Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Multiple hydrogen-based hybrid storage systems operation for microgrids:

A combined TOPSIS and model predictive control methodology
Bei Li a ,∗, Hongzhi Miao b , Jiangchen Li c
a
College of Chemistry and Environmental Engineering, Shenzhen University, 518060 Shenzhen, China
b
College of Transportation Engineering, Dalian Maritime University, 116026 Dalian, China
c
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, T6G 1H9

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Hydrogen-based hybrid storage system has a high energy density, which can operate as the long-term storage
Microgrid system, and play an important role in future smart cities. In the hydrogen storage system, fuel cell, hydrogen
Hydrogen storage system tanks, and electrolyzer are often combined together and operating with complex electrochemical reactions.
Two-dimension model
How to efficiently operate the hydrogen storage system and considering the convoluted electrochemical
TOPSIS
reactions is a problem. In addition, multiple hydrogen storage systems are often grouped together to supply
Allocating-and-dispatching
Model predictive control
the demands. Thus, cooperating the dispatching of these storage systems is another complicated problem.
In this paper, we first present a two-dimension model considering temperature influences for hydrogen-
based microgrid, where a regression method is adopted. Moreover, a combined allocating-and-dispatching
methodology involving two layers is proposed to cooperate the multiple storage systems. Specifically, both
TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution) and fuzzy logic are adopted as
the first-layer allocating algorithm. Then, the model predictive control (MPC) is utilized as the second-layer
dispatching algorithm. Based on the combined method, power is firstly allocated to hybrid storage system
considering each hybrid storage system health conditions, and secondly scheduled to battery storage and
hydrogen storage based on MPC method. The simulation results showed that with the combined Dematel-
TOPSIS and MPC algorithm, the degradation index and operation cost were the smallest among three
algorithms, and can further extend the lifetime of hybrid hydrogen storage systems in microgrids.

1. Introduction
Currently, large-scale renewable energy has been installed to reduce
the massive environment pollutions produced by fossil energy. Due to
the intermittence and uncertainty of the renewable energy, the energy
storage system is often integrated to stabilize the output [1]. The power
and energy densities of different storage systems [2] are shown in
Fig. 1. Among them, the hydrogen storage has a high energy density
as well as a medium power density; the Li-ion battery storage system
has a medium energy and power density; and the supercapacitor has
a low energy density, a high power density. Accordingly, for the long-
term operation, the hydrogen storage is the best choice, which can store
large amounts of energy [3]; while for the short-term operation, the
battery and supercapacitor are the best choice, which can fast respond
to the dynamic changes.
Thus, a combined battery and hydrogen hybrid storage system is
a better choice to respond to the renewable energy uncertainty. The
hybrid storage system structure is shown in Fig. 2. Here, the type of
the fuel cell is proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC), and the
type of the electrolyzer is alkaline electrolyzer.
In this hydrogen storage system, three devices are included: fuel
cell, electrolyzer, and hydrogen tank. The fuel cell [4] is used to
produce electricity and heat through hydrogen (H2 ), where further
details of the applied operation characteristics of a PEMFC stack can be
seen in the Ref. [4]. The electrolyzer [5,6] is used to produce hydrogen
(H2 ) based on electricity, where further details of alkaline electrolyzer
modeling and thermal performance of water electrolyzer can refer to
the sources [5] and [6], respectively. The hydrogen tank stores the
hydrogen (H2 ). However, these devices often operate with convoluted
electrochemical reactions. For example, how much energy the fuel cell
can output is decided by several input impacts including the input
hydrogen flow, the operation temperature, the pressure, and so on.
Also, how much hydrogen the electrolyzer can produce is decided by
the input electricity power, the temperature, and other factors. Thus,
how to efficiently operate the emerging hydrogen storage system, and

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: bei.li@szu.edu.cn (B. Li), honmgee@foxmail.com (H. Miao), jiangche@ualberta.ca (J. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116303
Received 7 June 2020; Received in revised form 19 November 2020; Accepted 22 November 2020
Available online 13 December 2020
0306-2619/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Nomenclature 𝑁𝑒𝑙 Number of electrolyzer cells

𝑁𝑓 𝑐 Number of cells
Acronyms 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 Fuel cell/electrolyzer total online running
times
CAES Compressed air energy storage 𝑖
𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 The allocated power to 𝑖th hybrid storage
Dematel Decision-making Trial and Evaluation Lab-
system
oratory
𝑄𝑓 𝑐 Produced heat of FC
FC Fuel cell
𝑆𝑂𝐶𝑖 The state of charge of the 𝑖th battery
LA Lead acid
storage system
MPC Model predictive control
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 Fuel cell/electrolyzer total startup times
PEMFC Proton exchange membrane fuel cell
𝑈𝑏𝑎 Battery total utilization power
PHS Pumped hydro storage
𝑉𝑏𝑎 Battery voltage
SC Supercapacitor
𝑉𝑒𝑙 The voltage of the electrolyzer
SMEC Superconducting magnetic energy storage
𝑉𝑓 𝑐 FC voltage
SNG Synthetic natural gas
𝑧 Compressibility factor
TOPSIS Technique for Order Preference by Similar-
ity to an Ideal Solution Variables
VRB Vanadium redox batteries
𝑖𝑏𝑎 Battery current
Parameters 𝑛𝑒𝑙 Electrolyzer produced hydrogen
𝑛𝑓 𝑐 Fuel cell consumed hydrogen
𝐶𝑎 Capacity of the battery
𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑖 ON/OFF state
𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑒𝑙
The maximum hydrogen flow physical
𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 Pressure in hydrogen tanks
constraint
𝑇𝑏𝑎 Battery operation temperature
𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑓𝑐
The maximum hydrogen flow physical
constraint 𝑇𝑒𝑙 Electrolyzer operation temperature
𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 Minimum and maximum fuel cell ramp up 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 Fuel cell operation temperature
and ramp down temperature 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 Hydrogen tanks operation temperature
𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 Minimum and maximum electrolyzer oper- 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ Battery charging/discharging power
ation temperature 𝑍𝑒𝑙 Electrolyzer input power
𝑇𝑓𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑇𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 Minimum and maximum fuel cell operation 𝑍𝑓 𝑐 Fuel cell output power
𝑐 𝑐
temperature
𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑇 𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 Minimum and maximum hydrogen tanks
𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
operation temperature

Symbols In addition, for the battery storage system, the operation tempera-
𝑛̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛 Hydrogen consumed by the FC ture has a big influence on the charging and discharging characteristics
𝐻2
𝑛̇ 𝑝𝑟𝑜 Theoretical production rate of hydrogen in of the battery [7]. From a conceptual purpose, Fig. 3 presents the typi-
𝐻2
a cell cal characteristics of a lithium-ion battery discharging process [7], [8].
The voltages of the battery are significantly different with respect to
𝐴ℎ Discharging capacity
𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠 different operation temperatures and capacities. Thus, to efficiently
𝐵𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 Charging and discharging cost of battery
operate the battery storage system, further considering the operation
𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 Battery investment costs temperature is also an urgent problem.
𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡
𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 Battery unit price
𝐵𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 Battery lifetime 1.1. Mathematical analysis of the operation of hydrogen-based hybrid stor-
𝐹𝑏𝑎 (⋅) Two-dimension function to represent the age system
battery operation characteristics
𝐹𝑒𝑙 (⋅) Two-dimension function to represent the As shown in Fig. 2, the operation characteristics of the fuel cell
electrolyzer operation characteristics can be described as [𝑃𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑄𝑓 𝑐 ] = 𝐹𝑓 𝑐 (𝑇𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑛𝑓 𝑐 ), where 𝐹𝑓 𝑐 (⋅) is a two-
𝐹𝑓 𝑐 (⋅) Two-dimension function to represent the dimension function to represent the fuel cell operation characteristics.
fuel cell operation characteristics The operation of electrolyzer can be represented as [𝑛𝑒𝑙 ] = 𝐹𝑒𝑙 (𝑃𝑒𝑙 , 𝑇𝑒𝑙 ),
𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 (⋅) Two-dimension function to represent the where 𝐹𝑒𝑙 (⋅) is a function to describe the electrolyzer operation char-
hydrogen tanks operation characteristics acteristics. The operation of hydrogen tanks can be represented as
[𝑃 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ] = 𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 (𝑛𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑛𝑒𝑙 , 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ), where 𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 (⋅) is a function to describe
𝐻𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 Operation cost of hydrogen storage
the hydrogen tanks operation characteristics. As shown in Fig. 3, for the
𝐻𝑆𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛 The condition of the 𝑖th storage system
battery storage system, the operation characteristics can be described
𝐼𝑒𝑙 ∕𝐴𝑒𝑙 The electrolyzer current density
as [𝑍𝑏𝑎 ] = 𝐹𝑏𝑎 (𝑇𝑏𝑎 , 𝑆𝑂𝐶𝑏𝑎 ), where 𝐹𝑏𝑎 (⋅) is a two-dimension function to
𝑖𝑓 𝑐 Current density in one cell describe the battery operation characteristics.
𝑖𝑜𝑚 Operation & maintenance cost At last, the operation goal is to decide the optimal control variables
𝐿𝑂𝐻𝑖 Level of hydrogen of the 𝑖th hydrogen 𝑢 = [𝑇𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑍𝑓 𝑐 ; 𝑇𝑒𝑙 , 𝑍𝑒𝑙 ; 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ; 𝑇𝑏𝑎 , 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ ], at the same time to satisfy
storage system the both objective function and the constraints.
Presently, there are several methods to operate the hybrid storage
considering the related electrochemical reactions is still a complex system, such as frequency management, rule-based methods, model
problem. predictive control (MPC), and so on [9]. Among them, the MPC method
is frequently adopted to manage the operation of the hybrid storage

