An Approach for Control of Battery Energy
Storage Management Systems Considering
Multiple Functions
Sherif A. Abdelrazek, Student Member, IEEE, Sukumar Kamalasadan, Member, IEEE and Johan
Enslin, Fellow, IEEE
 improvement [2]. On the other hand, super conducting
Abstract—This paper present a complete electrochemical
energy storage management scheme to maximize potential value
that can be brought forth to medium voltage feeders. In general,
the potential performance benefits produced by possible energy
storage applications include improved system reliability, dynamic
stability, enhanced power quality, transmission capacity
enhancement and area protection. Here we propose a unique
control algorithm that enhances coordination of ancillary
services applications mainly voltage support along with
renewables capacity firming. Optimization of control parameters
and set points are considered for management between the
mentioned applications. The design is tested on an Electro
Magnetic Transient Program (EMTP) simulation platform which
shows that the method performs both the functions.
Index Terms—Batteries, Energy storage, Battery Management
Systems, Battery Management Control
I. INTRODUCTION
T he applications in which energy storage systems are used
hold considerable value to energy producers, grid
operators and in turn, energy consumers. Energy storage
systems can provide efficient solutions for various issues in
modern electrical networks including micro grids [1]. For
different applications different technologies of energy storage
can be used. These applications include electric energy time
shift, electric supply capacity, load following, area regulation,
electric supply reserve capacity, voltage support, transmission
support, transmission congestion relief, transmission and
distribution upgrade deferral, substation on-site power, time of
use energy cost management, demand change management,
electric service reliability, electric service power quality,
renewable energy time shift, renewable capacity firming and
wind generation grid integration [2]. Studying the usability of
various energy storage technologies for various applications, it
is found that flywheel energy storage (FES) are suitable for
applications that address dynamic stability[4], transient
stability[5], voltage support[6] and power quality
improvement[7]. Nevertheless, FES cannot present value for
area control/frequency regulation or transmission capability
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support from National Science
Foundation through NSF Grant ECS-1309911 and Grant ECS-1063484 and
Duke Energy grant awarded to the second author.
978-1-4799-6415-4/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
magnetic energy storage (SCMES) and battery energy storage
systems (BESS) are suitable for applications that improve
dynamic stability [8, 9], transient stability [10, 11], voltage
support [12], area control/ frequency regulation [13, 14],
transmission capability [13, 14] and power quality [5, 15].
BESS was found to be the most feasible and economically
viable energy storage technology for the intended applications.
Several research works proposes optimal management of
BESS based on a particular functionality. For example, ref. [3]
discusses capacity firming for a large wind farm. It focuses on
developing a control strategy for optimal use of BESS for
wind capacity firming. However, little or no work is reported
integrating storage functionality (such as PV firming) and
value capability (such as voltage support) in one main stream
management system. Utilities invest considerably on capacitor
banks and static VAR compensators to keep voltage levels
steady within the permissible band. Capital investment and
operational degradation is a critical concern in asset
management. If multiple propositions can be integrated into
the Storage Management System (SMS) for example, such
technologies show better prospectus and capabilities in
modern power grid.
In this paper, a new method for integrating BESS multiple
functionalities is discussed. The proposed method works with
the SMS to enhance its active and reactive power capabilities
and at the same time evaluate the need and requirement of the
distribution feeder. The paper is organized as follows. In
section II, conventional energy storage system topology and
SMS architecture is discussed. Section III discusses the
proposed control methodology and design topology and
section IV illustrates simulation results. Experimental test bed
on a reduced representative Medium Voltage (MV) feeder is
discussed in section V and section VI concludes the paper.
II. ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM TOPOLOGY &
CONTROL
As shown in Fig. 1, The BESS model consists of a lithium
polymer battery model which was developed and validated
with methods similar to that in [16]. The SMS consists of two
main modes of operation; discharge mode and charge mode.
Switching between these modes is performed by electronic
switches. The discharge mode topology shown in Fig. 1(a)
includes the lithium polymer battery connected to a DC-DC
buck converter which is responsible for holding the DC link (Q1) is opened for the full charge cycle. Switch (Q2) shown in
voltage at a bucked voltage value. The buck converter is Fig. 2 is controlled to boost the rectified voltage from the grid.
connected to a 3-phase 3-leg voltage source inverter which has The output voltage of this boost converter is set to charge the
a built in filter for harmonic removal and reactive power battery at the desired rate (PESSr). The voltage (Vc) required to
support. The control scheme for the inverter is a simple P-Q charge the battery is calculated from the desired charge rate
regulation control scheme. (PESSr) as shown in (2) and Fig. 3. Switch (Q2) duty cycle is
controlled according to voltage (Vc).The inverter operates as
Storage Management System an uncontrolled rectifier during the charge cycle. Battery
DC Link charge rate is controlled solely by the boost converter.
250kW/750kWh ௏ ି௏
DC-DC Buck
Lithium
Converter
Inverter ȁܲாௌௌ௥ ȁ ൌ ܸ஻௔௧௧௘௥௬ ൈ ೎ ಳೌ೟೟೐ೝ೤ (1)
Polymer Battery ௥
0.48/12.475kV ȁ௉ಶೄೄೝ ȁൈ௥
3-Phase 3-Leg Wye-Wye ܸ௖ ൌ ൅ ܸ஻௔௧௧௘௥௬ (2)
Voltage Source Transformer
௏ಳೌ೟೟೐ೝ೤
Inverter

