Predictive Active Power-Flow Control of Two-way Wireless

Power Transfer System in V2G Services

A. A. S. Mohamed, Alberto Berzoy and Osama Mohammed
Energy Systems Research Laboratory, Florida International University
mohammed@fiu.edu.

Abstract— This paper presents a new methodology of active
power flow control for a bidirectional inductive wireless power
transfer (BIWPT) system in electric vehicle (EV) ancillary
services based on the system analytical model. The controller
exists on the vehicle side to consider the EV’s owner’s desire for
providing energy to the other sources. The owner is able to
choose between three different control modes; Charge,
Discharge and Abstain (no interaction). The controller
considers the EV’s battery state-of-charge (SOC) which is
provided by the battery management system (BMS). The
control parameters are predicted based on a simple and an
accurate analytical model for the BIWPT system. The
misalignment effect on the controller performance is considered
by adaptively estimating the wireless pads mutual inductance.
The proposed controller is implemented and tested by means of
simulations and experiments for stationary and quasi-dynamic
wireless power transfer situations.
Keywords— Active power flow control; Bidirectional; Electric
vehicle (EV); Predictive; Vehicle-to-grid (V2G); Wireless Power
Transfer (WPT).
I. INTRODUCTION
EV charging based on inductive wireless power transfer
(IWPT) technology has evolved into a state where it is
considered as robust, efficient (about 85-93%) and reliable in
harsh environments [1]. Numerous IWPT structures with
different power electronics topologies, compensation
techniques and control algorithms have been proposed and
implemented for EVs applications [2]. Most of these
configurations have been developed for unidirectional
operation and they are not suitable for bidirectional
applications, such as vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and grid-to-
vehicle (G2V) services. Power flow control algorithms are
essential in these entities to control the magnitude and the
direction of the power between the EV and the grid. Generally
speaking, power flow control can be categorized based on the
controller position (primary, secondary or dual) [3], the
resonance high frequency (HF) inverter topology [4] and the
modulation technique, such as pulse-width [5], [6], pulse
phase-shift [7], [8], pulse frequency modulation [7], [9], [10]
and combination between them [7]. Different types of control
theory such as classical proportional-integral (PI) [9], [10],
proportional-integral-derivative (PID) [11] and fuzzy
inference system [6], have been investigated to drive the
above modulation variables. Classic PI and PID controllers
suffer from large settling time, overshoots, and oscillations
and may not resist the uncertainties and disturbances. Fuzzy
controllers can be more robust however they present high
computational processing and noisy outcome. In addition, the
design of FLC system parameters shows tradeoff between
complexity and accuracy [12]. Moreover, the design of these
controllers need to be adaptive with variation of the system
parameters which depend on the relative position of the
wireless pads. Model-based active power flow (PAPF)
controllers appear to be promising in these applications in
terms of simplicity and accuracy. PAPF controllers for
BIWPT systems, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, are not
presented yet in literature.
This paper presents a new strategy of active power flow
controller for BIWPT systems in V2G services based on
predictive theory. The proposed controller is located on the
vehicle side. The EV’s owner desire and the battery SOC are
considered in the algorithm to decide the mode of operation
and the amount of power flow. Moreover, online mutual
estimation is achieved to consider the wireless pad
misalignment effect. The controller is developed based on an
accurate mathematical model that was published in [13], [14]
and extended in this paper.

Part of this work was supported by grants for the office of Naval Research.
The authors are with the Energy System Research Laboratory, Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Florida International University,
Miami, FL, 33174. (E-mail: mohammed@fiu.edu).
Fig. 1: BIWPT system components.