2
B. Li et al.
Fig. 1. Power and energy densities of different storage systems [2].
Fig. 2. Hydrogen-based hybrid storage system structure.
Fig. 3. Lithium-ion battery discharging characteristics.
system [10]. For example, authors in [11] adopt the MPC to operate
a combined hydrogen and battery storage system for the multi-energy
supply microgrid. Besides, the MPC is commonly accepted in vari-
ous industrial scenarios [12], and has the effective ability in dealing
with complex optimization problems subject to large numbers of con-
straints [12]. In this paper, due to the complex physical constraints
of the hybrid storage system, the MPC is the appropriate method to
operate the hybrid storage system.
3
Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303
Fig. 4. Multiple grouped Hydrogen-based hybrid storage systems.
Furthermore, to face a variety of load demand situations, multiple
hybrid storage systems are often grouped together to supply these fluc-
tuate demand services. The reason is that the grouped hybrid storage
systems can store more energy, and has larger ramp-up and ramp-down
capacities. However, how to efficiently cooperate these grouped hybrid
storage systems is another problem.
In fact, to coordinate the grouped hybrid storage systems, the hier-
archical strategy is often adopted. For example, in [13], authors present
a two-layer strategy to coordinate the interconnected microgrids. Thus,
in this paper, a combined methodology is proposed to solve the problem
of the multiple grouped hybrid storage, where the structure of the
multiple grouped hybrid storage systems is shown in Fig. 4. 𝑇 𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
is the total expected energy to be allocated to four hybrid storage
systems. In the power allocating layer, the total expected energy is
first allocated to each hybrid storage system based on each storage
system conditions, and the allocated algorithm is fuzzy logic [14] or
𝑖
TOPSIS [15]. In the dispatching layer, the allocated power 𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 is
then dispatched to battery storage and hydrogen storage based on MPC
algorithm.
The whole problem of the multiple grouped hybrid storage system
dispatching can be represented as two layers: allocating layer and
dispatching layer.
The allocating layer can be represented as:
𝑖
𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 =
𝑓 𝑢𝑧𝑧𝑦(𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 , 𝐻𝑆1𝑐𝑜𝑛 , 𝐻𝑆2𝑐𝑜𝑛 , … , 𝐻𝑆𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛 );
𝑠.𝑡. 𝐻𝑆𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛 = {𝑆𝑂𝐶𝑖 , 𝐿𝑂𝐻𝑖 }, 𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑛;
𝑖
where 𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 is the allocated power to 𝑖th hybrid storage system; 𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙
is the total expected power to be allocated to 𝑛 hybrid storage systems;
𝐻𝑆𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛 is the condition of the 𝑖th storage system; 𝑆𝑂𝐶𝑖 , 𝐿𝑂𝐻𝑖 are the
State of Charge of battery storage system and Level of hydrogen storage
system, respectively; 𝑓 𝑢𝑧𝑧𝑦 represents fuzzy logic algorithm.
The dispatching layer can be represented as:
∑
𝑇
𝑖
𝑀𝑃 𝐶𝑖 ∶𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑓 (𝐱, 𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 )
𝑡=1
𝑠.𝑡. 𝐴𝐱𝐩 ≤ 𝐛; 𝐵𝐱𝐩 = 𝐜 (𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑜𝑢𝑠);
𝑙𝑏 ≤ 𝐱𝐩 ≤ 𝑢𝑏 ;
𝐶𝐱𝐪 ≤ 𝐝; 𝐷𝐱𝐪 = 𝐞 (𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟);
𝑥𝑝 ∈ 𝐙; 𝑥𝑞 ∈ {0, 1, 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟} ;
where 𝑓 (⋅) is the objective function of the 𝑖th storage system; 𝐱 are the
decision variables; 𝑇 is the time horizon.
B. Li et al.
Fig. 5. The structure of allocating layer, dispatching layer, and PI controller.
In the dispatching layer, the reference control signals to each stor-
age are calculated, then are compared with the real measurement
signals. And the final difference values are controlled by PI controller
to at last control the converters, valves, temperature devices. The PI
control is out the scope of this paper. The detail control structure can
be seen in Fig. 5.
1.2. Related work
Regarding the operation of hybrid storage systems, many works
have been presented. In fact, the key technology is the power allo-
cation algorithm among different storage systems. And the allocation
methods are mainly developed based on the storages characteristics,
and can be categorized into three types: (1) frequency filter methods;
(2) rule-based methods; (3) intelligent methods.
The first category, i.e., the frequency filter method, is widely used
in hybrid storage systems operation. For example, in [16], authors
present a power allocation strategy for battery-supercapacitor (SC)
hybrid energy storage system, frequency filter method is adopted, the
SC responses to high frequency current, while Li-ion battery responses
to medium frequency current. In [17], authors propose an operation
strategy for composite storage system, in which multiple batteries and
one SC are considered. Linear filtering method is adopted to filter the
power fluctuation, and low frequency current load demand is stored in
batteries.
However, the frequency filter method is not practical when there
are multiple batteries and SC, because the charge balancing among
different batteries cannot be considered. In addition, the selection of the
cutoff frequency is a challenge [18], because a fixed cutoff frequency
is not suitable for different load demand conditions.
The second category, i.e., the rule-based strategy, is also commonly
adopted. For example, in [1], authors build a rule-based strategy to
operate the hydrogen and battery hybrid storage systems. However,
the rules are decided based on the initial states of the storage sys-
tems, which cannot be changed dynamically. More advanced rule-based
strategy, namely fuzzy logic rule based strategy is more usefulness. For
example, in [19], authors adopt the fuzzy logic strategy to dynamically
control the operation of battery and SC, considering the state of charge
of each storage. But the fuzzy membership function should be carefully
designed.
Nonetheless, the rule-based strategy is simple and reliable to control
the operation of hybrid storage system, but its dispatching results are
not optimal.
The third category is intelligent method, where one widely applied
class is model predictive control (MPC), which can face complex large
numbers of constraints and obtain the optimal dispatching results [12]
to control the operation of hybrid storage system. For example, authors
in [20] present a MPC strategy to optimally control the operation of
4
Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303
hydrogen and battery hybrid storage system, the problem is formu-
lated as a mixed integer linear programming problem, and solved by
branch-and-bound algorithm. Authors in [21] adopt a MPC algorithm
to dispatch the operation of battery and SC hybrid storage for an elec-
tric city bus, the objective function is minimizing the storage operation
costs, and solved by quadratic programming solver. In [22], authors
present a MPC-based strategy to mitigate the power fluctuation in an
electric ship with battery and SC hybrid storage system, the objective
function is to minimize the power tracking error and reduce the power
losses.
Although the MPC method can obtain the optimal results, but it
normally requires a heavy computation.
In summary, the above allocated algorithms are mainly used in
a single hybrid storage system. For example, a single hybrid storage
system consists of one battery and one SC, or one battery and one
hydrogen storage. However, the single hybrid storage cannot fulfill
the all applications, due to its limitation of power/energy density,
dynamic response, and other fluctuated factors [23]. Thus, multiple
hybrid storage systems should be further developed.
Furthermore, for the multiple hybrid storage, the allocated power
to each storage system should relate to each storage conditions [17],
e.g., state of charge and degradation, which make the multiple hybrid
storage operation strategy be more complex. For example, in [24],
authors present a multi-battery management system, the strategy is
aiming to maximize the lifespan of the battery storage systems by
considering the depth of discharges, and formulated as an optimiza-
tion problem. In [25], authors present a multi-battery home energy
management systems, the goal aims to make the stored energy of
the batteries close to the middle of storage limits, and extend the
lifetime of the batteries. The problem is formulated as an approximate
dynamic programming formulation. Authors in [26] present an equal-
ization strategy for multi-battery energy storage systems considering
the lifetime depreciation. The maximum consistency tracking algorithm
is adopted to search for the most equitable conditional depreciation.
In [27], authors propose a distributed equalization strategy for multi-
battery energy storage systems, and the allocated power to each battery
is based on their SOC states. The goal is to minimize the batteries op-
eration imbalance, and formulated as a quadratic convex optimization
problem.
The above references analysis show that the current allocated prob-
lem among multi-battery storage systems is often formulated as an
optimization problem. However, when the number of hybrid storage
is large, the solving procedure becomes more complex and requires
heavier computation.
In order to achieve a good and simple scheduling for multiple hybrid
storage systems, hierarchical strategy is often adopted [23,26], namely,
build different functioning layers to achieve different functions. For
example, in [28], a two-layer control strategy: top layer to allocate
power (a state machine method), bottom layer to control converters, is
presented to operate the battery/hydrogen based islanding microgrid.
In [19], a two-layer strategy: top layer to achieve energy scheduling
(fuzzy logic), bottom layer to control converters, is presented to operate
the battery/supercapacitor based photovoltaic microgrid. In [29], a
typical energy management strategy for the fuel cell and energy storage
hybrid system is presented, the high-level controller to output power
allocation signals, whilst the low-level controller to output PWM signal
to control converters. And authors in [30] present a hybrid energy
storage system energy management strategy for electric vehicle. The
strategy consists three levels: firstly, fuzzy c-means is used to achieve
driving pattern recognition; secondly, the wavelet transform is adopted
to allocate power to supercapacitor and battery; thirdly, fuzzy logic
is further deployed to maintain the SOC of supercapacitor within a
desired level.
In this paper, both the battery and hydrogen storage form a single
hybrid storage system, as shown in Fig. 2. Then, several single hybrid
storages form the multiple hybrid storage systems, as shown in Fig. 4.
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Furthermore, two types of energy, several numbers of storage, complex

