Powertrain design is entering a new phase of electrification, where integration now matters more than individual component performance. The conventional method of engineering motors, inverters, and batteries in isolation is giving way to full-system approaches that treat the powertrain as a single, optimized ecosystem. This shift is changing how efficiency, cost, and reliability are achieved.
Matrishvan Raval, Head of Product, Axial Flux Motors, and Thermal at Turntide Technologies.
Integrating electrical, mechanical, and thermal domains early in development enables engineers to validate interactions across the system, reducing redesign cycles, improving overall energy efficiency, and supporting scalable platforms across multiple vehicle classes.
We recently spoke with Matrishvan Raval, Head of Product, Axial Flux Motors, and Thermal at Turntide Technologies, about how system-level thinking is reshaping the design of electric and hybrid platforms. Turntide integrates electric motors, power electronics, and energy storage into unified systems that deliver higher performance, lower weight, and faster time-to-market.
In this Q&A, Raval explains what defines a true systems approach, why traditional component-by-component design often creates inefficiencies, and how tighter integration across the stack strengthens both thermal management and reliability.
He also discusses how optimization during component selection can yield measurable gains in drive-cycle efficiency and scalability for OEMs pursuing advanced electrification.
Here’s what he had to say…
What does a systems approach to powertrain design entail?
A true system method starts with the vehicle’s application (duty cycle, environment, regulatory constraints) and flows down into co-engineered subsystems.
Typical deliverables in a systems approach include:
- Vehicle targets: Range payload, top speed, duty cycle, torque, voltage, NVH, and regulatory standards
- Functional architecture: Common dc-link voltage, thermal loops, as well as safety and diagnostic strategy
- Co-simulation: Integrated motor/inverter/battery models, computational fluid dynamics (CFD)-driven cooling layout, and electromagnetic interference (EMI) and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) maps
- Hardware selection: Motors, inverters, batteries, pumps/fans chosen as components integrated to efficiently operate together
- Controls: Unified software stack that supervises energy flow, fault management, and predictive maintenance
At Turntide, we typically describe this as “integrating electric motors, power electronics, and energy storage solutions into a unified ecosystem.”
System-level powertrain design flow: from defining application requirements to validation and certification.
Why is a component-by-component approach counterproductive?
Treating the different powertrain components of an electric or hybrid system traps an original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in an endless cycle of mismatched interfaces, duplicated safety margins, and late-stage redesigns. Each supplier sizes its part for worst-case conditions that it cannot see, so the stack ends up over-engineered, heavier, and less efficient than necessary.
Because nothing is optimized around vehicle or equipment operation, software teams spend months writing work-arounds for torque holes, voltage drops, and overheating. The result is a heavier bill of materials, slower time-to-market, and performance that rarely meets the requirements. We follow a “multiple components; one solution” approach where the mandate is synergy, and not silos.
How does a systems approach support OEMs?
A unified engineering approach delivers measurable advantages across every stage of vehicle development, from early validation to platform scalability.
Typically, this entails:
- Shorter development timeframes. When the core stack comes pre-validated as a package, vehicle teams can jump directly to chassis integration, shaving time off the program schedule.
- Lower program risk. A single DFMEA, or Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, spans all high-energy subsystems, closing interface gaps that traditionally surface late and costly. This unified assessment identifies potential failure modes early in design, allowing teams to correct risks before they propagate through the system.
- Optimized cost and weight. Shared thermal loops, right-sized cables, and common software save kilograms and dollars without compromising compliance.
- Scalable platforms. Once the architecture is proven at one power level, stackable motors or parallel battery strings let the OEM address adjacent vehicle classes with minimal new tooling.
Engineers evaluate an integrated electric vehicle powertrain platform during system-level design and validation.
How does a systems approach impact thermal management or reliability, given the shift toward higher voltages in EV architectures?
Raising the dc-link from 400 to 800 V halves the current for the same power, reducing power losses and heat generation across busbars, connectors, and windings. Less power is lost to heat generation. Thermal management systems can be less robust, with smaller cooling pumps, compressors and radiators.
A systems approach turns those physics advantages into real reliability gains by:
- Designing a single coolant circuit that services the battery, inverter, and motor and eliminates thermal bottlenecks.
- Coordinating insulation levels, creepage/clearance distances, and gating strategies manages partial-discharge risk under variable battery state of charge.
- Using wide-bandgap silicon-carbide devices, whose higher junction-temperature tolerance aligns with the coolant loop’s capacity, reduces over-headroom and cost.
Why is optimization important when selecting the components for an electric or hybrid system?
Component choice is a multivariable trade-off (cost, weight, efficiency, thermal load, regulatory margin). Optimization reveals more efficient options or combinations that the team may have missed by selecting parts in isolation.
A classic example is an axial flux motor: its high diameter-to-length (D/L) ratio boosts torque density and frees space for larger batteries or hybrid systems operating with a diesel or gasoline engine. This saved space may also raise range and thermal headroom. A higher D/L ratio provides a motor with higher efficiency and torque density within space-constrained systems.
An efficient stack eliminates interface losses:
- Matching inverter switching frequency to motor inductance minimizes copper losses and acoustic beat-frequencies.
- Coordinating battery impedance with dc-link capacitance flattens ripple and improves regenerative-braking capture.
- Integrating thermal and power controllers allows the ECU to pre-cool components before high-load events, holding them in their peak-efficiency temperature window.
Together, these measures routinely deliver a two to five percent drive-cycle efficiency improvement when compared to a piecemeal system.
What are the overall benefits of taking a full-system approach to powertrain development?
Taking a full-system approach to powertrain development enables tighter integration between hardware and controls, reducing risk and simplifying validation. When the motor, inverter, battery, and cooling hardware are engineered as part of a unified system, teams can:
- Lock interface specs early, avoiding the late re-spin of busbars or CAN messaging.
- Provide a single warranty boundary, simplifying service contracts and field diagnostics.
- Streamline certification, submitting a unified evidence pack for functional safety, EMC, and environmental testing. This includes a battery passport.
What other factors are shaping powertrain development?
As electrified platforms continue to evolve, it’s important to understand the factors influencing how powertrain systems are developed and validated:
- Thermal is the new bottleneck. As voltage climbs, junction temperature, not chemistry, limits battery life. A systems team can right-size cold-plate geometry and coolant flow to defer costly liquid-immersion or refrigerant loops.
- Regulations are converging on system validation. UNECE R100, ISO 26262, and upcoming cybersecurity rules all evaluate the vehicle as a system. A piecemeal approach increasingly struggles to pass.
- Future-proofing. A modular, system-oriented architecture can absorb next-gen chemistries (solid-state, sodium-ion) or 1,000 Vdc-links with minimal re-engineering.
Bottom line: A powertrain is a chain, and its weakest link determines range, performance, and customer satisfaction. By replacing the component mindset with a systems approach and working with suppliers who apply the same principles, OEMs can deliver lighter, more efficient, and more reliable electric and hybrid machines while meeting aggressive program timelines and cost targets.
Filed Under: Electrification, Featured, Featured Contributions, Q&As