978-1-5090-1546-7/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE 1

 II. POWER FLOW ANALYTICAL MODEL. described in [13]. Then, substituting by their formulas in (1)
for estimating the secondary side active power.
Many different configurations for BIWPT system can be
found in the literature based on the power electronics inverter ܲ஺௉ெ ൌ σ௡ୀଵǡଷǡହǡǥ ࣬‡ƒŽሺܸ௦௜̴௡ ‫ܫ‬௦௜̴௡ ‫ כ‬ሻ (1)
and the compensation topology. The most commonly used
2) Fundamental Active Power Model (FAPM): In this model
configuration is the one which is based on LCL resonant the harmonics components of Isi are neglected and a simple
inverter, since it provides safe operation and it is less sensitive formula for the fundamental secondary current Isi_1 is given in
to the misalignment [15]. The BIWPT system under (2).
consideration is indicated in Fig. 1. It consists of two HF
inverters with controllers, L-filters (Lpi, Lsi), compensating ௝ெఊ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ ஼ೞ ோೞ೔ ା௝ఊఠೝ ெమ ோೞ೔ మ ஼೛ మ
‫ܫ‬௦௜̴ଵ ൌ ܸ௣௜̴ଵ ൅ ܸ௦௜̴ଵ (2)
capacitors (Cp, Cs) and magnetic coupler (Lpc, Lsc) with mutual ఠೝ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ ൫௅ೞ೎ ା஼ೞ ோೞ೔ మ ൯

inductance (M). The power transfer between the primary and

௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔
secondary sides is achieved by magnetic induction during where, ߛ ൌ , Vsi_1
൫௅೛೔ ା஼೛ ோ೛೎ ோ೛೔ ൯ሺ௅ೞ೔ ା஼ೞ ோೞ೎ ோೞ೔ ሻାఠೝమ ெమ ஼೛ ஼ೞ ோ೛೔ ோೞ೔
resonance operation through a large air gap (100-250 mm)
and Vpi_1 are the fundamental component of Vsi and Vpi,
[16]. The proposed predictive controller is able to generate the
respectively. Therefore, an accurate formula for calculating
phase modulation parameters (Į and ߚ represent the phase
the fundamental active secondary power is obtained by
shift between the firing of the two legs of the primary and
substituting (2) into (1) and considering only the fundamental
secondary inverter, respectively, and į is the phase shift
component as described in (3).
between the primary and secondary inverter voltage). These
parameters are adjusted to drive the magnitude and the ெఊ௏೏೎ ௏್ ఈ ఉ
•‹ ቀ ቁ •‹ ቀ ቁ •‹ሺߜሻ
direction of the power flow in the system as indicated in Fig. ଼ ఠೝ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ ଶ ଶ
ܲி஺௉ெ ൌ ቀ మቁ ൦ ൪ (3)
2. This controller is mainly depends on the system గ ஼ೞ ோೞ೔ ௏್ మ ଶ ఉ
൅ మ •‹ ቀ ቁ
௅ೞ೎ ା஼ೞ ோೞ೔ ଶ
mathematical model presented before in [13]. Following this
model, an accurate active power flow estimation will be
discussed in this section. 3) Approximate Fundamental Active Power Model
(AFAPM): In this case the second term in (2) and (3) is
neglected, since it is proportional to the resistive losses which
is relatively small with respect to the mutual coupling. The
final approximated active power equation is described in (4).
଼ ெఊ ஑ ஒ
ܲ஺ி஺௉ெ ൌ ቀ మቁ ൤ ܸ ܸ •‹ ቀ ቁ •‹ ቀ ቁ •‹ሺɁሻ൨ (4)
గ ఠೝ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ ௗ௖ ௕ ଶ ଶ

1.5 PAPM PFAPM PAFAPM

1.19
1 1.17
1.15
0.5 V2G mode
Ps (pu)

90
0
G2V mode
-0.5 -1.13
-1.15
Fig. 2: Phase shift control parameters including the deadtime. -1
-1.17
-90
-1.5
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
A. Active Power Flow Model. δ (degree)
In [13], an approximate fundamental power flow model Fig. 3: Comparison between the three active power models (Į = ȕ = 120o).
was presented, but this model is not accurate enough for the
proper control design. Thus, in this paper three different B. Power Flow Models Assessment.
mathematical models for the active power estimation with The abovementioned three models are simulated,
different levels of accuracy are presented and compared. analyzed and compared in MatLab environment. The active
Then, the appropriate one is chosen for the design of the power is estimated at different phase shift parameter (į) as
proposed predictive controller. shown in Fig. 3. It can be noticed that, the PFAPM is very close
to the PAPM with 0.14% normalized mean square error
1) Active Power Model (APM): It represents the total active
(NMSE). On the other hand, the PAFAPM shows inaccurate
power including the fundamental and the harmonics power
performance with 2.32% NMSE.
components. It is obtained by formulating Vsi and Isi in terms
From the control design point of view the FAPM is the
of the system design and control parameters as it was
most appropriate model for the following reasons: it is more
accurate than the AFAPM, and it is simple and does not need
iterative solution unlike the APM. Thus, this model is

