Assessment of Battery–Supercapacitor Topologies of an Electric Vehicle under Real Driving Conditions
<p>Comparison of SC and BP energy and power density at cell, module, and pack level.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Adopted vehicle architecture and analysis methodology.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Fitting of the OCV parameters. The curves obtained were adopted for the numerical model.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Experimental driving cycle explored.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>SC OCV vs. <span class="html-italic">SoC</span> curve adopted.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>A schematic layout of possible BS-HESSs. CFG stands for configuration.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Operating mode investigated. The arrows indicate the power flow direction between components.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>The state flow chart shows the state and the used transition rules.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Workflow of the proposed analysis.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Comparison of experimental and simulation data under four different driving cycles.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Motor efficiency map. The scatter points are the operating points of the driving cycles performed during the validation step.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>SC size effect on battery ageing and ohmic loss reduction among the configurations and referenced to CFG1. The results are averaged among all the considered driving cycles.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>BP current indicators of the CFG2 and CFG3 on different driving cycles.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Comparison of battery pack current in 61511002 test case for CFG1, CFG2, and CFG3.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Relative change in RMS and maximum current, considering the CFG1 as a reference, for both BS-HESS configurations varying SC size.</p> "> Figure 16
<p>Cost comparison of the different BS-HESS topologies varying SC size.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Modelling and validation of a light-duty BEV starting from the available literature data needed to assess the performance of the BS-HESS topologies;
- Assessment of two different BS-HESS topologies, passive and semi-active, in many different testing conditions, and SC size sensitivity analysis;
- Development of a causal rule-based controller, which is more suitable for online applications of the semi-active topology;
- Comparison of the battery ageing through a semi-empirical model, among different BS-HESS topologies and driving cycles;
- Comparative cost assessment of the BS-HESS topologies.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Battery Pack
2.2. Regenerative Braking
2.3. Test Driving Cycles
2.4. Supercapacitor and BS-HESS
2.5. Energy Management Strategy
- BP only, characterised by .
- Regenerative braking, characterised by . It is applied when and the SCs’ SoCs have a value allowing its recharge.
- Mixed SC and BP operations, characterised by .
- SC charging from BP operations, characterised by .
- SOCSC,max: SC SoC maximum threshold, set to 0.95 to ensure safe SC operation [44].
- TP: Power threshold under which the use of only the BP is preferred.
- TP,max: Power threshold over which the use of SC is preferred.
- PSC,charging: Target power to be drawn from the BP to recharge the SC.
2.6. Test Methodology
- Base configuration development and validation.
- Battery ageing and current estimation for the base BEV configuration in standard and real driving cycles.
- Integration of the supercapacitors in passive and semi-active topologies.
- Sensitivity analysis of the SC size versus battery ageing, current peaks, and root mean square (RMS) value reduction.
- Cost analysis of the explored BS-HESS solutions.
3. Results
3.1. Validation
3.2. BS-HESS Investigation
4. Conclusions
- Real driving conditions showed a higher battery ageing with respect to homologation driving cycles;
- Passive topology with the largest SC (6.8 kWh) mitigated the battery ageing by about 0.5%. Passive topology with a lower SC size (0.17 kWh) reduced the vehicle energy consumption by about 2.5% and mitigated the battery ageing by about 0.3%;
- Semi-active topology with a rule-based control strategy and SC size in the range of 1–4% of the BP reduced the RMS current by up to 20% compared to the baseline and reduced up to 10 times the ageing compared to the passive topology;
- The semi-active topology assured higher performances, also setting a cost limit of the BS-HESS due to the better utilisation of small SCs. The passive one was more effective at reducing the maximum peak currents.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
ANL | Argonne National Laboratory |
BEVs | Battery Electric Vehicles |
BP | Battery Pack |
BS-HESS | Battery Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System |
COP27 | Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change |
DoD | Deep-of-Discharge |
EM | Electric Motor |
EMS | Energy Management Strategy |
EVs | Electric Vehicles |
ESS | Energy Storage Systems |
GHG | Greenhouse Gases |
GWP | Global Warming Potential |
HESS | Hybrid Energy Storage Systems |
ICEVs | Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles |
KPI | Key Performance Indicator |
LCA | Life Cycle Analysis |
MIMO | Multi Input Multi Output |
MPC | Model Predictive Control |
OCV | Open Circuit Voltage |
PMSM | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
RMS | Root Mean Square |
SC | Supercapacitors |
SoC | State of Charge |
VSI | Voltage-Source Inverter |
xEVs | Electrified Vehicles |
References
- Goppelt, G. Electrification by 2030—The OEMs’ Plans. MTZ Worldw. 2022, 83, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- COP26 Goals. Available online: https://ukcop26.org/cop26-goals/ (accessed on 24 May 2022).