(a)

Storage Management System

DC Link
250kW/750kWh
DC-DC Boost
3-Phase Full
Lithium Wave
Polymer Battery Converter
Rectifier
0.48/12.475kV
Wye-Wye
Transformer
(b)
Fig. 1 Topology of the battery energy storage system (BESS). (a) Topology
for discharge cycle. (b) Topology for charge cycle.
When the SMS is operated in the charge mode (Fig. 1(b)),
the inverter switches are turned off and grid voltage is
rectified by the free-wheeling diodes. In this case the buck
converter is operated and controlled as a boost in the opposite
direction. The voltage at the dc link is boosted to charge the
battery at the desired rate.
r
Q1
Q2
Fig.2 SMS Electro Magnetic Transient Program (EMTP) simulation model
A. Discharge Cycle
The operation is modeled using EMTP software. During
battery discharge cycle, switch (Q1) shown in Fig. 2 is
controlled to hold the DC link voltage to a set value. Switch
(Q2) remains open during discharge cycle to insure buck
operation only. Inverter switches are controlled by pulse width
modulation (PWM). Modulation index is set according to the
reactive power required to be supplied or consumed from the
feeder (QESSr). The phase of the PWM reference signal
controls the active power output and is set by the reference
active power signal (PESSr).
B. Charge cycle
During charge cycle, the former buck converter operates as
a boost with input voltage as the DC link voltage and output
voltage (Vc) being the charging voltage for the battery. Switch
PCC
Fig. 3 Charge cycle boost converter control schematic.
III. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
TOPOLOGY
The simulation test bed consists of the BESS model
connected in conjunction with a 1MW PV station model. The
PV station is controlled to operate at unity power factor i.e. the
reactive power output (ܳ௉௏ ሻ is zero (standard for most of the
PV installations). The battery capacity is assumed to be
0.25MW and the inverter capacity 0.9 MVAR (capacitive or
inductive). It is assumed that the studied SMS topology allows
reactive power control during discharge mode only, since the
inverter is converted to an uncontrolled 3-phase full bridge
rectifier during battery charge mode (typical to existing SMS
topologies). Fig. 4 shows the regions of ESS controllability.
Conventional energy systems use most of inverter capacity for
active power dispatch as represented by area (A3) where
reactive power output is dictated by a minimal power factor of
0.8. The studied control scheme relies on using an inverter
with a relatively high capacity compared to that of the battery.
This capacity difference is used for reactive power dispatch to
allow voltage support capability.
For the proposed design, BESS active power output varies
ௗ௠
between the maximum discharge power ܲாௌௌ ൌ ʹͷͲܹ݇ and
௖௠
maximum charge powerܲாௌௌ ൌ െʹͷͲܹ݇. Area A1 in Fig. 4
shows the point of common coupling (PCC) controllable
output region for zero active power output from the PV station
installed at the same bus. As the PV station output increases,
the controllable region is shifted to the right till it becomes A2
at maximum (PV) output. So, areas (A1) & (A2) represent the
controllable regions for minimum and maximum PV station
output, respectively. A4 shows the control regions used during
PV capacity firming (PVCF) application. A1 & A2 show the
control regions for voltage support applications. Since peak
loads mostly occur after sunset, considerable voltage drops
occur on feeders at that time which forces voltage regulators
to boost voltages on sagging sides. In such a scenario ESS will
have completed its first application of PVCF and can supply
reactive power for voltage support after.
Fig. 5 shows the proposed control schematic. Coordination
between storage applications currently being studied is
maintained by the time of day (ToD) since priority is given to
PVCF during the day time while priority is given to voltage A. PV Capacity Firming
support during the evening and night time. Fig. 6 shows The BESS control algorithm for PVCF aims to minimize
overall flowchart. The time of PVCF start (TPVst) in Fig. 6 is PV station power swings. The described PVCF algorithm
defined in the described algorithm as the time when PV station focuses on large power swings occurring at noon when PV
output becomes greater than (3%) of its rated value. output is at its peak. These swings are the most crucial to
Maximum ESS minimize transients at substation generation units.
Q-Axis
2nd Quadrant Inverter Apparent 1st Quadrant
P-Sink Power Capacity P-Source i. Smoothing Reference Calculation
Q-Source Q ESS
dmCap

