See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/371469371

Modeling and Controller Design for Real-time Energy Management in

Battery/SC Electric Vehicles

Conference Paper · June 2023

DOI: 10.1109/VTC2023-Spring57618.2023.10199413

CITATIONS READS

0 58

5 authors, including:

Mohammad Rezaei Larijani Shahin Hedayati Kia

Sharif University of Technology Université de Picardie Jules Verne
5 PUBLICATIONS 15 CITATIONS 73 PUBLICATIONS 2,744 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ahmed El hajjaji
Université de Picardie Jules Verne
559 PUBLICATIONS 5,897 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Rezaei Larijani on 01 October 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Modeling and Controller Design of Battery/SC
Electric Vehicles for Real-time Energy Management
Morteza Rezaei Larijani1,2, Shahin Hedayati Kia1, MohammadReza Zolghadri2, Ahmed El Hajjaji1, and Amir Taghavipour3
1 MIS Lab. (UR4290), University of Picardie “Jules Verne”, 33 rue St Leu 80039, Amiens, France

2 Department of Electrical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

3 Mechanical Engineering Department, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

2023 IEEE 97th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023-Spring) | 979-8-3503-1114-3/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/VTC2023-Spring57618.2023.10199413

m.rezaei@u-picardie.fr, shdkia@u-picardie.fr, zolghadr@sharif.edu, hajjaji@u-picardie.fr, taghavi@kntu.ac.ir

Abstract—This paper deals with a straightforward
procedure for modeling and controller design of an electric
vehicle with a fully-active hybrid energy storage system
comprising the battery and supercapacitor for real-time energy
management. Firstly, the dynamic models of the energy storage
systems, the average model of bi-directional dc-dc converters,
the static model of the electric motor, and the vehicle dynamics
are obtained. Then, a classical low-pass filter is employed as a
supervisory control to define the reference signals of the low-
level controllers, which aim to regulate the input currents of the
bi-directional dc-dc converters. Besides, the dc-dc converters
efficiency factor, depending on the converter power flow
direction and operating point, is considered in the electric
vehicle model. Next, the obtained model is validated using the
FTP-75 drive cycle by comparing the results with an electric
vehicle of the commercial CarSim software. Finally, the
developed EV model is implemented in dSPACE using a recent
WLTC drive cycle to verify its performance in a real-time
digital simulator. The obtained results demonstrate the
effectiveness of the proposed modeling approach for real-time
energy management in battery/SC electric vehicles.
Keywords—Batteries, control systems, current control, dc-dc
power converters, electric vehicles, energy management, low-pass
filters, modeling, real-time systems, supercapacitors.
I. INTRODUCTION
The enormous potential for reducing the emission of
greenhouse gases, the restriction on fossil fuels, and
increasing vehicle efficiency, make the automotive industry
put more emphasis on developing electric vehicles (EVs)
with pure electric energy storage systems. Compared to
conventional vehicles, EVs have more well-to-wheel
efficiency and produce less noise, which makes them
acceptable alternatives to conventional vehicles [1]. Due to
the battery high energy density, and the supercapacitor (SC)
high power density, the combination of battery and SC is a
promising solution for providing a longer driving range and
extending the battery lifetime [2]. The effectiveness of this
hybridization depends on two factors: the configuration of the
energy storage system and the employed control strategy.
The configuration of the energy storages, battery, and SC
packs, is provided using a fully-active topology as shown in
Fig. 1. This topology offers greater flexibility in the power
splitting and provides more degrees of freedom in controlling
the bi-directional dc-dc converters [3]. The output of the
converters is linked to a common dc-link bus whose voltage is
maintained constant by a voltage controller owing to its
connection to the inverter input. In the fully-active topology,
both SC and battery pack currents can be controlled in charge
and discharge modes independently. As compared to an SC
semi-active topology, the battery pack has lower voltage and
smaller resistance, which helps minimize power loss.
One of the main purposes of hybridization is to extend the
battery lifetime, which can be evaluated by measuring the
root-mean-square (RMS) of the battery current at the end of
the drive cycle. Thus, the EV model needs to be as accurate as
possible. The battery, SC, and bi-directional dc-dc converters
are of great importance. However, most studies that employed
an energy management strategy used only the static first-order
internal resistance models for these storage systems, and the
dc-dc converter efficiency factor is not considered or is set to
a fixed value [4]–[6]. While the battery dynamic model not
only provides more accurate results than the static one, but
also it can be implemented in a real-time digital simulator
(RTDS) [7]. The converter efficiency plays a pivotal role in
precisely computing the low-level controller's reference
currents, which needs to be considered in the EV model, and
omitting it may lead to inadequate energy management [8].
In this paper, a straightforward procedure for modeling
and controller design in a battery/SC EV is proposed to
achieve credible results. Initially, the battery and SC packs
dynamic models are obtained through their respective
dynamic RC equivalent circuits. Then, the average model of
the bi-directional dc-dc converter is developed by
considering its efficiency factor according to its power flow
direction and operating point. Next, the static model of the
electric motor (EM) and drive, and the vehicle dynamics are
included in the EV model. A classic low-pass filter is used as
a supervisory control strategy to split the power between the
battery and SC packs. The proposed EV model can be
implemented in RTDS and is useful for analyzing advanced
real-time energy management strategies as well. The
organization of this paper is as follows. Section II deals with
the dynamic modeling of battery and SC packs, and the
average modeling of bi-directional dc-dc converters in the
fully-active topology. Section III presents the low-level
controller design and supervisory control strategy. In Section
IV, the vehicle dynamics and EM model are described. In
Section V, the commercial CarSim has been used for
evaluating the obtained EV model based on the FTP-75 drive
Fig. 1. Schematic of the battery/SC EV in the fully-active topology.