- Shafique, M.; Azam, A.; Rafiq, M.; Luo, X. Life Cycle Assessment of Electric Vehicles and Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles: A Case Study of Hong Kong. Res. Transp. Econ. 2022, 91, 101112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, G.; Peng, Z. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of BEV’s Environmental Benefits for Meeting the Challenge of ICExit (Internal Combustion Engine Exit). Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 1203–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kawamoto, R.; Mochizuki, H.; Moriguchi, Y.; Nakano, T.; Motohashi, M.; Sakai, Y.; Inaba, A. Estimation of CO2 Emissions of Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle and Battery Electric Vehicle Using LCA. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lai, X.; Chen, Q.; Tang, X.; Zhou, Y.; Gao, F.; Guo, Y.; Bhagat, R.; Zheng, Y. Critical Review of Life Cycle Assessment of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles: A Lifespan Perspective. eTransportation 2022, 12, 100169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wikner, E.; Thiringer, T. Extending Battery Lifetime by Avoiding High SOC. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Helmers, E.; Marx, P. Electric Cars: Technical Characteristics and Environmental Impacts. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2012, 24, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dong, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Li, Z.; Li, X.; Qin, J.; Liang, C.; Han, M.; Yin, Y.; Bai, J.; Wang, C.; et al. A Survey of Battery–Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage Systems: Concept, Topology, Control and Application. Symmetry 2022, 14, 1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, J.; Xu, B.; Shen, Y.; Wu, J. Energy Management Strategy for Battery/Supercapacitor Hybrid Electric City Bus Based on Driving Pattern Recognition. Energy 2022, 243, 122752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Hu, X.; Wang, Z.; Sun, F.; Dorrell, D.G. A Review of Supercapacitor Modeling, Estimation, and Applications: A Control/Management Perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 1868–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tehrani, K.; Maurice, O. A Cyber Physical Energy System Design (CPESD) for Electric Vehicle Applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 12th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), Waikoloa, HI, USA, 18–21 June 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Chong, L.W.; Wong, Y.W.; Rajkumar, R.K.; Isa, D. Modelling and Simulation of Standalone PV Systems with Battery-Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System for a Rural Household. Energy Procedia 2017, 107, 232–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Z.; Li, J.; Hou, J.; Hofmann, H.; Ouyang, M.; Du, J. The Battery-Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System in Electric Vehicle Applications: A Case Study. Energy 2018, 154, 433–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musa, A.; Pipicelli, M.; Spano, M.; Tufano, F.; De Nola, F.; Di Blasio, G.; Gimelli, A.; Misul, D.A.; Toscano, G. A Review of Model Predictive Controls Applied to Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems. Energies 2021, 14, 7974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golchoubian, P.; Azad, N.L. Real-Time Nonlinear Model Predictive Control of a Battery–Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System in Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 66, 9678–9688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bemporad, A.; Bernardini, D.; Long, R.; Verdejo, J. Model Predictive Control of Turbocharged Gasoline Engines for Mass Production; SAE International: Warrendale, PV, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Kouchachvili, L.; Yaïci, W.; Entchev, E. Hybrid Battery/Supercapacitor Energy Storage System for the Electric Vehicles. J. Power Sources 2018, 374, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carter, R.; Cruden, A.; Hall, P.J. Optimizing for Efficiency or Battery Life in a Battery/Supercapacitor Electric Vehicle. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2012, 61, 1526–1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, T.; Wills, R.G.A.; Lot, R.; Kong, X.; Yan, X. Optimal Sizing and Sensitivity Analysis of a Battery-Supercapacitor Energy Storage System for Electric Vehicles. Energy 2021, 221, 119851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sreedhar, S.; Siegel, J.B.; Choi, S. Topology Comparison for 48V Battery-Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2017, 50, 4733–4738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castaings, A.; Lhomme, W.; Trigui, R.; Bouscayrol, A. Practical Control Schemes of a Battery/Supercapacitor System for Electric Vehicle. IET Electr. Syst. Transp. 2016, 6, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rezaei, H.; Abdollahi, S.E.; Abdollahi, S.; Filizadeh, S. Energy Management Strategies of Battery-Ultracapacitor Hybrid Storage Systems for Electric Vehicles: Review, Challenges, and Future Trends. J. Energy Storage 2022, 53, 105045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salem, M.; Elnaggar, M.; Saad, M.S.; Fattah, H.A.A. Energy Management System for Fuel Cell-Battery Vehicles Using Multi Objective Online Optimization. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 40629–40641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Energy Systems D3 2015 Volkswagen E-Golf|Argonne National Laboratory. Available online: https://www.anl.gov/es/energy-systems-d3-2015-volkswagen-egolf (accessed on 28 April 2022).
- 2015 Volkswagen E-Golf Limited Edition—Specifications. Available online: https://www.evspecifications.com/en/model/640172 (accessed on 24 January 2023).
- Cavanini, L.; Majecki, P.; Grimble, M.J.; Sasikumar, L.V.; Li, R.; Hillier, C. Processor-In-the-Loop Demonstration of MPC for HEVs Energy Management System. IFAC PapersOnLine 2022, 55, 173–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giardiello, G.; de Nola, F.; Pipicelli, M.; Troiano, A.; Parascandolo, F.; Gimelli, A.; Santoro, D.; Sessa, B. Comparative Analysis on Fuel Consumption Between Two Online Strategies for P2 Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Adaptive-RuleBased (A-RB) vs. Adaptive-Equivalent Consumption Minimization Strategy (A-ECMS); SAE International: Warrendale, PV, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Z.; Huai, R.; Xiao, L. State-of-Charge Estimation for Lithium-Ion Batteries Using a Kalman Filter Based on Local Linearization. Energies 2015, 8, 7854–7873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carmeli, M.S.; Toscani, N.; Mauri, M. Electrothermal Aging Model of Li-Ion Batteries for Vehicle-to-Grid Services Evaluation. Electronics 2022, 11, 1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merkle, L.; Pöthig, M.; Schmid, F. Estimate E-Golf Battery State Using Diagnostic Data and a Digital Twin. Batteries 2021, 7, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suri, G.; Onori, S. A Control-Oriented Cycle-Life Model for Hybrid Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries. Energy 2016, 96, 644–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, L.; Zheng, Y.; Li, J.; Liu, Y. A Study of Novel Regenerative Braking System Based on Supercapacitor for Electric Vehicle Driven by In-Wheel Motors. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2015, 7, 1687814015573762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zou, Z.; Cao, J.; Cao, B.; Chen, W. Evaluation Strategy of Regenerative Braking Energy for Supercapacitor Vehicle. ISA Trans. 