Q-Source
The PVCF algorithm develops the characteristic maximum PV
curve for the PV station location at that time of year. For a
PESSdm+jQ dmCap
SEdmSSaxC
ESS

axC

PESSdm+jQ dmCap
A1 daily output power of PV stationܲ௞ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ where k signifies the

SEdmSSaxC
dm p
Ca

ESS
S PCC dm
S
A2
+jQ
ES

ma
x
+P
dm
ES
S A3 day; ݇ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ͵ǡͶǡ ǥ ǥ Ǥ ݊, the characteristic maximum PV
P PV A4 curve is given by:
PESS
cm

ܲ௠ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ݉ܽ‫ݔ‬ሺܲଵ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻǡ ܲଶ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻǡ ܲଷ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ǥ Ǥ ܲ௡ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻሻ (1)

max P-Axis
PESS PPV Further, the smoothed characteristic maximum power curve
dm

QPV=0
(SCMPC) is defined as:-
PP max S dm
V+ ax ௱௉೘ ሺ௧ሻ
PE dm PCC I ‫ۓ‬ ܲ௠ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ܮݎ݋‬௟ ൏ ൏ ܷ௟
S ESS

SS -
S ESS dmInd |
PESS-j

j|Q dm ௱௧
dmax

dm

dmax

ۖ ௱௉ ሺ௧ሻ
PESS-j

(2)
I

I nd
I

ES
| ܲௌ஼ெ௉ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ  ܷ௟ ߂‫ ݐ‬൅  ܲ௠ ሺ‫ ݐ‬െ ߂‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ ݎ݋‬೘ ൐ ܷ௟
dm

|Q ESS

‫۔‬ ௱௧
|Q ESS |

th
rd
3 Quadrant 4 Quadrant ۖ‫ ݐ߂ ܮ‬൅  ܲ ሺ‫ ݐ‬െ ߂‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ ݎ݋‬௱௉೘ሺ௧ሻ ൏ ‫ܮ‬
dmIn

‫ ە‬௟ ௠ ௟
d

P-Sink QdmInd
P-Source ௱௧
ESS

Q-Sink Q-Sink
ܲை௉ோ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ݉ ൈ ܲௌ஼ெ௉ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ (3)
Fig.4 ESS active and reactive power supplying capabilities.