979-8-3503-1114-3/23/$31.00
Authorized licensed use limited©2023 IEEE Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
to: Universite

Fig. 2. Battery (a) cell equivalent circuit. (b) pack block diagram [9].
cycle. In Section VI, the battery/SC EV model is
implemented in the RTDS and tested by the recent WLTC
drive cycle. The obtained results of digital offline simulation
SC energy in discharge and charge modes in acceleration and
braking stages [12], [13]. The block diagram of the SC pack
model used for digital simulation is shown in Fig. 3.b.
Parameters of the SC cell model are extracted from [14] and
listed in Table II, in which np and ns, are the numbers of
parallel and series SC cells, respectively. The stored energy
and the weight of one SC cell are 3.04 Wh and 0.51 kg.
C. Bi-directional dc-dc converter model and efficiency
1) Converter average model
The schematic diagram of the bi-directional dc-dc

input voltage and the subscribe ∈ ,

(DoS) and digital real-time simulation (DRTS) illustrate the
efficacy of the proposed modeling approach for real-time
energy management purposes.
II. ENERGY STORAGE AND DC-DC CONVERTER MODELING
A. Battery pack dynamic model
The battery pack consists of several battery cells
connected in series and parallel. The RC equivalent circuit
model, shown in Fig. 2.a, is used for the dynamic modeling
of each battery cell. The battery pack current, Ib, and terminal
voltage, Vb, are computed by
converter switching circuit is shown in Fig. 4, where is the
can be either the
battery pack terminal voltage, , or the SC pack voltage, .
The output voltage, , is the dc-link voltage. The inductor
is modeled as an ideal inductance L in series with , and the
parasitic elements of the switching elements are taken into
account. The switching elements network of the converter is
modeled using the averaged switched modeling technique
[15]. In Boost mode, the switch network equation can be
described by (3) and (4).
0,
, ′
(3)

0,
(1)