2
considered for achieving the proposed predictive control where, Pref is the desired active power which depends on
design. By considering the fundamental power model, it can many factors such as the EV owner desire, EV’s battery SOC
be noticed that the power flow capacity in V2G and G2V and the grid power price [19]. The first term in (8) will be
mode is different (1.19 and 1.15 pu, respectively). This is due subtracted or added to the second term, which is fixed, based
to the second term in (3) which is fixed with respect to į. This on the mode of operation. In G2V mode the first term is
term will be subtracted from the first one in case of G2V and negative while for V2G mode it is positive. Thus, the
added in case of V2G. Thus, this asymmetric operation is maximum transferred active power will be less in G2V than
considered during the control design. V2G mode, as was indicated in Fig. 3.
C. Mutual Coupling Estimation. start
After deriving and verifying the analytical model, the next Mode I
step for the predictive control operation is to solve this model. NO
interact?
For solving the model, the system design parameters need to
end
be known. The BIWPT system under consideration is YES
designed for fixed resonance frequency operation in both the YES NO
NO source NO
primary and secondary sides. Also, the resonance capacitors charge? grid need?
available?
are tuned to resonate with the self-inductance of the coils end YES end
YES
which are known after the design and are relatively fixed
YES YES
[17]. Hence, the compensation capacitors are fixed as well. soc • socmax? soc ” socmin?
Under these constraints, only the mutual inductance varies end NO NO end
based on the vehicle position and the misalignment between
set į=-90 o
set į=90 o
the wireless pads. Thus, this parameter needs to be adaptively
estimated before applying the control algorithm. In this Estimate
paper, a new online technique to estimate the mutual M, Pref and Pmax

inductance has been proposed. It is based on a mix between

analytical approach and measurements technique. A certain
known condition for the primary control parameter (Į) is
applied and the open circuit secondary voltage (Es) is
measured. The primary coil current at open circuit in the
secondary (Ipc_OCS) is calculated from (5). Then, the mutual
inductance is estimated using (6).
‫ܫ‬௣௖̴ை஼ௌ ൌ െ݆ܸ௣௜̴ଵ Τൣ߱௥ ൫‫ܮ‬௣௖ ൅ ‫ܥ‬௣ ܴ௣௖ ܴ௣௜ ൯൧
‫ ܯ‬ൌ ‫ܧ‬௦ Τ൫߱௥ ‫ܫ‬௣௖̴ை஼ௌ ൯
III. THE PROPOSED PREDICTIVE CONTROL
The proposed controller is located on the vehicle side to
control the magnitude and the direction of the power flow
between EV and the grid. The power flow control can be
achieved based on the primary and/or the secondary inverters.
In this paper, it is assumed that both inverters will be driven
by the same phase modulation parameter (i.e Į=ߚ) to control
the active power flow magnitudeǤ The third parameter į is
assigned to ±90o, to shift between the different modes of
operation (G2V when į=-90o and V2G when į=90o). Keeping
į=±90o, will help to minimize the reactive power flow and
achieve high power factor operation [18]. Based on the
previous assumptions, the control parameters (Į and ߚ) will
be predicted based on (7) and (8) which are deduced from (3).
ߙ ൌ ߚ ൌ …‘• ିଵ ቀͳ െ ൫ʹܲ௥௘௙ Τܲ௠௔௫ ൯ቁ
଼ ெఊ௏೏೎ ௏್ ଼ ஼ೞ ோೞ೔ ௏೏೎ మ
ܲ௠௔௫ ൌ േ ቀ మቁ ൅ ቀ మቁ
గ ఠೝ ௅೛೔ ௅ೞ೔ గ ௅ೞ೎ ା஼ೞ ோೞ೔ మ
NO YES calculate Į and ȕ
set Į=ȕ=180o Pref ” Pmax?
from (7)
update Į, ȕ, į
Fig. 4: The proposed control algorithm.
The proposed algorithm considers the EV’s owner desire
(5) by giving the ability to choose between three different modes
of operation: Mode I: Abstain which means no interaction,
(6)
Mode II: Discharge, and Mode III: Charge. The sequence of
the algorithm implementation linked with the available
communication system is indicted in Fig. 4 and described as
follows:
- A vehicle enters the coverage area of the communication
system and it receives a notification that there is a WPT
service available in the area.
- If the vehicle wants to interact, it will send a request for
service (charge or discharge) to the grid side unit, otherwise
it will ignore the notification.
- The grid side unit checks its own resource availability. If it
is capable to serve the new vehicle, it will accept the service
request; otherwise, it will reject the service.
- Once the grid approve its capability, the controller is going
to check the EV battery SOC to avoid battery over and
under charging. If the battery status is within the interaction
range the controller will assign į and estimate the
(7) parameters M, Pref and Pmax, otherwise it will stop the
service.
(8) - The controller checks the maximum available power of the
charger Pmax. If Pref is within the charger limit, the control

