh to 490 kWh extended the driving range by about 39%. Charging analysis indicated comparable charging durations for equal energy transfer, while the 800 V system enabled lower current levels, reduced transmission losses, and improved fast-charging efficiency. The findings demonstrate that battery voltage level and pack configuration play a critical role in the energy efficiency and operational performance of urban electric buses.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kizilarslan, Y., Arı, O. (2026). Comparative Evaluation of 600 V and 800 V Battery Architectures for Urban Electric Buses: Energy Efficiency and Range Analysis. Cukurova University Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, Volume: 5 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.70395/cunas.1895778

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Abdelaty, H., Mohamed, M. (2021). A prediction model for battery electric bus energy consumption in transit. Energies; 14:2824. [https://doi.org/10.3390/en14102824](https://doi.org/10.3390/en14102824)
  2. Aghabali, I., Bauman, J., Kollmeyer, P.J., Wang, Y., Bilgin, B., Emadi, A. (2021). 800-V electric vehicle powertrains: review and analysis of benefits, challenges, and future trends. IEEE Trans Transp Electrification; 7(3):927–948. doi:10.1109/TTE.2020.3044938
  3. Lajunen, A. (2014). Energy consumption and cost-benefit analysis of hybrid and electric city buses. Transportation Research Part C; 38:1–15. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.10.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.10.008)
  4. De Cauwer, C., Van Mierlo, J., Coosemans, T. (2015). Energy consumption prediction for electric vehicles based on real-world data. Energies; 8:8573–8593. [https://doi.org/10.3390/en8088573](https://doi.org/10.3390/en8088573)
  5. Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., Sun, R. (2021). Data-driven estimation of energy consumption for electric bus under real-world driving conditions. Transportation Research Part D; 94:102807.
  6. Deb, N., Singh, R. (2023). An 800V end to end SiC powertrain to accommodate extremely fast charging. Journal of Energy and Power Technology; 5:1-19. [https://doi.org/10.21926/jept.2301007](https://doi.org/10.21926/jept.2301007)
  7. Gao, Z., Lin, Z., LaClair, T.J., Liu, C., Li, J.M., Birky, A.K., Ward, J. (2017). Battery capacity and recharging needs for electric buses in city transit service. Energy; 122:588–600.
  8. Federal Transit Administration (2023). Guidebook for Deploying Battery Electric Buses. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. [https://doi.org/10.21949/1527667](https://doi.org/10.21949/1527667)
  9. Hjelkrem, OA., Lervåg, KY., Babri, S., Lu, C., Sodersten, CJ. (2021). A battery electric bus energy consumption model for strate-gic purposes: Validation of a proposed model structure with data from bus fleets in China and Norway. Transportation Research Part D; 94:102804. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102804](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102804)
  10. International Electrotechnical Commission (2023). IEC 61851-23: Electric vehicle conductive charging system – Part 23: DC electric vehicle supply equipment. IEC, Geneva.
  11. Kammuang-lue, N., Boonjun, J. (2021). Energy consumption of battery electric bus simulated from international driving cycles compared to real-world driving cycle in Chiang Mai. Energy Reports; 7:344–349. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.07.016](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.07.016)
  12. Konakati, N., Ravichandran, B., Nukala, S., S, A. (2022). A case study for evaluating pantograph-based charging systems for electric bus. SAE Technical Paper 2022-28-0044. [https://doi.org/10.4271/2022-28-0044](https://doi.org/10.4271/2022-28-0044)
  13. Das, S. (2025). Analysis of high-voltage options (400V vs 800V) in electric vehicle architecture. Journal of Emerging Technolo-gies and Innovative Research; 12(9):b404–b409.
  14. International Association of Public Transport (2004). SORT – Standardised On-Road Test Cycles. UITP, Brussels.
  15. Rogge, M., Wollny, S., Sauer, D.U. (2015). Fast charging battery buses for the electrification of urban public transport—A feasi-bility study focusing on charging infrastructure and energy storage requirements. Energies; 8:4587–4606. [https://doi.org/10.3390/en8054587](https://doi.org/10.3390/en8054587)
  16. Lajunen, A., Lipman, T. (2016). Lifecycle cost assessment and carbon dioxide emissions of diesel, natural gas, hybrid electric, fuel cell hybrid and electric transit buses. Energy; 106:329–342. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.03.075](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.03.075)
  17. Hassani Sadi, M.H., Sadeghi, Z., Bauman, J. (2025). A comprehensive review of universal fast-charging techniques for 400-V and 800-V electric vehicles. IEEE Access; 13:153212–153233. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3603845
  18. Kivekäs, K., Vepsäläinen, J., & Tammi, K. (2018). Stochastic driving cycle synthesis for analyzing the energy consumption of a battery electric bus. IEEE Access, 6, 77738–77752. [https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2871574](https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2871574)
  19. Romano, E., Petersen, M., Madsen, I. (2025). Machine learning-based energy consumption prediction and optimization for electric vehicles. Academic Journal of Earth Sciences; 3:27–32. [https://doi.org/10.61784/ajes3012](https://doi.org/10.61784/ajes3012)
  20. Yiğit, BH. (2024). Selection of powertrain of 25 m and bi-articulated electric bus rapid transit for Istanbul bus rapid transit line. PhD Dissertation. Bursa Uludağ University, Bursa, Türkiye.