, ′
(2) (4)

where is the duty cycle and " 1 $ ,

where Np and Ns are the numbers of parallel and series battery
cells, and vb and ib are the battery cell terminal voltage and and are
the discharge current, respectively. The block diagram of the independent inputs of the switch network, and is the
battery pack model is shown in Fig. 2.b. After computing the switching period. The average value of dependent inputs,
and , over can be represented by
〈 〉 '( ′ 〈 〉 '(
state-of-charge (SoC) of each battery cell according to its
current and initial SoC (SoC0), the battery cell model (5)
〈 〉 '( ′ 〈 〉 '(
parameters and the terminal voltage are determined, and
finally, the battery pack voltage is computed by (2). The (6)
detailed procedure for the modeling of the battery cell is
By doing so, the switching harmonics are eliminated, but the
given in [9]. The battery cell parameters used in this article
resulting equations still describe a large-signal and nonlinear
are listed in Table I. Qb and Vn are the battery cell rated
model of the switch network. For the small signal model, the
capacity and rated voltage, respectively, and Eb and mb are
is ) * ~ where ) and ~ are
equations are perturbed and linearized around a quiescent
the battery cell gravimetric energy density and weight.
operating point. Thus,
B. SC pack dynamic model the dc and ac low-frequency components of the duty cycle,
SCs have a high power density, and it is necessary to respectively. In this regard, the averaged switch network can
develop a model that can accurately represent their dynamic be represented by (7) and (8).
behavior during fast discharge and charge. There are several * ~
)′ $ ~
* ~
(7)
* ~
)′ $ ~
* ~
models available for SCs, including the first-order model, RC
transmission line, Zubeita model, and Franda model, among (8)
which Franda model with two RC branches in parallel with where term )" * ~ and )′ * ~ are considered by a
one variable capacitor is suitable for simulating the dynamic transformer whose primary winding is )" 1 $ ) , and
~
behavior of the SC in EV applications [10]–[12]. As shown and ~ , related to the controller effect, are
in Fig. 3.a, the RC equivalent circuit model of an SC cell has represented by independent voltage and current sources. As a
one variable capacitor, cv, whose value is proportional to its result, the dc/ac small signal model of the converter is derived
voltage. Capacitor cv has an active role in the evolution of the

Fig. 3. SC (a) cell equivalent circuit. (b) pack block diagram [12]. Fig. 4. Circuit schematic of the bi-directional dc-dc converter.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 5. Small-signal averaged circuit model of the dc-dc converter.
by replacing the average model of the switch network with
the corresponding small-signal model shown in Fig. 5. The
ac small signal can be employed for designing the low-level
controller, while the dc-dc converter can be digitally
simulated using the dc average model.
2) Dynamic efficiency factor computation
The dc-dc converter efficiency factor is computed for
both Boost (discharge) and Buck (charge) modes in this part.
• Discharge mode efficiency factor (Ix ≥ 0)
Fig. 7. Inner control loop scheme for the inductor current.
III. LOW-LEVEL CONTROLLERS DESIGN AND SUPERVISORY
CONTROL STRATEGY
A. Low-level controllers design for the dc-dc converters
Proportional-integral (PI) controllers are designed as low-
level controllers for the switching dc-dc converter based on
its small-signal averaged model.
1) PI current controller design for the inner control loop
The inner-current control loop, as shown in Fig. 7, aims

inductor reference current, ∗ , which is determined by the

to adjust of the dc-dc converter based on the desired

supervisory control strategy. Y Z is the transfer function of the

In discharge mode (Fig. 6.a), only switch S1 and diode D2
are active, and the steady-state dc equivalent circuit equations
that account for the switching loss can be written as [15] PI controller, where kpc and kic are the proportional and
0 $ $ ),-. $ )" ,/ $ )" / $ )" (9) integral gains, respectively. The control-to-output transfer

0 $ * )" $ $
01 21
function, Gid, can be obtained using the small-signal circuit
" shown in Fig. 5 when all other inputs except ~ are zero.
'( '(
(10)
Z8~
YZ
4D
where ,-. is the on-state resistance of the switch S1 when it ~ AB @
(13)

