2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

Accurate Battery Modeling Based on Pulse Charging

using MATLAB / Simulink

Sumukh Suryaγ , Intern, Janamejaya Channegowdaδ , Member, IEEE, Shantanu D Datarδ ,

2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES) | 978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/PEDES49360.2020.9379617

Abhay Shankar Jhaδ , Ashita Victorδ

γ e-Powertrain, KPIT, Bangalore, India, sumukhsurya@gmail.com
δ Ramaiah Institute of Technology, Bangalore, bcjanmay.edu@gmail.com

Abstract—Electric Vehicles (EV) use energy storage systems
like Lithium (Li) ion battery packs to drive them. The degrada-
tion of such batteries is strongly dependent on the type of charging
and discharging patterns. Short charging time and high utilization
of battery capacity can be achieved by pulse charging. In this
paper, a Li ion battery was modeled as multiple RC pairs ranging
from one to five using MATLAB / Simulink. The RC values were
in the order of mΩ and kF respectively. The advantage of such
modeling is that the high frequency transients in the current
are captured during pulse charging. It was observed that the
battery parameters were independent of the discharge current
and ambient temperature (Tamb ) and showed dependence on
SOC.
Keywords: Battery modeling, Battery Management Sys-
tem (BMS), MATLAB / Simulink, SOC
I. I NTRODUCTION
The technological advancement in the Electric Vehicle
(EV) industry has grown exponentially in the recent years.
Lithium based batteries play a vital role as the source of power
in EVs, as they offer several advantages such as long cycle life,
high working voltage, low self-discharge rate, high specific
energy and density [1], [2]. To design an efficient Battery
Management System (BMS) for the safety of EVs, an accurate
estimation of the battery parameters such as State of Charge
(SOC), State of Function (SOF) and State of Health (SOH)
are necessary [3]. These battery parameters can be estimated
by analysing the Equivalent Circuit Models (ECMs) of the
battery. The ECM consists of Open Circuit Voltage (OCV),
internal resistance (R0 ) and n RC pairs. Research has also
been carried out to use RL pairs instead of RC pairs, as
RL pairs have lesser model parameters and thereby reduce
parameterization effort [4]. The RC pairs help in determining
the dynamic characteristics of the battery such as polarization
and diffusion [5].
ECM parameters can be estimated using several opti-
mization techniques such as Genetic Algorithm, Differential
Evolution Algorithm [6], Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
technique [1]etc. However, the effectiveness of the optimiza-
tion technique varied with order of RC pairs [2]. Since, the
aging of the battery has an impact on the model parameters,
the sensitivity of these parameters can be determined using
One Factor At a Time technique (OFAT) [2]. Once the model
parameters are estimated, an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) is
used to simultaneously estimate both the battery internal states
and time-varying model parameters in real-time [10]. SOC
can be estimated using EKF [1] and can also be determined
using ECM based techniques [11]. The number of RC pairs
required for modeling a battery varies depending on the type
of charging. Earlier studies in literature confirms that Pulse
Current (PC) Constant Voltage (CV) strategy is better suited
than Constant Current and Current Voltage (CC and CV) as
the elimination of capacity fade occurs during charging in the
latter [12]. For pulse charging the model needs five RC pairs
as the high frequency dynamics can be captured by including
these RC pairs. However, for other charging patterns, a simple
RC pair would be sufficient to replicate the battery behavior.
Using the battery model, polynomial regression model and the
Gaussian process (GP) models were proposed to compute SOC
for higher accuracy [14] . It was shown that GP regression
model generally performs much better than the polynomial
regression model. The SOC computation plays a critical role
in deciding the range of the EV. A virtual sensor for the
computation of SOC was used for a small EV with two
passenger capacity [15]. For a battery capacity of 150Ah and
OCV of 72V, SOC was computed using experimental data of
vehicle speed, pedal position and acceleration and battery bank
voltage. Thus obtained SOC was compared with that of the
2RC pair battery model. The prediction was 91.8 % accurate.
This paper aims to automate the process of estimating the
parameters, using the parallel pool optimization tool available
in MATLAB / Simulink 2018a software package. A compara-
tive analysis is carried out to study the behaviour of the model
parameters with respect to SOC for different orders of RC
pairs. The equivalent model for one RC pair and ECM are
shown in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively. R1 and C1 are called as
polarizing resistance and capacitance respectively. R0 is the
internal resistance and the hysteresis component (hyst) refers
to multiple RC pairs in parallel.
Fig. 1: One RC pair battery model [13]
II. M ETHODOLOGY
A Li ion battery of 10 Ah capacity was modeled using
MATLAB / Simulink 2018a software package. Numerical
techniques were used to estimate the battery parameters and