VPCC ,δ PCC Voltage Support Where ߂‫ ݐ‬is the sampling time of PV power output
measurement in our case it is 30 sec. The PV optimum power
Low Pass- Reactive Power QVS
Filter Calculation
Zero

reference curve (OPR) is a fraction of the SCMP curve. The

VSS , δSS
Time of Day
(ToD)

PV Station
Substation
multiplication factor (m) is chosen such that maximum firming
(1MW-1.25MVA)
QESSr
Test Feeder
is attained for the described PV station from the used ESS.
SMS
PESSr (1MVA)

PPV
ii. Intermittency Detection
+ PC Zero

Intermittency detection allows us to idle the battery during

Data Hard
Memory
PPV Conditioning PSCMP - Limiter
Selector

SoC
Rate -
Logic
times when PV output power is smooth and does not require
Limiter
any conditioning. The intermittency detection algorithm relies
+

Intermittency Detection

PV Station Capacity Firming

Time of Day
(ToD)
on constantly tracking the rate of change of the difference (Pc)
between the output PV power and the OPF curve. The real
Fig. 5 Block diagram schematic for PV station capacity firming and voltage time measured values of (Pc) are passed through a low pass
support applications. filter which rejects sudden power fluctuations to obtain (P cf).
Start (Pcf) is then subtracted from (Pc) to obtain (D). If the value of
D violates an upper or lower limit, intermittency is then
Check Time assumed to be present and firming is commenced. Smoothing
continues till value of D is maintained within limits for a
No Is
TPVst<Time<TPVend period Td.
?
ܲ௖ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ܲ௣௩ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ െ ܲை௉ோ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ (4)
Yes
߂ܲ௖ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ
‫ۓ‬ ܲ௖ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ܮݎ݋‬௟ଶ ൏ ൏ ܷ௟ଶ
Monitor
VPCC & VSS Monitor PPV ۖ ߂‫ݐ‬
߂ܲ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ
ܲ௖௙ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ  ܷ௟ ߂‫ ݐ‬൅  ܲ௖ ሺ‫ ݐ‬െ ߂‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ ݎ݋‬௖ ൐ ܷ௟ଶ
Is (dPC/dt)
between limits
Yes
ESS Idle
‫۔‬ ߂‫ݐ‬
VPCC within Limits ? ? No ۖ ߂ܲ௖ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ
ሺ‫ݐ‬
‫ܮە‬௟ ߂‫ ݐ‬൅  ܲ௖ െ ߂‫ݐ‬ሻ݂‫ ݐ߂ ݎ݋‬൏ ‫ܮ‬௟ଶ
Yes
No
No
Is PPV< OPR Yes Discharge:
(5)
Dispatch Calculated
Reactive Power from
? PESSr=OPR-PPV
‫ܦ‬ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ ܲ௖ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ െ ܲ௖௙ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ (6)
ESS (QESSr) No
Charge: B. Voltage Support
PESSr=PPV-OPR
The voltage support algorithm relies on comparing the PCC
PV Station Capacity Firming
voltage and phase values to the substation voltage and phase
Fig. 6 BESS management flow chart for PVCF and voltage support values. The required reactive power to be injected or drained
applications
to hold the voltage at the same value of that of the substation IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
is calculated and set as a reference value (Qessr)for the BESS.
A. PV Capacity Firming
The reactive power (Q12) transmitted in a two bus system from
bus 1 to bus 2 shown in Fig. 7, is given by; The described PVCF algorithm is applied on the full version
ȁ୚భ ȁమ ȁ୚భ ȁȁ୚మ ȁ of the aggregated circuit shown in Fig. 8. The PV output of the
ଵଶ ൌ ȁ୞ȁ
•‹ȯ െ ȁ୞ȁ
•‹ሺȯ ൅ Ɂଵ െ Ɂଶ ሻ (7) 8 days preceding the algorithm test day are known and are
δ1& δ2 are the respective voltage angles at buses 1 and 2. used to obtain the (OPR) curve. Fig. 9(a) shows the output
Feeder resistance is relatively small compared to inductance power of the PV station with the (OPR) curve calculated. The
so, let us assume feeder lines to be fully reactive i.e. (R=0, PV power intermittency is detected in regions A, B and C.
Z=jX). Equation 7 and 8 become:- This allows the PVCF to commence. During these times, the
ȁ୚భ ȁమ ȁ୚భ ȁȁ୚మ ȁ ESS output power is as shown in Fig. 9(b). Negative power
ଵଶ ൌ െ …‘•ሺɁଵ െ Ɂଶ ሻ (8)
ଡ଼ ଡ଼ represents battery charge while positive represents discharge.
Q12 The battery state of charge (SoC) is set to 50% at the
beginning of the day to allow sufficient energy charge and
Z=R+jX= |Z|ϒ°| discharge capability for capacity firming. Fig. 9(c) shows the
V1 V2 PCC power which is the summation of ESS power and PV
station power outputs. The figure shows efficient firming
presented in a firmed PCC power output which will contribute
Fig. 7 Two bus system to depict reactive power transmission. to less voltage regulators’ tap changes and transients at
substation generators. The algorithm was capable of reducing
PCC V 1 δ1 SS the maximum PV power swing of this day from 650kW to
QPCC 240kW (maximum power swings are reduced to 37% of
PV Station Q1
X1 X2 Substation previous values).
PPCC
ESS VSS
VPCC δSS
δPCC QLG
B
Fig. 8 Aggregated model of a medium voltage feeder