, and ~ is the ac
conducts, and RD2 and the voltage source VD2 are the diode D2
model as it conducts, tr, and Qr are the diode reverse recovery where is the dc-link voltage,

efficiency factor 3 , discharge mode, can be computed by method in the open-loop control system, Y- .
time and recovered charge, respectively. Hence, the component of . kic is obtained by the pole-zero cancellation

^
@^ _6
(11).
Y- ] `
456 [\6 \6
456 789
3 : $E 1* FG
456 48 ; <=>? @AB 78 0 21 1
@ B
(14)
B
48 78 48 456 @ <CD ;<=>? 78 @4CD '( '( 78
(11)
aZ ⁄b a (15)
• Charge mode efficiency factor (Ix < 0)
Thus, the closed-loop transfer function, d , can be given by
In charge mode (Fig. 6.b), only switch S2 and D1 are
e=\6

equations are obtained, and the efficiency factor 3 H , charge

d
active. Using the same methodology, the buck converter dc
@e=\6 B
J @ R
(16)
K56 ^\6
mode, can be computed by (12).

not cover the switching frequency, f g . Hence, the cutoff

The inner-current control loop should be both fast enough and

3 I W
48 78 48
H 456 789 456 K8 LKC? MNOC? L1B PQ8 S U frequency of the closed-loop current control system, f h0 , is
R@E 1 @ |Q1 |F
selected as 0.1 times f g . Thus, kpc can be computed by (17).
(12)
J
K56 LKC? LNO=>D MOC?PQ8 T( T( 8

where ,-. is the switch S2 on-state resistance, and RD1 and a ⁄b 2jf h0 (17)
VD1 are the resistance and the voltage source of diode D1,
respectively. Both efficiency factors are stored in the 2) PI voltage controller design for outer control loop
respective lookup tables. The voltage controller maintains by adjusting the dc-
link current, , and acts as the outer control loop. Since the
inner-current control loop is faster than the outer-voltage
control loop, it is not considered in the design of the PI

8, where Y k and YkZ are the transfer functions of the PI

voltage controller. The voltage control loop is shown in Fig.

controller and the dc-link, respectively. The transfer function

for the dc-link is given by (18).
Gvi(s)=1/ Cs (18)
where C is the dc-link capacitance. Thus, the closed-loop
transfer function of the voltage control, dk , can be obtained
Fig. 6. Equivalent circuit schematic. (a) Discharge mode (Boost). (b) by (19), which has two poles, l and l , as the roots of the
Charge mode (Buck).
denominator of dk .

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IV. VEHICLE AND ELECTRIC DRIVE MODELLING
A. Vehicle dynamics
Given Newton’s second law, the vehicle dynamics can be
described in the longitudinal direction by (26).

~•4 E F €0 $ N€v * €• * €AA P

0 4
Fig. 8. Outer control loop scheme for the dc-link bus voltage. (26)

where 4 is the vehicle's longitudinal speed, and €0 is the

^
e=\m [\m J @ _m R
^\m
dk @e=\m n D @[\m @[_m
(19) total tractive force. €v , €• , and €AA are the aerodynamic drag
where Y- k is the open-loop transfer function of the voltage
respectively. •4 is the vehicle mass, and ~ is the vehicle
force, grading resistance force, and rolling resistance force,
control system, and a k and aZk denote the PI voltage
Hence, the equivalent vehicle mass at the wheel side, ~•4 ,
mass factor which considers the rotating parts of the EV.

dk has a pair of real poles and one of them, l , contributes

controller proportional and integral gains. It is assumed that

to a faster system response as compared to the other pole, l .

can be determined by (27).