3
 parameters Į and ߚ will be estimated based on (7),
otherwise the maximum parameters will be used Į=ߚ=180o.
- The controller will update the control parameters and send
the new angle Į to the primary side.
IV. SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
For the purpose of testing the proposed controller, a
Simulink/MatLab model of BIWPT system (shown in Fig. 1)
for EV applications was developed. Also, an experimental
prototype for the same configuration was built. It consists of:
(1) two 40 kHz LCL H-bridge resonance inverters to achieve
the bidirectional power flow operation, (2) two identical
circular wireless pads with ferrite bars, (3) a firing board to
generate synchronized switching signals for the inverters, (4)
a Li-ion battery to emulate the EV battery performance, (5) a
programmable MAGNA power supply to emulate the DC
bus, and (6) sensor board based on LEM voltage and current
capacity by setting Į=ȕ=180o and į=-90o. Fig. 6 indicates the
primary and secondary side variables (voltages and currents)
during this mode of operation. The two inverters generate full
square waves with 90o phase shift (the secondary lags the
primary). This phase shift is responsible for directing the
power flow from the DC link to the EV battery. Good
correlation can be noticed between the experimental and the
simulation results.
A second scenario has been investigated using the same
system in which the EV supports the power grid (discharging
or V2G). This mode has been achieved by setting į=90o. The
simulated and experimental system performance is described
in Fig. 7. In this case, the secondary voltage leads the primary
one to allow the power to flow from the battery to the DC
bus.
VExp. VSim. I Exp. I Sim.
50

pi
pi
0

10I
(a)

V
transducer and oscilloscope. The entire system setup is -50
depicted in Fig. 5, and the design parameters are described in 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Table I. The simulated and experimental systems are 50

si
si
analyzed and their results were compared for verification 0

10I
(b)
purposes. Then, the Simulink model was used to verify the V -50

effectiveness of the proposed controller. 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
100
50
pc
pc

0
5I
V

-50 (c)

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1

50
sc
sc

0 (d)
5I
V

-50
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (msec)
Fig. 6: Tested and simulated system performance under full supply voltages
for G2V operation (Į=ȕ=180o, į=-90o) (a) primary inverter, (b) secondary
inverter, (c) primary coil, and (d) secondary coil.

VExp. VSim. I Exp. I Sim.

Figure 5: BIWPT system setup. 50

pi
pi

0
10I

(a)
V

-50
TABLE I
BIWPT SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
50
si

Param. Value Param. Value Param. Value

si

0
10I

(b)
V

Lpi 26 μH Lsi 25.5 μH Cp 0.64 μF -50

Rpi 32 mȍ Rsi 31 mȍ Cs 0.66 μF 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Lpc 25 μH Lsc 24 μH k 0.25 100
50
pc
pc

Rpc 30 mȍ Rsc 29 mȍ f 40 kHz 0 (c)

5I
V

Ferrite Si Power Stranded copper -50

Core MOSFET Wires
I93/28/16 IXFB110N60P3 H07V-K 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Capacitor Ceramic Driver FAN7391 Sensors Hall effect 50
sc
sc

Battery Li-ion Polymer (PL-1055275-14STM) Air-gap 150 mm 0 (d)

5I
V

-50
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
A. Experimental Verification for BIWPT System Model. Time (msec)
The simulated and experimental prototype were analyzed Fig. 7: Tested and simulated system performance under full supply voltages
during the charging operation (G2V) and the results are for V2G operation (Į=ȕ=180o, į=90o) (a) primary inverter, (b) secondary
inverter, (c) primary coil, and (d) secondary coil.
shown in Fig. 6. The system was adjusted to supply the full