Applying (7) & (8) to the system in Fig. 8 we get;

ȁଵ ȁଶ ȁଵ ȁȁୱୱ ȁ
ଵ ൌ െ …‘•ሺɁଵ െ Ɂୱୱ ሻ ൅ A
ଶ ଶ C
ȁ୚భ ȁమ ȁ୚భ ȁȁ୚ౌిి ȁ
െ …‘•ሺɁଵ െɁ୔େେ ሻ ൅  ୐ୋ ൌ Ͳ    ሺͻሻ
ଡ଼భ ଡ଼భ
ȁ୚ౌిి ȁమ ȁ୚ౌిి ȁȁ୚భ ȁ
 ୔େେ ൌ െ …‘•ሺɁ୔େେ െ Ɂଵ ሻ (10)
ଡ଼భ ଡ଼భ
From equations (9) & (10) we get; (a)
ȁ୚ౌిి ȁమ ȁ௏భ ȁȁ௏ೞೞ ȁ ȁ௏భ ȁమ ȁ௏భ ȁమ
 ୔େେ ൌ െ ܿ‫ݏ݋‬ሺߜଵ െ ߜ௦௦ ሻ ൅ ൅ ൅ ܳ௅ீ
ଡ଼భ ௑మ ௑మ ௑భ
(11)
The goal is to calculate the reactive power to be injected at
the PCC to attain a voltage equal to the voltage at the
substation. So, we equate VPCC to VSS in equation (11). Under
this condition, we assume the voltage at bus 1 to be 1pu. The
active power injected at PCC is zero since active power
supplied by the ESS is zero during voltage support. Equation
(12) represents the approximate reactive power amount to be
injected at the PCC to attain a voltage equal to that at the
substation.
ȁ୚౏౏ ȁమ ȁ௏ೞೞ ȁ ଵ ଵ
 ୔େେ ൌ െ ܿ‫ݏ݋‬ሺߜ௉஼஼ െ ߜ௦௦ ሻ ൅ ൅ ൅ ܳ௅ீ
ଡ଼భ ௑మ ௑భ ௑మ (b)
(12)
Voltage at the substation and the PCC is constantly Fig. 9 PVCF simulation results. (a) PV power output OPR curve calculated.
monitored QPCC is calculated during operation and given to the (b) ESS output power. (c) PCC active power output.
ESS as a reference to support the voltage at the PCC. The B. Voltage Support
reactance and reactive power (QLG) at bus 1 term in equation
The calculated reactive power in equation (12) is given as
(12) is considered as a constant in real time and is tuned till
the reference signal (QESSr) to the ESS. The voltage support
optimum reactive power support is attained. The real time
algorithm is applied on the full version of the aggregated
update of this term will be studied in future publications.
circuit shown in Fig. 8. The active and reactive power output
of the PV station is set to zero for this simulation. Feeder load
is set to a typical load curve as shown in Figs. 10(a&b).
240 kW
650 kW
(c)
Fig. 9 PVCF simulation results. (a) PV power output compared to OPR. (b)
BESS output power with battery SoC plotted on the second y-axis. (c) PCC
active power output after PVCF compared to PV power output of day 9.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10 Feeder loads and generation. (a)Active power output of substation &
ESS plotted with feederactive power load. (b)Reactive power output of
substation & ESS plotted with feederreactive power load
Fig. 11 shows the voltage profile of the PCC with and
without ESS reactive power compensation. It is clear that in
the case of reactive power compensation by the ESS, voltage
band is tighter and the ESS is effective in supporting voltage.
V. CONCLUSION
The firming and voltage support algorithms were found to
be effective for their respective purposes. PVCF using a BESS
was found to be effective in smoothing power swings of
double the capacity of the battery used. Voltage support
application was successful at tightening the voltage band at
various buses on the tested circuit.
Fig. 11 Voltage profile at PVV with and without ESS voltage support