electrochemical reactions, physical operation conditions, and health
conditions are considered, which make the current multiple hybrid
storage systems operation problem as a typical and complex problem.
Thus, how to efficiently, orderly, and healthily schedule such mul-
tiple hybrid storages is an essential problem. In this paper, an extended
hierarchical strategy, i.e., a combined two-layer strategy with a power
allocating layer and a dispatching layer, is proposed to solve the
multiple hybrid storages operation problem efficiently.

1.3. Contributions

In order to solve the above multiple grouped hybrid storage sys-

tems operation problem, we first build a two-dimension model of
the hydrogen and the battery storage systems considering operation
temperatures. Then a combined two-layer allocating-and-dispatching
algorithm is adopted. In allocating layer, fuzzy logic, TOPSIS, and
Dematel-TOPSIS methods are adopted to allocate power to each hy-
brid storage system. In dispatching layer, MPC method is used to
dispatch power to battery storage and hydrogen storage. Considering Fig. 6. Relationship between FC output power, input H2 , and temperature. (Full
blue color figure represents the theoretical model, and colorful figure represents the
the previous works, few have studied the combined multi-criteria deci-
linearized model.). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend,
sion making and MPC strategy to operate the multiple hybrid storage the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
systems. Thus the contributions of this paper can be concluded as
follows:
The produced heat of FC can be calculated as in [31]:
• First, we build a two-dimension model for hydrogen and battery
storage systems, the operation temperature is considered. After 𝑉𝑓 𝑐
𝑄𝑓 𝑐 = 𝑁𝑓 𝑐 ⋅ (1.48 − ) ⋅ 𝐼𝑓 𝑐 (3)
that, a MPC operation model for the hybrid storage system is 𝑁𝑓 𝑐
developed;
Then the hydrogen consumed by the FC is computed using:
• Second, a combined two-layer algorithm is developed to dispatch
multiple grouped hybrid storage systems. The power allocating 𝑁𝑓 𝑐 𝐼𝑓 𝑐
𝑛̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛
𝐻2
= (4)
layer is used to allocate the expected energy to each hybrid 2𝐹 𝑈
storage system based on the condition of each storage system. The where 𝐹 is the Faraday constant; and 𝑈 is the utilization efficiency of
dispatching layer is then used to dispatch the allocated energy to hydrogen in the FC.
battery storage and hydrogen storage. At last, based on the above fuel cell model, we can then calcu-
• Last, in allocating layer, three algorithms fuzzy logic, TOPSIS, and late the relationship between FC output power 𝑃𝑓 𝑐 , input H2 𝑛̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛
𝐻2
, and
Dematel-TOPSIS are compared. In TOPSIS method, the degrada- temperature 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 .
tion index 𝐷𝑒𝑔 and operation cost 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 were smaller than that in We then use a linear regression to describe the two-dimension
fuzzy logic algorithm. With the Dematel-TOPSIS algorithm, the relationship 𝐹𝑓 𝑐 (⋅), which can be seen in Fig. 6.
weight of each attribute was reasonably designed and calculated,
𝐷𝑒𝑔 and 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 were further smaller than that in TOPSIS algorithm. 2.2. Electrolyzer model

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 An electrolyzer can use electricity to produce hydrogen. The char-
describes the proposed model; Section 3 presents the problem formu- acteristics of an electrolyzer can be described as follows [20]:
lation; and Section 4 shows the simulation results. Finally, Section 6 𝐼𝑒𝑙
concludes the paper. 𝑉𝑒𝑙 = 𝑁𝑒𝑙 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑣 + (𝑟1 + 𝑟2 𝑇𝑒𝑙 )
𝐴𝑒𝑙
𝑡2 𝑡 𝐼 (5)
2. Model + (𝑠1 + 𝑠2 𝑇𝑒𝑙 + 𝑠3 𝑇𝑒𝑙2 ) ⋅ 𝑙𝑜𝑔(1 + (𝑡1 + + 3 ) ⋅ 𝑒𝑙 )
𝑇𝑒𝑙 𝑇𝑒𝑙2 𝐴𝑒𝑙
In this section, we present the two-dimension models for fuel cell, where 𝑉𝑒𝑙 is the voltage of the electrolyzer; 𝑁𝑒𝑙 the number of cells; 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑣
electrolyzer, hydrogen tanks, and battery. the reversible cell potential; 𝑇𝑒𝑙 the temperature and 𝐼𝑒𝑙 ∕𝐴𝑒𝑙 (𝐴∕𝑚2 ) the
current density. 𝑟1 , 𝑟2 , 𝑠1 , 𝑠2 , 𝑠3 , 𝑡1 , 𝑡2 , and 𝑡3 are empirical coefficients.
2.1. Fuel cell model The theoretical production rate of hydrogen in a cell is given by:
𝑁𝑒𝑙 𝐼𝑒𝑙
A fuel cell (FC) can use the hydrogen (H2 ) to produce electricity 𝑛̇ 𝑝𝑟𝑜
𝐻2
= 𝜂𝐹 (6)
2𝐹
and heat. We use the voltage electrical model presented in [4,20] to
Based on Faraday’s efficiency, we can obtain the relation between
describe the characteristic of FC:
the real production rate of hydrogen and the theoretical one, using:
𝑉𝑓 𝑐 = (𝐸𝑂𝐶 − 𝑟𝑓 𝑐 ⋅ 𝑖𝑓 𝑐 − 𝐴(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ) ⋅ 𝑙𝑛(𝑖𝑓 𝑐 ) − 𝑚(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ) ⋅ 𝑒𝑛⋅𝑖𝑓 𝑐 ) ⋅ 𝑁𝑓 𝑐 (1) (𝐼𝑒𝑙 ∕𝐴𝑒𝑙 )2
𝜂𝐹 = 𝑓2 (7)
where 𝑉𝑓 𝑐 is the FC voltage; 𝐸𝑂𝐶 is the open-circuit voltage of one cell; 𝑓1 + (𝐼𝑒𝑙 ∕𝐴𝑒𝑙 )2
𝑖𝑓 𝑐 is the current density in one cell; 𝑁𝑓 𝑐 is the number of cells; and 𝑛, where 𝑓1 and 𝑓2 are coefficients. 𝑓1 , 𝑓2 also change with different
𝑟𝑓 𝑐 , 𝐴(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ), and 𝑚(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ) are empirical coefficients; 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 is the temperature temperatures, and linear regression is used to describe the change:
of FC. 𝑓1 = 𝑔0 ⋅ 𝑇𝑒𝑙 , 𝑓2 = 𝑔1 ⋅ 𝑇𝑒𝑙 .
At last, based on the above theoretical electrolyzer model, we can
𝐴(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ) = 𝑅 ⋅ 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ∕𝛼∕𝑧∕𝐹 (2)
then calculate the relationship between electrolyzer input power 𝑃𝑒𝑙 ,
We use a linear regression model to describe 𝑚(𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ) = 𝑚𝑎 + 𝑚𝑏 ⋅ 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 . output H2 𝑛̇ 𝑝𝑟𝑜
𝐻2
, and operation temperature 𝑇𝑒𝑙 .