4
 The abovementioned two scenarios verify the capability
of the model to achieve the bidirectional power flow
operation (charge and discharge). Another test has been done
to validate the system ability to change the magnitude of
power flow. In this test, the system is charging the battery
with less power level than the first scenario. The small power
level is obtained by changing the phase shift between two
inverters legs for both the primary and secondary inverters.
The used control parameters in this case are Į=ȕ=90o, į=-90o,
and the results are shown in Fig. 8. As can be observed, the
two inverters generate quasi-square wave voltage with zero
level appears. This zero level reduces the root mean square
voltage and current value, and the power as well. In general,
the results shows good agreement between the Simulink
model and the experimental prototype.
discharging (V2G) to charging (G2V) operation at 0.06 sec.
The controller changes the angle į from 90o to -90o (see Fig.
10(a)). As a result of į variation, the power flow is reversed
from positive to negative following the new reference. The
system stays working in Mode III the rest of the time with
different power level. The inverter secondary voltage
variations are due to the control actions, are indicated in Fig.
10(c) and (d). During the entire period of operation, the
controller succeeded to follow the reference value and the
system was capable of transferring the required power. It
shows fast transient response with accurate steady state
performance.
Mode I Mode II
200
δ β =α

o
Angle
100 (a)

VExp. VSim. I Exp. I Sim. 0

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
50 150
pi

Ps(W)
pi

0 100
10I

(a) (b)
V

-50 50 actual reference

0
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
50 50

Vsi(V)
si

(c)
si

0 0
10I

(b)
V

-50 -50
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
100 Time (sec) (d)
50 50 50
50
pc

0
pc

0 0
0 (c)
5I
V

-50 -50 -50

-50
0.04 0.04 0.0802 0.1201 0.1203
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Figure 9: Control performance during Mode I and II, (a) control parameters,
50 (b) secondary power, (c) secondary voltage, and (d) zoomed secondary
sc
sc

0 (d) voltage.
5I
V

-50
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 Mode II Mode III
Time (msec) 200
o

Fig. 8: Tested and simulated system performance under full supply voltages 100
Angle

(a)
for G2V operation (Į=ȕ=90o, į=-90o) (a) primary inverter, (b) secondary 0
δ β =α

inverter, (c) primary coil, and (d) secondary coil.

-100
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
50
B. Simulation Results for the Proposed Control. 0 actual reference
Ps(W)

-50 (b)
After verifying the system model, the proposed PAPF -100
-150
control is implemented and tested in this section. The 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
controller performance under Mode I and II are indicated in 50
Vsi(V)

Fig. 9. The figure shows the transition from the “Abstain” to 0 (c)
the “Discharge” mode at 0.04 sec. During Mode I, all the -50
control parameters were set to zero and no power flow occurs. 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Time (sec)
After applying Mode II (Discharge), į was adjusted to 90o to 50
(d)
50 50
achieve V2G operation, and Į and ȕ were set to match with 0 0 0
the desired power (Pref), as shown in Fig. 9(a) and (b). At 0.08 -50 -50 -50
0.06 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.1399 0.14 0.14
sec., Pref exceeds the power limits, thus the controller adjusts
Į and ȕ to 180o to provide the maximum available power. Figure 10: Control performance during Mode II and III, (a) control
parameters, (b) secondary power, (c) secondary voltage, and (d) zoomed
Then, at 0.12 sec. the required power decreased and the secondary voltage.
control system follows the new value. During these
transitions of power flow, the variation of Vsi can be noticed V. CONCLUSION
in Fig. 9(c) and (d).
The performance of the proposed controller during the A simple vehicle side predictive active power flow
transition from Mode II to Mode III, is investigated in Fig. 10. controller for BIWPT system in V2G applications is proposed
In this test, the controller switches the system from in this paper. The controller is suitable for stationary and