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on May 24,2021 at 16:47:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

experiment was 3600 s. Fig. 5 shows a comparison of estimated

Em versus the experimental data. The corresponding error was
in the order mV. Fig. 6 shows the values of five RC pairs with
corresponding time constant (τ5 ), Em at Tamb of 303 K. The
same code was run again by changing Tamb to 330 K. It was
observed that the battery parameters showed dependence on
SOC and were independent of Tamb . Similarly, results for RC
Fig. 2: Equivalent Circuit Model [13] pairs ranging from four to a single pair is provided in Fig 7,
Fig 8, Fig 9 and Fig 10 respectively.
As the SOC increased, R0 ,R1 ...R5 and the time constants
(τ =Ri Ci ) also increased. The capacitance value was in the
later used for OCV (Em ) estimation. Simulink optimization
order of kF. In reality, such value of capacitance does not exist
tool box, Parallel Computing Toolbox and Curve Fitting tool
inside the battery. The RC pair simply represents the diffusion
box were used for estimating Em and one to five RC pairs were
of Li ions within the battery. The initial approximations for
used for the ECM. A .mat file containing the experimental
the values of Em and battery parameters for n RC pairs can
pulse discharge data for Li polymer battery ranging from 0
be either provided by the user or default values of Em , Ro
to 100% SOC was pre-loaded during initialisation. The initial
and τ can be used as shown in Table 1.
estimates for Em , R0 and Tamb were manually provided. Em
waveform was divided into numerous pulses based on the time
constants (τ ). Later, variations in voltage is observed based on TABLE I: Default values in the estimation of ECM
pulse charging pattern. parameters
Based on user input, values of Em and R0 were estimated. Em R0 τ
Finally, the equivalent circuit models were moved from MAT- Nominal 4.1V 0.001Ω 5
LAB to Simulink environment. For the creation of parameters Min 3.4V 0.0001Ω 50
of ECM block, four main steps were followed. The blocks used
Max 4.2V 0.1Ω 200
optimization methods to find out the number of RC parallel
combinations. They helped in facilitating the initial conditions
to the battery model and the estimation of parameters by curve 4

fitting the experimental results with simulation results. The

results provided Em , values of R0 , R1 , C1 and their time
3.5
Voltage

constants of R1 C1 ...R5 C5 (τ1 ...τ5 ). Fig. 3 shows a flowchart 3

depicting the steps involved in the process of estimating Em , 2.5

R1 ,C1 ...R5 ,C5 . 10

0 5 10 15 20 25
Current (A)

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
1
SOC

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hours)

Fig. 4: Experimental data for Li Polymer Battery

4.5

3.5

2.5
data
simulation
2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
200 Time (hours)
0

-200
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
R esidual: Mean ±1.8448 mV, Max 218.8294 mV

Fig. 5: Comparison of estimated OCV with experimental data

Fig. 3: Flowchart indicating the various steps in ECM IV. C ONCLUSION

estimation Pulse charging of batteries is one of the popular fast
charging techniques which has gained prominence over the
past years. The study of performance of the battery under
III. R ESULTS pulse charging technique is the focus of this paper. Accurate
battery models for Li ion chemistry were built using MATLAB
Fig. 4 shows the pre-loaded experimental data for a Li / Simulink 2018a software package. The powertrain blockset
polymer battery. The relaxation time provided during the along with the optimization and curve fitting tools were used

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on May 24,2021 at 16:47:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

for this analysis. Battery models represented by RC pairs R EFERENCES

ranging from one to five were simulated. It was found that the [1] Lai, Xin, Shuyu Wang, Shangde Ma, Jingying Xie, and Yuejiu Zheng.
battery parameters were dependent on SOC and independent of ”Parameter sensitivity analysis and simplification of equivalent circuit
Tamb . The mean residual voltage compared to the experimental model for the state of charge of lithium-ion batteries.” Electrochimica
data was in the order of mV. With the correct initial approx- Acta 330 (2020),135239.
imation for battery parameters, the response in the parameter [2] Lai, Xin, Wenkai Gao, Yuejiu Zheng, Minggao Ouyang, Jianqiu Li,
estimation was faster. The value of R1 for one RC pair was Xuebing Han, and Long Zhou. ”A comparative study of global optimiza-
tion methods for parameter identification of different equivalent circuit
around 9 mΩ, around 2 mΩ for two RC and three RC pairs, models for Li-ion batteries.” Electrochimica Acta 295 (2019): 1057-1066.
around 1 mΩ for ECM with four RC pairs and 0.25 mΩ for [3] Zhang, Lijun, Hui Peng, Zhansheng Ning, Zhongqiang Mu, and
SOC of 100%. Hence, it was shown that as the order of RC Changyan Sun. ”Comparative research on RC equivalent circuit models
pairs increases, R1 estimation provides accurate results. for lithium-ion batteries of electric vehicles.” Applied Sciences 7, no. 10
(2017): 1002.
Em
[4] Yang, Jufeng, Yingfeng Cai, Chaofeng Pan, and Chris Mi. ”A novel
1 2 3 4 5

4
9.5

9
400 2500
10
50
resistor-inductor network-based equivalent circuit model of lithium-ion
300 2000 8 40
8.5 6
batteries under constant-voltage charging condition.” Applied Energy 254
200 1500 30
3.5 8
100 1000
4
20
(2019): 113726.
7.5 2