2015, 55, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Partridge, J.; Abouelamaimen, D.I. The Role of Supercapacitors in Regenerative Braking Systems. Energies 2019, 12, 2683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Quirama, L.F.; Giraldo, M.; Huertas, J.I.; Tibaquirá, J.E.; Cordero-Moreno, D. Main Characteristic Parameters to Describe Driving Patterns and Construct Driving Cycles. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2021, 97, 102959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gebisa, A.; Gebresenbet, G.; Gopal, R.; Nallamothu, R.B. Driving Cycles for Estimating Vehicle Emission Levels and Energy Consumption. Future Transp. 2021, 1, 615–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baure, G.; Dubarry, M. Synthetic vs. Real Driving Cycles: A Comparison of Electric Vehicle Battery Degradation. Batteries 2019, 5, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Andreev, M.K. An Overview of Supercapacitors as New Power Sources in Hybrid Energy Storage Systems for Electric Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2020 XI National Conference with International Participation (ELECTRONICA), Sofia, Bulgaria, 23–24 July 2020; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Alatalo, M. Module Size Investigation on Fast Chargers for BEV; Chalmers University of Technology: Gothenburg, Sweden, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Song, Z.; Hofmann, H.; Li, J.; Han, X.; Zhang, X.; Ouyang, M. A Comparison Study of Different Semi-Active Hybrid Energy Storage System Topologies for Electric Vehicles. J. Power Sources 2015, 274, 400–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharyya, P.; Banerjee, A.; Sen, S.; Giri, S.K.; Sadhukhan, S. A Modified Semi-Active Topology for Battery-Ultracapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System for EV Applications. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Smart Grid and Renewable Energy (PESGRE2020), Cochin, India, 2–4 January 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Parvini, Y.; Siegel, J.B.; Stefanopoulou, A.G.; Vahidi, A. Supercapacitor Electrical and Thermal Modeling, Identification, and Validation for a Wide Range of Temperature and Power Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 1574–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Zhang, H.; Yang, F.; Tong, L.; Yan, D.; Yang, Y.; Ren, J.; Ma, L.; Wang, Y. State of Charge Estimation of Supercapacitors Based on Multi-Innovation Unscented Kalman Filter under a Wide Temperature Range. Int. J. Energy Res. 2022, 46, 16716–16735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ostadi, A.; Kazerani, M. A Comparative Analysis of Optimal Sizing of Battery-Only, Ultracapacitor-Only, and Battery–Ultracapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage Systems for a City Bus. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2015, 64, 4449–4460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castaings, A.; Lhomme, W.; Trigui, R.; Bouscayrol, A. Energy Management of a Multi-Source Vehicle by λ-Control. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mesbahi, T.; Khenfri, F.; Rizoug, N.; Bartholomeüs, P.; Moigne, P.L. Combined Optimal Sizing and Control of Li-Ion Battery/Supercapacitor Embedded Power Supply Using Hybrid Particle Swarm–Nelder–Mead Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2017, 8, 59–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sikha, G.; Popov, B.N. Performance Optimization of a Battery–Capacitor Hybrid System. J. Power Sources 2004, 134, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Castro, R.; Pinto, C.; Araújo, R.E.; Melo, P.; Freitas, D. Optimal Sizing and Energy Management of Hybrid Storage Systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 9–12 October 2012; pp. 321–326. [Google Scholar]