5
quasi-dynamic interaction between EV and the power grid.
The mathematical model that is used to predict the control
parameters is derived and verified. Three modes of control are
provided for the EV’s owner to choose between them. The
proposed controller considers the misalignment effect by
adaptively estimating the system mutual inductance. A
BIWPT system model driven by the proposed controller is
built and analyzed by simulation and experimental tests. The
controller shows accurate and fast performance during both
the transient and steady state operation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Part of the effort involved in this work was partially
supported by scholarship supported from Cultural Affairs and
Missions Sector, Egypt, for doctoral student; Mr. Ahmed A.
S. Mohamed.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] S. Li and C. C. Mi, “Wireless Power Transfer for Electric
Vehicle Applications,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power
Electron., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 4–17, Mar. 2015.
[2] G. A. Covic and J. T. Boys, “Modern Trends in Inductive
Power Transfer for Transportation Applications,” IEEE J.
Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 28–41,
Mar. 2013.
[3] R. Bosshard, U. Badstubner, J. W. Kolar, and I. Stevanovic,
“Comparative evaluation of control methods for Inductive
Power Transfer,” in 2012 International Conference on
Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA),
2012, pp. 1–6.
[4] F. Turki and U. Reker, “Further design approaches of the
standardization: Inductive charging of electric vehicles,” in
Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), 2012 2nd
International, 2012, pp. 1–6.
[5] J.-Y. Lee and B.-M. Han, “A Bidirectional Wireless Power
Transfer EV Charger Using Self-Resonant PWM,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1784–1787, Apr.
2015.
[6] K. Thirugnanam, T. P. E. R. Joy, M. Singh, and P. Kumar,
“Modeling and Control of Contactless Based Smart Charging
Station in V2G Scenario,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5,
no. 1, pp. 337–348, Jan. 2014.
[7] M. Bojarski, K. K. Kutty, D. Czarkowski, and F. De Leon,
“Multiphase resonant inverters for bidirectional wireless
power transfer,” in Electric Vehicle Conference (IEVC),
2014 IEEE International, 2014, pp. 1–7.
[8] L. Zhao, D. J. Thrimawithana, and U. K. Madawala, “A
hybrid bi-directional IPT system with improved spatial
tolerance,” in Future Energy Electronics Conference
(IFEEC), 2015 IEEE 2nd International, 2015, pp. 1–6.
[9] M. J. Neath, U. K. Madawala, and D. J. Thrimawithana, “A
new controller for bi-directional inductive power transfer
systems,” in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on
Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2011, pp. 1951–1956.
[10] U. K. Madawala, M. Neath, and D. J. Thrimawithana, “A
Power #x2013;Frequency Controller for Bidirectional
Inductive Power Transfer Systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 310–317, Jan. 2013.
[11] M. J. Neath, A. K. Swain, U. K. Madawala, and D. J.
Thrimawithana, “An Optimal PID Controller for a
Bidirectional Inductive Power Transfer System Using
Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 1523–1531, Mar. 2014.
[12] G. J. Klir and B. Yuan, Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory
and Applications, 1st edition. Upper Saddle River, N.J:
Prentice Hall, 1995.
[13] A. A. S. Mohamed, A. Berzoy, and O. Mohammed, “Power
Flow Modeling of Wireless Power Transfer for EVs
Charging and Discharging in V2G Applications,” in 2015
IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC),
2015, pp. 1–6.
[14] A. A. S. Mohamed, F. G. N. de Almeida, and O. Mohammed,
“Harmonics-based steady-state mathematical model of
bidirectional inductive wireless power transfer system in
V2G applications,” in 2016 IEEE Transportation
Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC), 2016, pp. 1–6.
[15] A. A. S. Mohamed, D. Allen, T. Youssef, and O.
Mohammed, “Optimal design of high frequency H-bridge
inverter for wireless power transfer systems in EV
applications,” in 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference
on Environment and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC), 2016,
pp. 1–6.
[16] “J2954A (WIP) Wireless Power Transfer for Light-Duty
Plug-In/ Electric Vehicles and Alignment Methodology -
SAE International.” [Online]. Available:
http://standards.sae.org/wip/j2954/. [Accessed: 10-Jul-
2016].
[17] M. Budhia, G. A. Covic, and J. T. Boys, “Design and
Optimization of Circular Magnetic Structures for Lumped
Inductive Power Transfer Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 3096–3108, Nov. 2011.
[18] A. A. S. Mohamed, A. Berzoy, and O. Mohammed,
“Experimental Validation of Comprehensive Steady-state
Analytical Model of Bidirectional WPT System in EVs
Applications,” accepted for publication in IEEE Trans. Veh.
Technol.
[19] C. H. Ou, H. Liang, and W. Zhuang, “Investigating Wireless
Charging and Mobility of Electric Vehicles on Electricity
Market,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 5, pp.
3123–3133, May 2015.