5
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Fig. 7. Relationship between electrolyzer input power, output H2 , and temperature. Fig. 8. Relationship between compressibility factor 𝑧, pressure, and temperature. (Full
(Full blue color figure represents the theoretical model, and colorful figure represents blue color figure represents the theoretical model, and colorful figure represents
the linearized model.). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure linearized model.). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend,
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

We then use a linear regression to describe the two-dimension Based on different discharging currents 𝑖𝑏𝑎 and temperatures 𝑇𝑏𝑎 , we
relationship 𝐹𝑒𝑙 (⋅), which can be seen in Fig. 7. use a linear regression to obtain the relationship:
̂0 = 𝑑 𝐸 + 𝑑 𝐸 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑 𝐸 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝐸 0 1 2
̂ = 𝑑 𝑅 + 𝑑 𝑅 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑 𝑅 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝑅
2.3. Hydrogen tank model 0 1 2
̂ = 𝑑 𝐾 + 𝑑 𝐾 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑 𝐾 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝐾 0 1 2
(11)
Hydrogen is compressed and stored in hydrogen tanks. The gas in 𝐴̂ = 𝑑0𝐴 + 𝑑1𝐴 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑2𝐴 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
tanks satisfies the gas law: ̂ = 𝑑 𝐵 + 𝑑 𝐵 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑 𝐵 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝐵 0 1 2
𝐶̂ = 𝑑0𝐶 + 𝑑1𝐶 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 + 𝑑2𝐶 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 = 𝑛𝑅𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ⋅ 𝑧 (8)
After that, we can obtain the two-dimension battery model consid-
where 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 is the pressure, 𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 is the volume, 𝑛 is the number of ering the operation temperature, namely:
moles, 𝑅 is the constant, 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 is the temperature. 𝑧 is the compress- 𝑄
ibility factor, which satisfies: 𝑉̂ ̂ ̂ ̂
𝑏𝑎 = 𝐸0 − 𝑅 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 − 𝐾 ⋅ ⋅ 𝐴ℎ + 𝐴̂ ⋅ 𝑒𝑥𝑝(−𝐵
̂ ⋅ 𝐴ℎ) − 𝐶̂ ⋅ 𝐴ℎ (12)
𝑄 − 𝐴ℎ
27𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 Based on the above two-dimension model, if we can obtain the
(𝑧 + )(1 − )=1 (9)
2
64𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ⋅𝑧 8𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ⋅ 𝑧 current discharging capacity 𝐴ℎ, we can then calculate the relationship
between battery discharging/charging power 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ and output/input
We then use a linear regression to describe the change of com- current 𝑖𝑏𝑎 , temperature 𝑇𝑏𝑎 .
pressibility factor 𝑧, 𝑧 = 𝑏0 + 𝑏1 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 + 𝑏2 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 , which is shown in We then use a linear regression to describe the two-dimension
Fig. 8. relationship 𝐹𝑏𝑎 (⋅), which can be seen in Fig. 9.
At last, based on the above hydrogen tanks model, the pressure in
3. Operation of multiple grouped hybrid storage system
hydrogen tanks can be described as: 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 = (𝑏0 +𝑏1 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 )𝑛𝑅𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ∕(𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 −
𝑏2 𝑛𝑅𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ). The multiple grouped hybrid storage systems can face varieties of
load demand situations. We present a two-layer operation algorithm
including two layers: (1) the power allocating layer, to allocate the
2.4. Battery model expected power to each hybrid storage system; (2) the dispatching
layer, to dispatch the allocated power to battery storage and hydrogen
For the battery model, we consider the influence of the temperature, storage.
and use the voltage electrical model to describe the characteristic of
3.1. Power allocating layer
battery:
𝑄 In the power allocating layer, the goal is to allocate the expected
𝑉𝑏𝑎 = 𝐸0 − 𝑅 ⋅ 𝑖𝑏𝑎 − 𝐾 ⋅ ⋅ 𝐴ℎ + 𝐴 ⋅ 𝑒𝑥𝑝(−𝐵 ⋅ 𝐴ℎ) − 𝐶 ⋅ 𝐴ℎ (10)
𝑄 − 𝐴ℎ power to each hybrid storage system based on their conditions. For
where 𝑉𝑏𝑎 is the battery voltage, 𝐸0 is the open-circuit voltage of example, when one hybrid storage system has low SOC and LOH,
then the allocated charging task of this storage should be high. While,
battery, 𝑖𝑏𝑎 is the current, 𝑅 is the resistor, and 𝐾, 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 are empirical
when it has low SOC and LOH as well as a high degradation, then the
coefficients, 𝑄 is the capacity of the battery, 𝐴ℎ is the discharging
allocated discharging task of this storage should be low. This means
capacity.
that, the allocated task of each storage system is based on its dynamic
In fact, in the above model, the coefficients 𝐸0 , 𝑅, 𝐾, 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 are conditions.
all influenced by the operation temperature 𝑇𝑏𝑎 . Then, firstly, we need In this paper, we adopted two methods to achieve the power allo-
to find out how the temperature influences the above coefficients. cating function: fuzzy logic and TOPSIS.

6
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Fig. 10. Fuzzy logic rules to decide each storage system charging power to store the
Fig. 9. Relationship between battery discharging/charging power, output/input current
sufficient power.
𝑖𝑏𝑎 , and temperature 𝑇𝑏𝑎 , when the discharging capacity is 20𝐴ℎ. (Full blue color figure
represents the theoretical model, and colorful figure represents linearized model.). (For
interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to
the web version of this article.)

Table 1
Fuzzy logic rules to allocate charging power, when there is sufficient power.
Rules LOH, Low LOH, Medium LOH, High
SOC, Low HH H M
SOC, Medium H M L
SOC, High M L LL

Table 2
Fuzzy logic rules to allocate discharging power, when there is insufficient power.
Rules LOH, Low LOH, Medium LOH, High
SOC, Low LL L M
SOC, Medium L M H
SOC, High M H HH

3.1.1. Power allocating based on fuzzy logic
In the fuzzy logic controller, the allocated power to each storage
system is based on the fuzzy rules, which are built based on the
conditions of each storage system. Here, the state of charge (SOC) and
the level of hydrogen (LOH) are adopted to describe the conditions of
each storage system.
For example, when there is sufficient energy to be expected to store
in the multiple grouped hybrid storage system, how to allocate the
charging task to each hybrid storage system? Firstly, we obtain the SOC
and LOH of each hybrid storage system. Then, based on the fuzzy rules,
calculate the charging power for each hybrid storage system.
The detailed fuzzy rules can be seen in Table 1 and Fig. 10. They
present that the hybrid storage system needs to charge energy when
there is sufficient energy. Table 2 and Fig. 11 describe the rules that
the hybrid storage system needs to discharge power when there is
insufficient energy. ‘‘LL’’, ‘‘L’’, ‘‘M’’, ‘‘H’’, ‘‘HH’’ represent ‘‘very low’’,
‘‘low’’, ‘‘medium’’, ‘‘high’’, ‘‘very high’’.
Based on the fuzzy rules, the allocated power 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 to each
hybrid storage system can be then calculated.
3.1.2. Power allocating based on TOPSIS
In the above fuzzy logic method, we do not consider the degradation
impacts of the battery storage and the hydrogen storage. Then we adopt
the TOPSIS [15] method, which can consider more impacts, and make
the allocated task to each hybrid storage system more reasonable.
The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS) was first presented by Hwang and Yoon in 1981 [32,33].
Fig. 11. Fuzzy logic rules to decide each storage system discharging power to supply
the insufficient power.
TOPSIS is an effective method to solve the multi-attribute decision
making problem. Here, we adopt it to decide the allocated power to
each hybrid storage system.
First, several attributes are considered. For the battery system, SOC
and battery total utilization power (𝑈𝑏𝑎 ) are used as two attributes to
evaluate the battery condition. 𝑈𝑏𝑎 is used to describe the degradation
of the battery. When 𝑈𝑏𝑎 is large, it means battery has run for a long
time, and the degradation of the battery is high.
For the hydrogen storage system, LOH, fuel cell/electrolyzer total
online running times (𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 ), and fuel cell/electrolyzer total startup
times (𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 ) are adopted as three attributes to evaluate the hydrogen
storage system condition. 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 and 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 are adopted to describe
the degradation of the hydrogen storage system. When 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 is large,
it means that hydrogen storage system has run for a long time; when
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 is large, it means that hydrogen storage has started up for many
times. These two attributes can evaluate the degradation degree of the
hydrogen storage.
Then five attributes are considered to evaluation the condition of
each hybrid storage system: SOC, 𝑈𝑏𝑎 , LOH, 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 , 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 . The five
attributes are the inputs of the TOPSIS method. Based on the inputs,
TOPSIS method can then rank the multiple hybrid storage systems, and
calculate the weight of each hybrid storage system. At last, based on

7
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Table 3 equal. Then, in this subsection, we introduce the Dematel (Decision