- Cabrane, Z.; Ouassaid, M.; Maaroufi, M. Analysis and Evaluation of Battery-Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System for Photovoltaic Installation. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2016, 41, 20897–20907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Libich, J.; Máca, J.; Vondrák, J.; Čech, O.; Sedlaříková, M. Supercapacitors: Properties and Applications. J. Energy Storage 2018, 17, 224–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parameter | Value |
---|---|
Curb weight [kg] | 1700 |
Frontal area A [m2] | 2.23 |
Drag coefficient Cd [-] | 0.29 |
Tire | 205/55 R16 |
Tire rolling resistance Cr, Cr1, Cr2 [-] | 1.112 × 10−2, 3.784 × 10−4, −1.15 × 10−5 |
Inverter type | 3-phase voltage source inverters (VSI) |
Electric Motor type | permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) |
Electric Motor max speed [rpm] | 12,000 |
Electric motor max torque [Nm] | 270 |
Battery nominal voltage [V] | 323 |
Battery capacity [Ah] | 75 |
Final drive ratio [-] | 9.8 |
Test Name | Description | Slope [%] | Windows Position | A/C |
---|---|---|---|---|
61511002 | Steady State Speed | 0 | Open | Off |
61511003 | Steady State Speed | 6 | Open | Off |
61511006 | Passing manoeuvres | 0,3,6 | Open | Off |
61511007 | High slope conditions | 25 | Open | Off |
61511009 | Mixed | 0 | Open | Off |
61511010 | UDDS | 0 | Open | Off |
61511020 | Mixed | 0 | Closed | On |
Variable | Value | Variable | Value |
---|---|---|---|
60 | 2.78 × 10−4 | ||
27 | 0.57 | ||
1 | −30,725 | ||
0 | 8.31 |
Test Name | Duration [s] | Distance [km] | Mean/Max Speed [km/h] | Mean/Max acc. [m/s2] | Pi/Pc/Pa/Pd [%] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
61511002 | 550 | 10.0 | 66/129 | 0.2/1.9 | 4/78/9/9 |
61511003 | 550 | 10.0 | 66/129 | 0.2/1.9 | 4/78/9/9 |
61511006 | 812 | 11.7 | 71/131 | 0.6/2.4 | 13/38/23/26 |
61511007 | 114 | 1.0 | 33/66 | 0.4/1.8 | 26/21/29/24 |
61511009 | 4830 | 53.5 | 40/130 | 0.4/3.8 | 27/25/25/23 |
61511010 | 2018 | 50.2 | 90/130 | 0.3/4.3 | 8/69/11/12 |
61511020 | 4830 | 53.5 | 40/130 | 0.4/3.8 | 27/25/25/23 |
EXP1 | 308 | 2.5 | 23/51 | 0.4/1.0 | 28/28/22/22 |
EXP2 | 6960 | 49.6 | 26/57 | 0.3/1.6 | 4/30/36/30 |
EXP3 | 1080 | 7.5 | 25/51 | 0.4/1.9 | 11/28/34/27 |
Parameter | Value |
---|---|
SoCSC,min [-] | 0.35 |
SoCSC,max [-] | 0.95 |
TP [kW] | 15 |
TP,max [kW] | 35 |
PSC,charging [kW] | 8 |
Test Name | Final SoC (Exp/Sim) | ΔSoC [%] | Consumed Energy (Exp/Sim) [kWh] | Energy Error [%] | Max Speed Error [km/h] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
61511002 | 87.2/86.7 | −0.5 | 1.40/1.50 | 7.7 | 0.11 |
61511003 | 68.8/68.5 | −0.3 | 4.33/4.33 | −0.2 | 0.10 |
61511006 | 26.8/23.2 | −3.6 | 4.76/4.88 | 2.3 | 0.35 |
61511007 | 20/19.8 | −0.2 | 1.41/1.33 | −5.2 | 0.14 |
61511009 | 67.2/66.8 | −0.4 | 6.94/6.96 | 0.3 | 0.12 |
61511010 | 33.2/28.8 | −4.4 | 8.15/8.56 | 5.1 | 0.38 |
61511020 | 31.6/31.6 | 0.0 | 14.77/14.74 | 0.06 | 0.25 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pipicelli, M.; Sessa, B.; De Nola, F.; Gimelli, A.; Di Blasio, G. Assessment of Battery–Supercapacitor Topologies of an Electric Vehicle under Real Driving Conditions. Vehicles 2023, 5, 424-445. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles5020024
Pipicelli M, Sessa B, De Nola F, Gimelli A, Di Blasio G. Assessment of Battery–Supercapacitor Topologies of an Electric Vehicle under Real Driving Conditions. Vehicles. 2023; 5(2):424-445. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles5020024
Chicago/Turabian StylePipicelli, Michele, Bernardo Sessa, Francesco De Nola, Alfredo Gimelli, and Gabriele Di Blasio. 2023. "Assessment of Battery–Supercapacitor Topologies of an Electric Vehicle under Real Driving Conditions" Vehicles 5, no. 2: 424-445. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles5020024