To do so, l is set to 10 times l [16]. Further, since the ~•4 •4 * „N…†‡ * …• PN •P * 4…gH ‰
A‚ƒ D
(27)

where …†‡ and …• are the inertia of the EM and the gearbox,
voltage controller response must be slower than the current

control system, f kh0 , is set to 0.1 times f h0 . By specifying

controller, the cutoff frequency of the closed-loop voltage
whose gear ratio, • , is constant. The parameters used in this
f kh0 , it is possible to define the fast pole, l $2jf kh0 , and article are listed in Table III. Resistances forces of €v , €• , and
subsequently obtain l . Thus, aZk and a k can be defined as €AA can be described by (28).
aZk ol l o × N0.1 2jf kh0 P 2jf kh0 (20) €v 0.5Œv •Ž 4 * •

a $o l * l o × 2j 0.1f kh0 * f kh0 Š €• •4 g ‘ ’

k
€AA •4 g A cos ’
(21) (28)

where Œv is the air density, • is the wind speed in the

B. Supervisory control strategy
A filter-based strategy, whose bandwidth is r h0 in rad/s,
is used to define the output currents, " and " , of the dc-dc opposite direction of the vehicle motion, •Ž is the frontal

and ’ is the road slop angle. The total tractive force on the
area, is the drag factor, g is the gravitational acceleration,
pack, a coefficient s ∈ [0, 1] is introduced. The factor s ,
converter (Fig. 9). To prevent complete discharge of the SC
driven wheels is described by (29).
1, ˜†‡ ≥ 0
which depends on the state-of-voltage (SoV) of the SC and
€0 30 • †‡ ⁄ gH , —
–
$1, ˜†‡ < 0
the power flow direction, is utilized to ensure that the SoV of
the SC remains within its lower and upper bounds. The filter- (29)

too. However, in this paper, s is developed as a second order where 30 is the total transmission efficiency, including
based strategy presented in [17] considers the SoV boundary

curve with a common balance point (SoV=0.75) in both gearbox and differential, and †‡ and ˜†‡ are the
discharge and charge situations. By doing so, " decrease mechanical torque and electrical power of the EM,

€0 is always less than the maximum tire friction force.

respectively. Tire slip is negligible due to the assumption that
the linear s. Further, it provides a better opportunity to charge
more slowly as SoV approaches 0.5 or 1, in comparison to

the battery. After computing " by (22), " is given by (23). B. EM and drive
"
s 0Av * 1$s wx
(22) The electric drive comprises a three-phase inverter,
"
$ "
controller, and an EM, which is a three-phase PMSM in this
0Av (23)
, which is either the reference current of the battery pack,
work. For energy management purposes, a static model with
∗ an efficiency map, which has a maximum error of 3% as
∗
, or the SC pack, ∗ , can be defined as (24) compared to the dynamic model, is suitable for modeling the
z $1, ≥0
electric drive [18]. The inverter has a constant efficiency,
∗ " 456
N3 -._ P , { , ∈ ,
1, <0 angular speed, rA , and †‡ . The EM control is based on its
while the EM efficiency factor, in contrast, depends on its
48
(24)

where " and 3 -._ are the output current and the efficiency
torque. The EM operates in a constant torque zone when rA
torque control which should be less than the permissible

is below the rated speed, r. , and it operates in the constant

of the dc-dc converter (the battery or SC side), given by (25).
3 , ≥0 power zone when rA is greater than r. . Knowing that the
3 , ∈ ,
-._
3H, <0
(25)
braking torque is a negative value, †‡ can be given by (30)
™v
, rA < r.
| †‡ |
†‡
r. ™v ⁄rA , rA > r.
(30)
†‡
™v
where †‡
power of EM, ˜†‡ , can be determined by (31).
is the maximum torque of EM. The electrical

–
˜†‡ †‡ rA N3†‡ rA , †‡ P
Fig. 9. Supervisory control strategy based on filtering and s.
(31)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
where 3†‡ is the EM efficiency factor, and — 1 when EM illustrate the EM angular speed in rpm, ‘A 60⁄2j rA ,
operates as a generator, and — $1 when it operates in and the mechanical torque in Simulink and CarSim. These

computed by (21), where 3Z.k is the inverter efficiency.