The inputs and outputs of the TOPSIS method.
Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory) method to decide the weight
Attributes SOC 𝑈𝑏𝑎 LOH 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 Rank Weight
for each attribute.
𝐻𝑆1 𝑒11 𝑒12 𝑒13 𝑒14 𝑒15 𝑅1 𝑊1
The dematel method is first introduced to study the structural
𝐻𝑆2 𝑒21 𝑒22 𝑒23 𝑒24 𝑒25 𝑅2 𝑊2
⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ relations in a complex system [35]. It is a powerful technique to analyze
𝐻𝑆𝑖 𝑒𝑖1 𝑒𝑖2 𝑒𝑖3 𝑒𝑖4 𝑒𝑖5 𝑅𝑖 𝑊𝑖 the causality and mutual influence among factors [36]. Here, we adopt
𝐻𝑆𝑛 𝑒𝑛1 𝑒𝑛2 𝑒𝑛3 𝑒𝑛4 𝑒𝑛5 𝑅𝑛 𝑊𝑛 the Dematel method to calculate the weight for each attribute.
The steps of Dematel method is concluded as follows [34]:

the weight, the expected power can be allocated to each hybrid storage 1. Generating the direct-relation matrix.
system. Measure the relationship between attributes 𝑖 and 𝑗 according
The inputs and outputs of the TOPSIS method can be seen in to the following four influential levels: No influence (0), Low
Table 3. influence (1), Medium influence (2), High influence (3), Very
high influence (4). The integer score 𝑥𝑖𝑗 is given by the experts
(a) TOPSIS method with multiple attributes and describes the influential level that attribute 𝑖 on attribute 𝑗.
The steps of TOPSIS method can be concluded as follows [32,33]: Then the 𝑖th row, 𝑗th column element 𝑎𝑖𝑗 of the direct-relation
𝑛 × 𝑛 matrix 𝐴 can be calculated as follows:
1. Based on the multiple attributes, build the decision matrix 𝐸 =
1∑ 𝑘
ℎ
𝑒𝑖𝑗 , where 𝑒𝑖𝑗 represents the value of 𝑗th attribute in the 𝑖th (17)
𝑎𝑖𝑗 = 𝑥
alternatives; 𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛, 𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑚. ℎ 𝑘=1 𝑖𝑗
2. Considering the difference of each attribute, normalize the deci-
where ℎ represents the total number of experts.
sion matrix 𝐸, and transform it to the normalized matrix 𝐸 ′ =
2. Normalizing the direct-relation matrix
𝑒′𝑖𝑗 .
Based on the above direct-relation matrix 𝐴, the normalized
3. Based on the weight of each attribute, calculate the weighted
direct-relation matrix can be calculated as follows:
normalized decision matrix 𝑉 = 𝑣𝑖𝑗 , 𝑣𝑖𝑗 = 𝑤𝑗 ⋅ 𝑒′𝑖𝑗 . ( )
The weight 𝑤𝑗 can be calculated based on different methods, ∑𝑛 ∑
𝑛
𝑠 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑎𝑖𝑗 , 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑎𝑖𝑗 (18)
such as Dematel [34] (which can be used to calculate the weight 1≤𝑖≤𝑛
𝑗=1
1≤𝑗≤𝑛
𝑖=1
of subjective factors), Entropy [33] (which can be used to calcu-
late the weight of objective factors).
𝐴
4. Determine the positive ideal solution 𝐴+ and the negative ideal 𝑋= (19)
𝑠
solution 𝐴− :
{ } The sum of each row 𝑖 represents the effects that attribute 𝑖 gives
𝐴+ = (max 𝑣𝑖𝑗 |𝑗 ∈ 𝐽 ), (min 𝑣𝑖𝑗 |𝑗 ∈ 𝐽 ′ )|𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛 to the other attributes.
𝑖 𝑖 (13)
{ } 3. Attaining the total-relation matrix
= 𝑣+ , 𝑣+ , … , 𝑣+
1 2 𝑚
Based on the normalized direct-relation matrix 𝑋, the total-
{ } relation matrix 𝑇 can be calculated in the following:
𝐴− = (min 𝑣𝑖𝑗 |𝑗 ∈ 𝐽 ), (max 𝑣𝑖𝑗 |𝑗 ∈ 𝐽 ′ )|𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛
𝑖 𝑖 (14)
{ } 𝑇 = 𝑋(𝐼 − 𝑋)−1 (20)
= 𝑣− , 𝑣− , … , 𝑣−
1 2 𝑚

where 𝐽 = {𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑚|𝑗 represent the-bigger-the-better at- 4. Causal analysis

tribute }; 𝐽 ′ = {𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑚|𝑗 represent the-smaller-the-better Based on the matrix 𝑇 , the sum of rows and the sum of columns
attribute }. of 𝑇 can be then calculated, and denoted as vector 𝐷 and 𝑅:
5. Calculate the positive distance 𝑆𝑖+ and the negative distance 𝑆𝑖−
as follows: 𝑇 = [𝑡𝑖𝑗 ]𝑛×𝑛 , 𝑖, 𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛;
√ ∑
𝑛
√𝑚
√∑ 𝐷= 𝑡𝑖𝑗 ;
𝑆𝑖 = √ (𝑣𝑖𝑗 − 𝑣+
+
𝑗)
2
𝑗=1 (21)
𝑗=1
√ (15) ∑𝑛
√𝑚 𝑅= 𝑡𝑖𝑗 ;
√∑
𝑆𝑖− = √ (𝑣𝑖𝑗 − 𝑣−
𝑗)
2 𝑖=1
𝑗=1 where 𝐷 + 𝑅, named ‘‘Prominence’’ is calculated by adding D to
6. Calculate the relative distance of each alternative use the follow- R, which means the importance of each attribute. The vertical
ing equation: axis 𝐷 − 𝑅, named ‘‘Relation’’ is made by subtracting D from R,
which divide attribute into a causal group and an effect group.
𝑆𝑖−
𝑅𝐷𝑖 = (16)
𝑆𝑖+ + 𝑆𝑖− At last, based on the ‘‘Prominence’’ 𝐷 +𝑅, we can then calculate the
The value of the relative distance 𝑅𝐷 describes the relative superior- weight 𝑤𝑗 for each attribute.
ity of each alternative. When 𝑅𝐷𝑖 is larger, it means that the alternative
𝑖 is better; whereas when 𝑅𝐷𝑖 is smaller, the alternative 𝑖 is relatively 3.2. Dispatching layer
poorer.
At last, based on the relative distance 𝑅𝐷𝑖 , we can then calculate
the allocated power 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 to each hybrid storage system. After each hybrid storage system receives the allocated power
𝑖
𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 , it then needs to dispatch the allocated power to its battery
(b) DEMATEL method to decide the weight storage and hydrogen storage, and MPC method is adopted.
In the TOPSIS method, we adopt five attributes to evaluate the In the objective function, the utilization cost of each device is used
condition of each storage. However, the weight of each attribute is to decide the dispatching priority of battery storage and hydrogen

8
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

storage. The objective function can be represented as: Table 4

{ } Initial states of the four hybrid storage systems.
∑𝑇
𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠
∑
𝐼
Initial SOC 𝑈𝑏𝑎 [kWh] LOH [N m3 ] 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 [h] 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 [𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑠]
𝑖
𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐵𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 (𝑡) + 𝐻𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 (𝑡) , 𝐼 = {𝑓 𝑐, 𝑒𝑙}
𝑡=1 𝑖 𝐻𝑆1 0.8 10 7 10 30
𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 𝐻𝑆2 0.85 15 8 20 20
𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠
𝐵𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 (𝑡) = 𝑍 (𝑡); (22) 𝐻𝑆3 0.7 25 7 15 12
2𝐵𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠 𝐻𝑆4 0.75 30 7.5 20 10
𝑖
𝑖
𝐻𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 = ( 𝑖𝑛𝑣 + 𝑖𝑜𝑚 )𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑖 , 𝑖 ∈ 𝐼
𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒
Table 5
𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠 Simulation parameters of the multiple storage systems.
where 𝐵𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 (𝑡) are the charging and discharging cost of battery, 𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 =
𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 ⋅ 𝐶𝑎 is the battery investment costs, 𝐵 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 is the battery unit price,
𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 Parameters Value Parameters Value
𝑖𝑛𝑣
𝐵𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 is the battery lifetime; 𝐻𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑖 , 𝑖 ∈ 𝐼 = {𝑓 𝑐, 𝑒𝑙} are the operation 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡
𝐵𝑖𝑛𝑣 400 e/kWh 𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑚𝑖𝑛 0.1
cost of fuel cell and electrolyzer, 𝑖𝑜𝑚 is the operation & maintenance 𝐵𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 1300 𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.9
𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 3200 euro /kW 𝑃 𝑚𝑖𝑛 0 bar
cost, 𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑖 is the ON/OFF state; 𝑇 is the control horizon. 𝑖𝑛𝑣
𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 30 000 h 𝑃 𝑚𝑎𝑥 700 bar
Fuel cell and electrolyzer power limitation: 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡
𝑓 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 4000 e/kW 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑍𝑒𝑙,𝑓 0.8 kW
𝑐
𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑓 𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑓 𝑒 30 000 h 𝑍𝑒𝑙,𝑓 10 kW
𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑖 𝑍𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑍𝑖 ≤ 𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑖 𝑍𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝑖 = {𝑓 𝑐, 𝑒𝑙} (23) 𝑐