3
0 0.5 1
7
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
500
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
10
0 0.5 1
[5] Cen, Zhaohui, Pierre Kubiak, and Ilias Belharouak. ”Online parameter
R0
10-3
R1 R2 R3
10-3
R4 R5
estimation/tracking for Lithium-ion battery RC model.” 2016 Interna-
0.05 2 0.03 0.2 3 0.025

0.04 0.02
tional Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference (IRSEC). IEEE,
1.5 0.15
0.03
1
0.02

0.1
2
0.015 2016.
0.02 0.01

0.01
0.5
0.01
0.05
1
0.005
[6] Sangwan, Venu, Avinash Sharma, Rajesh Kumar, and Akshay Kumar
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
Rathore. ”Equivalent circuit model parameters estimation of li-ion bat-
SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC
tery: C-rate, soc and temperature effects.” In 2016 IEEE International
Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES),
Fig. 6: 5RC modeling Vs. SOC showing Em , R1 ...R5 , τ1 ...τ5 pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2016.
[7] Zhang, Cheng, Kang Li, and Jing Deng. ”Real-time estimation of battery
internal temperature based on a simplified thermoelectric model.” Journal
of Power Sources 302 (2016): 146-154.
Em 1 9 3 4

4
10 3000 4000 300
[8] Zhang, Qun-Zhi, Xin-Yue Wang, and Hui-Mei Yuan. ”Estimation for
8.5 3000

8
9000
9000
900
SOC of Li-ion battery based on two-order RC temperature model.”
3.5

7.5
1000
1000
100 2018 13th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications
3
0 0.5 1
7
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
(ICIEA). IEEE, 2018.
0.03
O0
R
10-3
O1
0.15
O9
0.7
O3
0.05
O4 [9] Vyroubal, Petr, and Tom Kazda. ”Equivalent circuit model parameters
0.09
C
0.1
0.C
0.04 extraction for lithium ion batteries using electrochemical impedance
5 0.03

4
0.4
0.09
spectroscopy.” Journal of Energy Storage 15 (2018): 23-31.
0.01 0.05
0.9

0
3

9 0 0
0.01

0
[10] Zhang, Cheng, et al. ”Improved Realtime State-of-Charge Estimation
0 0.5
26 S
1 0 0.5
26 S
1 0 0.5
26 S
1 0 0.5
26 S
1 0 0.5
26 S
1
of LiFePO4 Battery Based on a Novel Thermoelectric Model.” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics 64.1 (2016): 654-663.
Fig. 7: 4 RC pair model Vs. SOC showing Em , R1 ...R4 & τ1 ...τ4 [11] Nugroho, Asep, et al. ”Battery state of charge estimation by using a
combination of coulomb counting and dynamic model with adjusted
gain.” 2015 International Conference on Sustainable Energy Engineering
and Application (ICSEEA). IEEE, 2015.
Em
11
1
800
2
3000
3
[12] Lv, Haichao, Xiankun Huang, and Yongzhong Liu. ”Analysis on pulse
4
10.5 600 2500 chargingdischarging strategies for improving capacity retention rates of
2000
3.5
10 400

1500
lithium-ion batteries.” Ionics (2020): 1-22.
9.5 200

3
0 0.5 1
9
0 0.5 1
0
0 0.5 1
1000

0 0.5 1
[13] Plett, Gregory L. Battery management systems, Volume I: Battery
R0
10-3
R1 R2 R3
modeling. Artech House, 2015.
10 0.15
0.04

0.03
0.02 [14] Z. Xi, M. Dahmardeh, B. Xia, Y. Fu and C. Mi, Learning of Battery
8 0.1
0.015

0.02 0.01
Model Bias for Effective State of Charge Estimation of Lithium-Ion
6 0.05
0.01 0.005 Batteries, in IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 68, no.
0
0 0.5
SOC
1
4
0
SOC
0.5 1
0
0 0.5
SOC
1
0
0 0.5
SOC
1 9, pp. 8613-8628, Sept. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2019.2929197.
[15] Gruosso, Giambattista, et al. A Virtual Sensor for Electric Vehicles State
Fig. 8: 3 RC pair model Vs. SOC showing Em , R1 ...R3 & τ1 ...τ3 of Charge Estimation. Electronics 9.2 (2020): 278.

Em 1 2
14 1000
89 E
4 70
13
800 1
16
12
3.5
600 14
11 m.7

12
3 10 400
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
m 13
0 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.4 E 0 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.4 E
R0 R1 R2
10-3
0.06 15 0.03
R0 RE
E0-m
E5
0.025 0.03
0.04
10 0.02
0.01 E0
0.02
0.015
0.05 4
5
0 0.01
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
SOC SOC SOC 0 3
0 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.4 E 0 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.4 E
SOC SOC

Fig. 9: 2 RC pair model Vs. SOC showing Em , R1 ,R2 & τ1 ,τ2

Fig. 10: 1 RC pair model Vs. SOC showing Em , R1 & τ1

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on May 24,2021 at 16:47:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.