motor mode. Hence, the inverter input current can be figures show close similarities, even though the tire slip is
neglected. Fig. 12 presents the EM electrical power in both
˜†‡ 3Z.k –
/
the EV model and CarSim, which is crucial for computing the
Z.k (32) inverter current. The EM electrical power is always less than
V. VALIDATION AND COMPARISON WITH CARSIM EM rated power of 40 kW, and both figures show similar
results.
In this section, the DoS results of the EV model are
validated by comparing them with the results obtained from VI. EXPERIMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION IN RTDS
the EV model in the commercial software CarSim. The The developed EV model, including the battery and the
selected vehicle is a B-class hatchback electric RWD which SC packs dynamic models, has been implemented in the
follows the FTP-75 drive cycle in the commercial CarSim, RTDS, as shown in Fig. 13. The RTDS is based on dSPACE
where the battery is the only energy storage. Figs. 10 and 11 SCALEXIO 9HE with an Intel Xeon E4-1275 V3 CPU. The
reference speed, 4∗ , is based on WLTC Class 2 (Fig. 14),
4000
Simulink developed by the United Nations Economic Commission for

The EV parameters are listed in Table III, and r =0.01 rad/s

3000 CarSim
Europe (UNECE), and includes the extra high-speed phase.
n r [rpm]

and r =0.1 rad/s are selected for the low-pass filter cutoff
2000

1000

0 angular frequency. The SC and battery pack energies are

0 200 400 600
Time [s]
800 1000 1200 1400
0.304 kWh and 28.01 kWh, respectively. The electric power
of the inverter (Pinv), battery (Pb), and SC packs (Psc) are
˜Z.k
2000

Z.k
Simulink
CarSim (33)
˜
n r [rpm]

1500
(34)
˜ (35)
1000
800 810 820 830 840 850 860 870 880 890 900
Time [s] The battery pack current fluctuation is analyzed using its
RMS current at the end of the drive cycle (T=1800 s) by (36).
Fig. 10. Angular speed of the EM in the EV model and Carsim.
• žŸ N P
A™ '
'
(36)

r h0 , (r and r ). The higher the filter cutoff frequency, the

The electric powers are shown in Figs. 15 and 16 for two
T EM [N.m]

greater the fluctuation that occurs in the battery's power. Figs.

Increasing r h0 , leads to an increase in the battery pack’s

17.a and 17.b show the battery pack current and its RMS.

current fluctuation, whether the battery pack is being

discharged or charged. Conversely, decreasing the filter
cutoff frequency reduces the battery pack’s current
T EM [N.m]

fluctuation, but prevents the battery pack from being charged.

Fig. 11. EM mechanical torque in the EV model and CarSim.

PEM [kW]

Fig. 13. Block diagram of the EV model implemented in the RTDS.

PEM [kW]

V*V [km/h]

Fig. 12. EM electrical power in the EV model and CarSim. Fig. 14. Reference speed based on the WLTC class 2 drive cycle.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE I
Specification of the battery cell
Power [kW]

Qb(Ah) Vn (V) Eb(Wh/kg) mb(g) Ns Np

3.25 3.6 251 46.5 80 30

TABLE II
Parameters of the equivalent circuit dynamic model of the SC cell

r1(mΩ) r2(Ω) c1(F) c2(F) k(F/V) ns np

Power [kW]

0.36 1.92 2100 172 623 100 1

TABLE III
EV electrical and mechanical specifications for DoS and RTDS
Fig. 15. Electric power of the inverter, battery, and SC packs at r . Parameters Symbol Value
EV equivalent mass δM V 1642 kg
Power [kW]

frontal area× drag factor Af Cd 0.63 m²

rolling resistance factor Cr 0.008
Mechanical wheel radius rwh 0.287 m
gear ratio Ng 3.905
gear inertia Jg 1 kg.m²
Power [kW]

wheel inertia Jwh 0.8 kg.m²

transmission efficiency ηt 0.98
EM inertia JEM 0.0226kg.m²

Fig. 16. Electric power of the inverter, battery, and SC packs at r . EM nominal speed nn 500 rpm
™v
EM maximum torque †‡ 305 N.m
EM maximum power ˜†‡
™v 40 kW
dc-link bus voltage Vdc 400 V
converter inductance L 2 mH
inductance resistance rL 0.01 Ω
Electrical