Fuel cell and the electrolyzer cannot startup at the same time
𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑓 𝑐 + 𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑙 ≤ 1.
battery discharging/charging power 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ and output/input current
Fuel cell consumed hydrogen 𝑛𝑓 𝑐 is decided by the output power
𝑖𝑏𝑎 , temperature 𝑇𝑏𝑎 .
𝑍𝑓 𝑐 and the operation temperature 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 , which can be calculated based
For example, in Fig. 9, the current discharging capacity is 20𝐴ℎ, and
on Fig. 6:
the operation curve can be calculated as:
𝑛𝑓 𝑐 = (𝑍𝑓 𝑐 − (−0.21 + 6.9538𝐸 −4 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ))∕187.043 (24) 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ − 𝑏1 − 𝑏3 ⋅ 𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝑖𝑏𝑎 = (30)
Fuel cell consumed hydrogen is limited to the maximum hydrogen 𝑏2
flow physical constraint 𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 , fuel cell operation temperature should where 𝑏1 , 𝑏2 , 𝑏3 are the coefficients of the linear regression.
[ 𝑓𝑐 ]
be kept between 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ∈ 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑇𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑐 [
, fuel cell ramp up and ramp down In addition, battery charging and discharging power is limited by
]
temperature is limited to 𝛥𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ∈ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 . These constraints the physical constraints:
can be described as follows:
𝑈 𝐵𝑙 ⋅ 𝑍𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑍𝑙 ≤ 𝑈 𝐵𝑙 ⋅ 𝑍𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝑙 = 𝑐ℎ, 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ (31)
0 ≤ 𝑛𝑓 𝑐 ≤ 𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑓𝑐
The charging and discharging of the battery cannot happen at the
𝑇𝑓𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑐 ≤ 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 ≤ 𝑇𝑓 𝑐
(25)
same time 𝑈 𝐵𝑐ℎ + 𝑈 𝐵𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ ≤ 1.
𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ |𝑇𝑓 𝑐 (𝑘) − 𝑇𝑓 𝑐 (𝑘 − 1)| ≤ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 State of charge SOC:
Electrolyzer produced hydrogen 𝑛𝑒𝑙 is decided by the input power ( )
𝜂𝑐ℎ 𝑍𝑐ℎ − 𝜂𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ 𝑍𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ 𝑑𝑡
𝑍𝑒𝑙 and the operation temperature 𝑇𝑒𝑙 , which can be calculated based 𝑆𝑂𝐶(𝑘) = 𝑆𝑂𝐶(𝑘 − 1) +
𝐶𝑎 (32)
on Fig. 7:
𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑆𝑂𝐶(𝑘) ≤ 𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑛𝑒𝑙 = (−0.0026 + 5.8285𝐸 −5 𝑇𝑒𝑙 ) + 0.0022𝑍𝑒𝑙 (26) where 𝐶𝑎 is the capacity of the battery.
Electrolyzer produced hydrogen is limited to the maximum hydro- The electricity power balance equation is:
gen flow physical constraint 𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑒𝑙[
; electrolyzer operation temperature
] 𝑍𝑒𝑙 − 𝑍𝑓 𝑐 + 𝑍𝑐ℎ − 𝑍𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ − 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 = 0 (33)
should be kept between 𝑇𝑒𝑙 ∈ 𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 , electrolyzer ramp up and
[ ]
ramp down temperature is limited to 𝛥𝑇𝑒𝑙 ∈ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 . These Here, we should notice that 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 is the variable from the power
constraints can be described as follows: allocating controller.
0 ≤ 𝑛𝑒𝑙 ≤ 𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑒𝑙
𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑇𝑒𝑙 ≤ 𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 (27) 4. Simulation results
𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ |𝑇𝑒𝑙 (𝑘) − 𝑇𝑒𝑙 (𝑘 − 1)| ≤ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥
In this paper, we consider a multiple hybrid structure consisting
Hydrogen tanks pressure can be calculated based on Fig. 8, and is of four hybrid storage systems, each hybrid storage system includes a
presented as follows: battery storage and a hydrogen storage. Four hybrid storage systems
( )( )
𝑏0 + 𝑏1 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑛0 − 𝑛𝑓 𝑐 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑛𝑒𝑙 𝑑𝑡 𝑅𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 are parallelly interconnected. The two-layer algorithm is developed in
𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 = ( ) (28) matlab R2017a, MPC is solved by Gurobi 8.1.0. The control variables
𝑉 − 𝑏2 𝑛0 − 𝑛𝑓 𝑐 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑛𝑒𝑙 𝑑𝑡 𝑅𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
of MPC include: [𝑇𝑓 𝑐 , 𝑍𝑓 𝑐 ; 𝑇𝑒𝑙 , 𝑍𝑒𝑙 ; 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ; 𝑇𝑏𝑎 , 𝑍𝑐ℎ,𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ ].
Hydrogen tanks operation temperature should be kept between
[ 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ] The initial states of the four hybrid storage systems are concluded
𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ∈ 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 , the ramp up and ramp down temperature is limited
[ ] in Table 4:
to 𝛥𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ∈ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 , hydrogen tanks pressure is limited to
[ 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ] The simulation parameters are summarized in Table 5. The initial
𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ∈ 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 , 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 . These constraints can be described as follows:
temperature of fuel cell, electrolyzer, hydrogen tanks and battery are
𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑚𝑎𝑥
≤ 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ≤ 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 the same 𝑇𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑐 = 𝑇𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑖 = 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
𝑖𝑛𝑖 = 𝑇 𝑖𝑛𝑖 = 293.15𝐾.
𝑏𝑎
𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ |𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 (𝑘) − 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 (𝑘 − 1)| ≤ 𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑥 (29) In order to test the performance of the above two-layer strategy,
𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑥 two load profiles are adopted:
𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ≤ 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 ≤ 𝑃𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
For the battery model, the operation characteristics is related to 1. Profile 1: a short-term second profile (which can be seen in
the state of charge SOC, with different SOCs, the operation curves are Fig. 12, ‘‘Total’’ curve);
different. So, firstly, we need to obtain the current SOC value. Then, 2. Profile 2: a long-term one-day profile (which can be seen in
based on the SOC value, we can calculate the relationship between Fig. 21, ‘‘Total’’ curve).

9
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Fig. 12. Power allocated to four hybrid storage systems based on Fuzzy logic method. Fig. 13. Power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on MPC in hybrid
(Fuzzy logic/ MPC). storage1 system. (Fuzzy logic/ MPC).

In order to compare the performance of different algorithms, in each

profile, we developed different cases:

1. Case 1, Fuzzy logic/ MPC. Fuzzy logic is adopted in power

allocating layer. MPC is adopted in dispatching layer.
2. Case 2, TOPSIS/ MPC. TOPSIS method is used in power allocat-
ing layer. MPC is adopted in dispatching layer.
3. Case 3, Dematel-TOPSIS/ MPC. Dematel is adopted to decide
the weight for attributes. TOPSIS method is adopted in power
allocating layer. MPC is adopted in dispatching layer.

The simulation results of (Profile 2, Case 1), (Profile 2, Case 2),

(Profile 2, Case 3) are shown in Appendix A.

4.1. Simulation results based on Fuzzy logic/ MPC combined algorithm

(Profile 1, Case 1)

Simulation results based on Fuzzy logic/ MPC combined method are

shown in the following. Fig. 12 describes the power allocated to four Fig. 14. Power allocated to four hybrid storage systems based on TOPSIS method.
(TOPSIS/ MPC).
hybrid storage systems based on Fuzzy logic method. It can be seen that
the total power is allocated to four hybrid storage systems. Fig. 13 de-
scribes the power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on
MPC in hybrid storage1 system. The other simulation results including
the operation characteristics of hybrid storage1 system are presented
in Appendix A.

4.2. Simulation results based on TOPSIS/ MPC combined algorithm (Profile

1, Case 2)

Simulation results based on TOPSIS/ MPC combined method are

shown in the following. Fig. 14 describes the power allocated to four
hybrid storage systems based on TOPSIS method. Fig. 15 describes
power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on MPC in
hybrid storage1 system. Further simulation results are presented in
Appendix A.

4.3. Simulation results based on dematel-TOPSIS/ MPC combined algo-

rithm (Profile 1, Case 3)

In this algorithm, we first develop the direct-relation matrix 𝐴, and Fig. 15. Power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on MPC in hybrid
the attributes namely, SOC, 𝑈𝑏𝑎 , LOH, 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 , 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 are the same as storage1 system. (TOPSIS/ MPC).
in TOPSIS method. The matrix 𝐴 is presented in the following Table 6:
where the values in the direct-relation matrix 𝐴 represent the
influential levels.