application.
REFERENCES
[1] Jim Eyer, “Energy Storage for the Electricity Grid: Benefits and Market
Potential Assessment Guide,” multi prog Lab., Sandia, Albuquerque,
New Mexico City of Co., Abbrev. State, Rep. Feb., 2010.
[2] Paulo F. Ribeiro, et. al.“Energy Storage Systems for Advanced Power
Applications”
[3] SercanTeleke, Student Member, IEEE, Mesut E. Baran, Senior Member,
IEEE, Alex Q. Huang, Fellow, IEEE,Subhashish Bhattacharya, Member,
IEEE, and Loren Anderson “Control Strategies for Battery Energy
Storage for Wind Farm Dispatching”
[4] V. Karasik, K. Dixon, et. al., “SMES for power utility applications: A
review of technical and cost considerations,” IEEE Trans. Appl.
Superconduct., vol. 9, pp.541–546, June 1999.
[5] D. Lieurance, F. Kimball, et. al, “Design and cost studies for small scale
superconducting magnetic energy storage systems,” IEEE Trans. Appl.
Superconduct., vol. 5, pp. 350–353, June 1995.
[6] J. McDowall, “Conventional battery technologies—Present and future,”
in Proc. 2000 IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, vol. 3,
July 2000, pp. 1538–1540.
[7] W. V. Hassenzahl, Capacitors for Electric Utility Energy Storage:
Electric Power Res. Inst., 1997, vol. WO-8812.
[8] R. B. Boom and H. A. Peterson, “Superconductive energy storage for
power systems,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. MAG-8, pp. 701–704, Sept.
1972.
[9] R. F. Giese, “Progress toward high temperature superconducting
magnetic energy storage (SMES) systems—A second look,” Argonne
National Laboratory, 1998.
[10] I. D. Hassan, R. M. Bucci, and K. T. Swe, “400 MW SMES power
conditioning system development and simulation,” Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 8, pp. 237–249, July 1993.
[11] Q. Jiang and M. F. Conlon, “The power regulation of a PWM type
superconducting magnetic energy storage unit,” IEEE Trans.
EnergyConversion, vol. 11, pp. 168–174, Mar. 1996.
[12] W. R. Lachs and D. Sutanto, “Battery storage plant within large load
centers,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, pp. 762–769, May 1992.
[13] M. A. Casacca, M. R. Capobianco, and Z. M. Salameh, “Lead-acid
battery storage configurations for improved available capacity,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 11, pp. 139–145, Mar. 1996.
[14] N.W. Miller, et.al., “Design and commissioning of a 5 MVA, 2.5 MWh
battery energy storage,” in Proc. 1996 IEEE Power Engineering Society
Transmission and Distribution Conf., 1996, pp. 339–345.
[15] N. Abi-Samra, C. Neft, A. Sundaram, and W. Malcolm, “The
distribution system dynamic voltage restorer and its applications at
industrial facilities with sensitive loads,” in Proc. 8th Int. Power Quality
Solutions ’95, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 9–15, 1995.
Olivier Tremblay1, Louis-A. Dessaint Electrical Engineering
Department, E´cole de TechnologieSupe´rieure “Experimental
Validation of a Battery Dynamic Model for EV Applications”