MOSFETs on-resistance Ron1,2 0.02 Ω

recovered charge Qr 2 µCoul
reverse recovery time tr 50 ns
kpc 0.031
gains of PI

at r and r .
kic 0.157
A™
current/voltage
Fig. 17. (a) Battery pack current . (b) controllers, given
A™
for r and r , and battery-only are 29.41 Amp, 31.68
kpv 2.765
fsw=10kHz
Amp, and 36.1 Amp, respectively. For r h0 r there is
kiv 157.91

r h0 r .
more energy loss, reducing the battery life as compared to simulation time-step ts 1 ms

Reducing r h0 results in a reduction of the battery RMS

the value of r h0 is small, the SC pack is charged and
current and an increase in the SoV, as shown in Fig. 18. When
discharged more frequently due to the smoother provided
To emphasize the significance of converter efficiency, the
battery pack current, , is computed for a fixed efficiency
value and compared with the current obtained using the

obtained at r is 18.01%, which highlights the critical role of

by the low-pass filter. In addition, the SoV is always dynamic efficiency, as shown in Fig. 19. The maximum error

effectiveness of using the factor s.

maintained between 0.5 and 1, which validates the
the converter efficiency factor.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 [3] Q. Zhang and G. Li, “Experimental Study on a Semi-Active Battery-
1 Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage System for Electric Vehicle
Application,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1014–
0.9
1021, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2019.2912425.
0.8
[4] B.-H. Nguyen, R. German, J. P. F. Trovão, and A. Bouscayrol,
0.7 “Real-Time Energy Management of Battery/Supercapacitor Electric
0.6 1
=0.01 Vehicles Based on an Adaptation of Pontryagin’s Minimum
0.5
2
=0.1 Principle,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 203–212,
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2018.2881057.
Time [s] [5] A. Florescu, A. I. Bratcu, I. Munteanu, A. Rumeau, and S. Bacha,
“LQG Optimal Control Applied to On-Board Energy Management
System of All-Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst.
0.8 Technol., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1427–1439, Jul. 2015, doi:
0.7
10.1109/TCST.2014.2372472.
[6] A. Kachhwaha et al., “Design and Performance Analysis of Hybrid
0.6 Battery and Ultracapacitor Energy Storage System for Electrical
Vehicle Active Power Management,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 2,
0.5 p. 776, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14020776.
600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700
[7] M. Rezaei Larijani, M. Zolghadri, S. Hedayati Kia, and A. El Hajjaji,

Fig. 18. SoV of the SC at r and r .

Time [s]
“Performance Analysis of the Lithium-ion Battery RC Equivalent
Circuit Model Using EPA Drive Cycles,” in 2022 13th Power
Electronics, Drive Systems, and Technologies Conference
(PEDSTC), Tehran, Iran: IEEE, Feb. 2022, pp. 393–397. doi:
10.1109/PEDSTC53976.2022.9767430.
[8] C. Wang, R. Xiong, H. He, X. Ding, and W. Shen, “Efficiency
analysis of a bidirectional DC/DC converter in a hybrid energy
I b [Amp]

storage system for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” Appl. Energy,

vol. 183, pp. 612–622, Dec. 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.178.
[9] M. Rezaei Larijani, M. Zolghadri, S. Hedayati Kia, and A. El Hajjaji,
“Battery Cell Dynamic Modeling Using the RC Equivalent Circuit
for RTDS Frameworks,” in IECON 2021 – 47th Annual Conference
of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Toronto, ON, Canada:
IEEE, Oct. 2021, pp. 1–6. doi:
Ib rms [Amp]