10
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Table 6 Table 7
Direct-relation matrix 𝐴. The percentage of the allocated power based on three algorithms (at time 𝑡 = 50 s).
Matrix SOC 𝑈𝑏𝑎 LOH 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 Cases Fuzzy logic/MPC TOPSIS/MPC Dematel-TOPSIS/MPC
SOC 0 4 1 1 4 𝐻𝑆1 0.2319 0.2716 0.2807
𝑈𝑏𝑎 4 0 4 2 1 𝐻𝑆2 0.3044 0.2901 0.2807
LOH 3 4 0 2 1 𝐻𝑆3 0.2319 0.2379 0.2329
𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 3 4 3 0 1 𝐻𝑆4 0.2319 0.1959 0.2057
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 4 4 1 1 0

Fig. 18. SOC and LOH in hybrid storage1 system (Profile 1).

Fig. 16. Power allocated to four hybrid storage systems based on Dematel-TOPSIS
method. (Dematel-TOPSIS/ MPC).

Fig. 19. SOC and LOH in hybrid storage1 system (Profile 2).

Fig. 17. Power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on MPC in hybrid
storage1 system. (Dematel-TOPSIS/ MPC).
Simulation results based on Dematel-TOPSIS/ MPC combined
method are shown as follows. Fig. 16 describes the power allocated to
four hybrid storage systems based on Dematel-TOPSIS method. Fig. 17
describes power dispatching to battery and hydrogen storage based on
MPC in hybrid storage1 system.
4.4. Comparison analysis between different algorithms
The three algorithms mainly influence the allocated power. We
compare the percentage of the allocated power based on the three algo-
rithms (at time 𝑡 = 50 s, Profile 1) in Table 7. It can be seen that based
on different algorithms the allocated power to each hybrid storage is
different. These three algorithms mainly influence the allocated power.
The SOC and LOH of the hybrid storage1 under Profile 1 are
shown in Fig. 18. Under Profile 2, the SOC and LOH of the hybrid
storage1 are presented in Fig. 19. It can be seen that based on the
three algorithms, the operation characteristics of battery and hydrogen
storage are significantly different.
At last, we evaluate the performance of each algorithm. Four in-
dexes are adopted: cumulative operation power of battery 𝑈𝑏𝑎 , online
operation times of fuel cell and electrolyzer 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 , startup times of
fuel cell and electrolyzer 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 , operation costs 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡.
When 𝑈𝑏𝑎 is large, the degradation of battery is large; when 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦
is large, the degradation of fuel cell and electrolyzer is also large.
Especially, when 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 is large, the startup of fuel cell and elec-
trolyzer is frequently, thus accelerating the degradation of fuel cell and
electrolyzer. So, we use 𝐷𝑒𝑔 = 𝑈𝑏𝑎 + 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 + 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 to represent
the degradation of the four hybrid storage systems. The results under
Profile 1 are shown in Table 8, results under Profile 2 are shown in
Table 9.

11
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

Table 8
The performance of the three algorithms (Profile 1).
Algorithms 𝑈𝑏𝑎 [kW] 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 [e]
Fuzzy logic/MPC 108.1365 183 119 410.1365 1865.9
TOPSIS/MPC 30.6385 199 130 359.6385 783.3353
Dematel-TOPSIS/MPC 25.7057 199 128 352.7057 712.6784

Table 9
The performance of the three algorithms (Profile 2).
Algorithms 𝑈𝑏𝑎 [kW] 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 [e]
Fuzzy logic/MPC 34.0196 153 23 210.0196 704.4560
TOPSIS/MPC 28.0668 159 22 209.0668 632.0031
Dematel-TOPSIS/MPC 26.4124 156 22 204.4124 604.7622

Table 10
The performance of the three algorithms (RCase2).
Algorithms 𝑈𝑏𝑎 [kW] 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 [e]
Fuzzy logic/MPC 7.6979 95 23 125.6979 267.5226
TOPSIS/MPC 9.4134 71 19 99.4134 253.3140
Dematel-TOPSIS/MPC 8.9746 71 19 98.9746 247.1648

It can be seen that in TOPSIS method, degradation impacts (namely,

𝑈𝑏𝑎 , 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 , and 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 ) are considered, thus leading to both a smaller
degradation index 𝐷𝑒𝑔 and operation cost 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡. In Dematel-TOPSIS
method, the weight of each attribute is reasonably designed and cal-
culated, and we allocate larger weights to attributes 𝑈𝑏𝑎 , 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒ℎ𝑦 , and
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑦 than attributes SOC, LOH. Consequently, the degradation index
𝐷𝑒𝑔 and operation cost 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 are further smaller.

5. Real applications Fig. 20. PV-hydrogen microgrid system.

The above two-layer strategy is then implemented in a PV-hydrogen

microgrid system, and the structure of this microgrid can be seen in
Fig. 20. PV panels are implemented to produce energy, and multi-
ple hybrid storage systems are deployed to address uncertainty. This
microgrid structure has been studied in several real applications. For
example, authors in [37] study the sizing of a PV-hydrogen-battery
stand-alone microgrid. Authors in [38] study the operation of a real
PV/wind-hydrogen microgrid system. Authors in [39] implement a
hardware experimental control of a PV-hydrogen-battery microgrid.
Then, based on the above PV-hydrogen microgrid. Two different
real cases are implemented. In the first real case (RCase1), the one-day
solar radiation and load demand profiles are obtained from practical
and rigid usage tests by a laboratory [40]. Furthermore, the rated
power of one PV panel is 0.17kW. The PV output and load demand
data profiles are shown in Fig. 21. The time interval is 30 min. Then
the proposed two-layer strategy is deployed to control the operation of
multiple hybrid storage systems to address the net load 𝑃 𝑉 − 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑.
The results for the RCase1 have been illustrated in previous Fig. 19
and Table 9. [ Section 4, Profile2]. Fig. 21. PV output and load demand data profiles. (RCase1 ≡ Profile2).
In the second real case (RCase2), the one-year solar radiation and
load demand profiles are obtained from a practical building [20], load
profile is reduced in this paper. The one-year PV output and load
demand data profiles are shown in Fig. 22. The time interval is 1 h. Due
to the large amounts of calculation time for the one year running, we 6. Conclusion
arbitrarily adopt a 24-hour duration 1920 h–1943 h, which is presented
In this paper, we studied the optimal operation of multiple hybrid
in Fig. 23. Then the proposed two-layer strategy is deployed to control
storage systems. In the hybrid storage, both battery and hydrogen
the operation of multiple hybrid storage systems to address the net load
storage were integrated. Firstly, a two-dimension model consisting
𝑃 𝑉 − 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑. of fuel cell, electrolyzer, and battery were developed, in which, the
Under real case RCase2, the SOC and LOH of the hybrid storage1 are temperature impacts were considered. Secondly, a two-layer operation
presented in Fig. 24. And the final cost results are shown in Table 10. strategy structure were proposed, where it included a power allocating
The detail results are presented in Appendix A. layer and a dispatching layer. In the allocating layer, three algorithms

12
B. Li et al. Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303

1. The temperature had positive influences on the operation char-

acteristics of the hydrogen storage system. Specifically, under
a safe higher temperature condition, the fuel cell could gener-
ate a larger power, and the electrolyzer could produce more
hydrogen;
2. The proposed two-layer power operation algorithm could or-
derly and healthily dispatch power to each storage;
3. When more dynamic attributes are considered, the allocated
power to each storage system were more reasonable. Specif-
ically, when up to five attributes were considered in TOPSIS
method, both the degradation index and operation cost were
smaller than they were in fuzzy logic algorithm with less at-
tributes;
4. When the weight of each attribute was further reasonably de-
signed and calculated in Dematel-TOPSIS algorithm, the allo-
cated power to each storage were with more ‘‘intelligent’’, thus
promoting that the degradation index 𝐷𝑒𝑔 and operation cost
𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 were further smaller than that in TOPSIS algorithm.
Fig. 22. One year PV output and load demand data profiles. With the combined Dematel-TOPSIS and model predictive control
method, we can achieve an ‘‘intelligent’’ operation. In the first-layer,
based on the Dematel weight matrix, the subjective factors (such as
preference) can be considered. Then, based on the multi-attribute de-
cision method TOPSIS, different attributes are included and analyzed,
making the decision results more reasonable and effective. In the sec-
ond layer, model predictive control can hand and face large numbers of
constraints, which can well deal with complex optimization problems.
At last, the two-layer operation strategy can smarter achieve different
goals.
The above conclusions present the sophisticated theoretical analysis
and indications of the proposed methodology for the typical multiple
hybrid storage systems. However, for further works in practical imple-
mentations, more details should be studied and considered. Firstly, in
the two-dimension modeling, linearized method is adopted to describe
the impacts of temperature. But for more complex real-world applica-
tions, the nonlinear relations could be further considered and modeled
in the next step. Secondly, an accurate measurement of the operation
temperature of hydrogen storage and battery storage is also a problem,
since there are lots of sampling locations where sensors can be de-
ployed. In addition, the operation temperature is also influenced by the
Fig. 23. 1920 h–1943 h PV output and load demand data profiles. (RCase2).
environment resulting in the considering of the external temperature
variation.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Bei Li: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing - orig-

inal draft, Writing - review & editing. Hongzhi Miao: Visualization,
Investigation. Jiangchen Li: Visualization, Investigation, Validation,
Supervision, Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-

cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by ‘‘Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic

Fig. 24. SOC and LOH in hybrid storage1 system (RCase2).
Research Foundation, China’’ (2019A1515110641), and ‘‘Fundamental
Research Funds for the Shenzhen university, China’’ (000002110235).

Appendix A. Supplementary data

were compared: fuzzy logic, TOPSIS, and Dematel-TOPSIS; and in the
dispatching layer, MPC algorithm was adopted. The Appendix is presented in supplementary materials.
Based on the simulation results, some conclusions are concluded as Supplementary material related to this article can be found online
follows: at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116303.

13
B. Li et al.
References
[1] Li B, Roche R, Miraoui A. Microgrid sizing with combined evolutionary algorithm
and MILP unit commitment. Appl Energy 2017;188:547–62.
[2] Chang L, Zhang W, Xu S, Spence K. Review on distributed energy storage systems
for utility applications. CPSS Trans Power Electron Appl 2017;2(4):267–76.
http://dx.doi.org/10.24295/CPSSTPEA.2017.00025.
[3] Li B. Sizing and operation of multi-energy hydrogen-based microgrids [Ph.D.
thesis], Universite Bourgogne Franche-Comte, UTBM; 2018.
[4] Laurencelle F, Chahine R, Hamelin J, Agbossou K, Fournier M, Bose T, Laper-
riere A. Characterization of a ballard MK5-E proton exchange membrane fuel
cell stack. Fuel Cells 2001;1(1):66–71.
[5] Ulleberg Ø. Modeling of advanced alkaline electrolyzers: a system simulation
approach. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2003;28(1):21–33.
[6] Diéguez P, Ursúa A, Sanchis P, Sopena C, Guelbenzu E, Gandía L. Thermal
performance of a commercial alkaline water electrolyzer: experimental study and
mathematical modeling. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008;33(24):7338–54.
[7] Huria T, Ceraolo M, Gazzarri J, Jackey R. High fidelity electrical model with
thermal dependence for characterization and simulation of high power lithium
battery cells. In 2012 IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference. 2012, p.
1–8.
[8] Ji Y, Zhang Y, Wang CY. Li-ion cell operation at low temperatures. J Electrochem
Soc. 160 (4) A636–A649.
[9] Marie P, Laurent G, Julien P, Frédéric C. Simultaneous optimization of sizing
and energy management—Application to hybrid train. Math Comput Simulation
2019;158:355–74.
[10] Khan AA, Naeem M, Iqbal M, Qaisar S, Anpalagan A. A compendium of
optimization objectives, constraints, tools and algorithms for energy management
in microgrids. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;58:1664–83.
[11] Li B, Roche R, Paire D, Miraoui A. A price decision approach for multiple
multi-energy-supply microgrids considering demand response. Energy 2019;167.
[12] Shang C, You F. A data-driven robust optimization approach to scenario-based
stochastic model predictive control. J Process Control 2019;75:24–39. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2018.12.013.
[13] Bazmohammadi N, Tahsiri A, Anvari-Moghaddam A, Guerrero JM. A hierar-
chical energy management strategy for interconnected microgrids considering
uncertainty. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2019;109:597–608.
[14] Khalid R, Javaid N, Rahim MH, Aslam S, Sher A. Fuzzy energy management
controller and scheduler for smart homes. Sustain Comput: Inf Syst 2018;21.
[15] Vavrek R, Chovancová J. Assessment of economic and environmental en-
ergy performance of EU countries using CV-TOPSIS technique. Ecol Indic
2019;106:105519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105519.
[16] Jing W, Lai CH, Wong WS, Wong MD. A comprehensive study of battery-
supercapacitor hybrid energy storage system for standalone PV power system in
rural electrification. Appl Energy 2018;224:340–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2018.04.106.
[17] Zhou H, Bhattacharya T, Tran D, Siew TST, Khambadkone AM. Compos-
ite energy storage system involving battery and ultracapacitor with dynamic
energy management in microgrid applications. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2011;26(3):923–30.
[18] Wu Y, Huang Z, Liao H, Chen B, Zhang X, Zhou Y, Liu Y, Li H, Peng J. Adaptive
power allocation using artificial potential field with compensator for hybrid
energy storage systems in electric vehicles. Appl Energy 2020;257:113983. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113983.
[19] Cabrane Z, Ouassaid M, Maaroufi M. Battery and supercapacitor for photo-
voltaic energy storage: a fuzzy logic management. IET Renew Power Gener
2017;11(8):1157–65.
[20] Li B, Roche R, Paire D, Miraoui A. Sizing of a stand-alone microgrid con-
sidering electric power, cooling/heating, hydrogen loads and hydrogen storage
degradation. Appl Energy 2017;205:1244–59.
14
Applied Energy 283 (2021) 116303
[21] Song Z, Hofmann H, Li J, Hou J, Han X, Ouyang M. Energy management
strategies comparison for electric vehicles with hybrid energy storage system.
Appl Energy 2014;134:321–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.
035.
[22] Hou J, Sun J, Hofmann HF. Mitigating power fluctuations in electric ship
propulsion with hybrid energy storage system: Design and analysis. IEEE J Ocean
Eng 2018;43(1):93–107.
[23] Hajiaghasi S, Salemnia A, Hamzeh M. Hybrid energy storage system for
microgrids applications: A review. J Energy Storage. 21 (FEB): 543–570.
[24] Babazadeh H, Asghari B, Sharma R. A new control scheme in a multi-battery
management system for expanding microgrids. 2014.
[25] Wei Q, Liu D, Shi G, Liu Y. Multibattery optimal coordination control for
home energy management systems via distributed iterative adaptive dynamic
programming. IEEE Trans Ind Electron. 62 (7): 4203–4214.
[26] Fan F, Tai NL, Zheng XD, Huang W, Shi J. Equalization strategy for multi-battery
energy storage systems using maximum consistency tracking algorithm of the
conditional depreciation. IEEE Trans Energy Convers. 1.
[27] Fan F, Tai N, Huang W, Zheng X, Fan C. Distributed equalisation strategy for
multi-battery energy storage systems. J Eng 2019;2019(16):1986–90.
[28] Pu Y, Li Q, Chen W, Liu H. Hierarchical energy management control for
islanding DC microgrid with electric-hydrogen hybrid storage system. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2019;44(11):5153–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.
2018.10.043, The 6th International Conference on Energy, Engineering and
Environmental Engineering.
[29] Chen H, Zhang Z, Guan C, Gao H. Optimization of sizing and frequency control
in battery/supercapacitor hybrid energy storage system for fuel cell ship. Energy
2020;197:117285.
[30] Hu J, Liu D, Du C, Yan F, Lv C. Intelligent energy management strategy of hybrid
energy storage system for electric vehicle based on driving pattern recognition.
Energy 2020;198:117298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117298.
[31] Shabani B, Andrews J, Watkins S. Energy and cost analysis of a solar-hydrogen
combined heat and power system for remote power supply using a computer
simulation. Sol Energy 2010;84(1):144–55.
[32] Hwang C-L, Yoon K. Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Multiple
Attribute Decision Making. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 1981, p. 58–191.
[33] Chen P. Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method. Expert
Syst Appl 2019;136:33–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.035.
[34] Lin YT, Yang YH, Kang JS, Yu HC. Using DEMATEL method to explore the core
competences and causal effect of the IC design service company: An empirical
case study. Expert Syst Appl. 38 (5): 6262–6268.
[35] Liou JJ, Yen L, Tzeng G-H. Building an effective safety management system
for airlines. J Air Transp Manag 2008;14(1):20–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jairtraman.2007.
[36] Ghassemi SA, Danesh S. A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach
for desalination process selection. Desalination 2013;313:44–50. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.12.008.
[37] Castaeda M, Cano A, Jurado F, Sánchez H, Fernández LM. Sizing opti-
mization, dynamic modeling and energy management strategies of a stand-
alone PV/hydrogen/battery-based hybrid system. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2013;38(10):3830–45.
[38] Dursun E, Kilic O. Comparative evaluation of different power management
strategies of a stand-alone PV/Wind/PEMFC hybrid power system. Int J Electr
Power Energy Syst 2012;34(1):81–9.
[39] Alam M, Kumar K, Verma S, Dutta V. Renewable sources based DC microgrid
using hydrogen energy storage: Modelling and experimental analysis. Sustain
Energy Technol Assess 2020;42:100840.
[40] Elkazaz M, Sumner M, Thomas D. Energy management system for hybrid PV-
wind-battery microgrid using convex programming, model predictive and rolling
horizon predictive control with experimental validation. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2020;115:105483.