10.1109/IECON48115.2021.9589552.
[10] A. Singh, “Ultracapacitor characterization using a novel dynamic
parameter identification modeling technique for electric
transportation applications,” Master Thesis, Ontario Tech
University, Ontario, Canada, 2015.
[11] F. Naseri, E. Farjah, T. Ghanbari, Z. Kazemi, E. Schaltz, and J.
Schanen, “Online Parameter Estimation for Supercapacitor State-of-
Energy and State-of-Health Determination in Vehicular

considering both dynamic and fixed efficiency factors (r h0 = r ).

Fig. 19. Battery pack current for the bi-directional dc-dc converter Applications,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 67, no. 9, pp. 7963–
7972, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2019.2941151.
[12] R. Faranda, M. Gallina, and D. T. Son, “A new simplified model of
VII. CONCLUSION Double-Layer Capacitors,” in 2007 International Conference on
Clean Electrical Power, May 2007, pp. 706–710. doi:
This paper presents a straightforward technique for 10.1109/ICCEP.2007.384288.
modeling battery/SC EVs that consider the dynamic models [13] M. B. Camara, H. Gualous, F. Gustin, and A. Berthon, “Design and
of the battery and SC packs. The bi-directional dc-dc New Control of DC/DC Converters to Share Energy Between
Supercapacitors and Batteries in Hybrid Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh.
converter efficiency is taken into account based on the power Technol., vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 2721–2735, Sep. 2008, doi:
flow direction and the operating point. The design procedure 10.1109/TVT.2008.915491.
for the current and voltage controllers is presented in detail. [14] A. Lahyani, P. Venet, A. Guermazi, and A. Troudi,
The low-level controller's reference signals are generated by “Battery/Supercapacitors Combination in Uninterruptible Power
Supply (UPS),” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28, no. 4, pp.
a low-pass filter while considering the SoV of the SC pack. 1509–1522, Apr. 2013, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2012.2210736.
The accuracy of the developed EV model is validated by [15] R. W. Erickson and D. Maksimović, Fundamentals of Power
comparing the results obtained from implementing it in the Electronics. Springer Nature, 2020.
dSPACE RTDS with a 1 ms simulation time-step with those [16] G. K. Sah, M. Schütt, and H.-G. Eckel, “Comparison of Decoupling
Techniques via Discrete Luenberger Style Observer for Voltage
obtained from the commercial CarSim software. This Oriented Control,” in 2020 22nd European Conference on Power
platform proves to be particularly useful for the development Electronics and Applications (EPE’20 ECCE Europe), Sep. 2020,
of advanced real-time energy management approaches, pp. 1–10. doi: 10.23919/EPE20ECCEEurope43536.2020.9215745.
which is one of the perspectives of this work. [17] A. Castaings, W. Lhomme, R. Trigui, and A. Bouscayrol,
“Comparison of energy management strategies of a
battery/supercapacitors system for electric vehicle under real-time
REFERENCES constraints,” Appl. Energy, vol. 163, pp. 190–200, Feb. 2016, doi:
[1] C. Mi and M. A. Masrur, Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Principles and 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.11.020.
Applications with Practical Perspectives, 2nd édition. Hoboken: [18] A. Desreveaux, M. Ruba, A. Bouscayrol, G. M. Sirbu, and C. Martis,
John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2017. “Comparisons of Models of Electric Drives for Electric Vehicles,”
[2] R. Carter, A. Cruden, and P. J. Hall, “Optimizing for Efficiency or in 2019 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC),
Battery Life in a Battery/Supercapacitor Electric Vehicle,” IEEE Oct. 2019, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/VPPC46532.2019.8952540.
Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 1526–1533, May 2012, doi:
10.1109/TVT.2012.2188551.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universite Picardie Jules Verne. Downloaded on August 17,2023 at 14:43:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

View publication stats