IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO.

9, SEPTEMBER 2018 8009

Acceleration Speed Optimization of Intelligent EVs

in Consideration of Battery Aging
Bingzhao Gao , Lulu Guo , Qing Zheng , Bin Huang, and Hong Chen , Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—A speed optimization framework is presented to min- B Pre-exponential factor.

imize both the battery aging and the energy consumption for in- CD Coefficient of air resistance.
telligent electric vehicles (EVs) during acceleration process. To de- Crate Discharge rate.
scribe quantitatively the battery capacity loss and to optimize in
real-life driving conditions, a control-oriented battery life model f Coefficient of rolling resistance.
is derived. Then, the formulation of the speed optimization dur- i Cell battery discharge current.
ing an acceleration process is established and solved by sequential i0 Speed ratio.
quadratic programming (SQP) algorithm. Several simulations are Ib Discharge current of battery pack.
conducted in the case that an intelligent EV speeds up to the speci- L Cost function.
fied speed considering different road slopes. The results during an
acceleration process from 0 to 100 km/h within 14 s show that the m Vehicle mass.
loss of battery capacity can be reduced by 9.6% while the battery nm Motor speed.
energy consumption is merely increased by 1.6% compared with Npara Number of paralleled cells in a battery pack.
the strategy that only considers the optimal energy consumption. Pb0 Instantaneous output power of battery pack.
Index Terms—Intelligent EVs, lithium-ion battery, control- Pb Tnstantaneous power of battery pack.
oriented life model, speed optimization. Pm Instantaneous output power of motor.
Qloss Battery capacity decay rate.
Qloss Percentage of capacity loss.
NOMENCLATURE R Universal gas constant.
α Weighting factor. r Dynamic tire radius.
Āh Equivalent variable Ah-throughput. R0 Equivalent internal resistance of battery pack.
ηiv Instantaneous operating efficiency of inverter. S0 Cell battery rated capacity.
ηm Instantaneous operating efficiency of motor. T Absolute temperature.
ηt Total efficiency of transmission system. Tm Motor torque.
γ Boundary condition. u Control variable.
μ Inequality constraint. Voc Battery pack open circuit voltage.
ρ Air density. x State variable.
θ Slope. z Power law factor.
A Face area. I. INTRODUCTION
Ah Total ampere-hour throughput.
N RECENT years, environment issues such as energy

Manuscript received September 8, 2017; revised February 9, 2018 and May 8,

2018; accepted May 11, 2018. Date of publication May 25, 2018; date of current
version September 17, 2018. This work was supported in part by the National
Nature Science Foundation of China under Grants 61522307 and 61520106008,
and in part by China Automobile Industry Innovation and Development Joint
Fund under Grant U1664257. The review of this paper was coordinated by Prof.
D. Diallo. (Corresponding author: Hong Chen.)
B. Gao and Q. Zheng are with the State Key Laboratory of Automotive Sim-
ulation and Control, Jilin University (Campus NanLing), Changchun 130025,
China (e-mail:,gaobz@jlu.edu.cn; zhengqing16@mails.jlu.edu.cn).
L. Guo and H. Chen are with the State Key Laboratory of Automotive Sim-
ulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun 130021, China, and also with
the Department of Control Science and Engineering, Jilin University (Cam-
pus NanLing), Changchun 130025, China (e-mail:, guoll14@mails.jlu.edu.cn;
chenh@jlu.edu.cn).
Bin Huang is with the Department of vehicle engineering, Jilin Univer-
sity (Campus NanLing), Changchun 130025, China (e-mail:, 1522394879@
qq.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TVT.2018.2840531
I consumption, CO2 emission and intellectualization are
emphasized, which promote the development of intelligent pure
electric vehicles [1]. However, due to the limited range caused by
low energy density of battery and inadequate capacity of energy
storage, intelligent EVs don’t make a strong confidence to the
passenger for successful completion of a long trip [2]. In order to
solve this problem, several optimization works such as real-time
control and adaptive intelligent energy management system [3],
[4], switched reluctance motor drives [5], and the speed
optimization in the acceleration process of intelligent EVs have
been conducted. Speed optimization is an important technology
for intelligent vehicle which use the information technology
and control technology to make the vehicle have the automatic
recognition of road condition, automatic speed control, auto-
matic driving and other advanced functions, and it has shown
great potential, for instance, it can reduce energy consumption
and driver’s fatigue, improve vehicle safety and so on [6].

0018-9545 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8010 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

In general, the objective of speed optimization in the accelera- The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section II
tion process is to minimize the energy consumption of the power proposes a control-oriented battery life model which overcomes
source. Among various driving scenarios, comparatively high the defects of the existing battery life model that is only suit-
energy is consumed during acceleration of a speed change [7], able for specific conditions and can not be used to optimize in
and different acceleration methods also lead to different energy actual driving conditions. In Section III, the framework of the
consumption, such as, the amount of energy consumed during speed optimization is established from four aspects: the state
acceleration process is larger in case of applying a constant ac- equation, the performance function, the inequality constraint
celeration value than adopting multiple acceleration values [8], and the boundary condition. In Section IV, the algorithm for
[9]. Therefore, an optimization control method to pick an opti- solving the speed optimization is described. The effectiveness
mal acceleration trajectory for a given speed change is to adopt of a proposed control-oriented battery life model is demon-
an optimization scheme that minimizes the amount of energy strated through simulations in Section V. Finally, conclusions
consumed. Much work has been done in this field, it has pointed are provided in Section VI.
out that energy consumption is dependent on the chosen acceler-
ation value for a given speed change [10]. Acceleration control II. CONTROL-ORIENTED BATTERY LIFE MODEL
strategy for intelligent EVs based on the goal of reducing en-
Power battery is the core of intelligent EVs and directly deter-
ergy consumption while maintaining drivability for a given load
mines the performance of the vehicle. Lithium-ion battery is the
has been developed and can reduce the energy consumption by
preferred energy storage device for intelligent EVs, due to their
1.9% [11]. Moreover, overall trip time can also be a performance
high power and energy density, wide range of operating temper-
index for speed optimization [12], if intelligent EVs can not ac-
ature and high reliability [19]–[22]. However, intelligent EVs
celerate to a certain speed from rest in a reasonable amount of
powered by lithium-ion battery also have some problems such as
time.
high cost and short service life [23]. Therefore, it is extremely
Under the trend of vehicle electrification, battery has grad-
important to consider the influence of battery life. Generally,
ually become the only source of power for EVs. The drive of
battery aging presented as a reduction in the ability to store
the vehicle is completely dependent on the battery system, and
energy and deliver power, performance correlated with loss in
it also affects the safety of the passengers, so the research on
capacity and increase in internal resistance [24], [25]. However,
the battery becomes more and more important. Based on cloud
until now, the battery life models are generally identified from
computing networks, a study by Khayyam aims to enhance the
the recycled charge and discharge experimental data [16]–[18],
battery life by controlling charging process of the battery to re-
and insight regarding the aging mechanisms associated with
duce the chance of over-charging when EVs are charged through
Lithium-ion battery is limited [26], [27]. Over past few years,
the grid [13]. In speed optimization, recent work focuses on
depending on the recycled charge and discharge experimental
finding an optimal acceleration process for EVs during speed
data, many battery life models have been established, and these
changes by solving a multi-objective optimization problem with
battery life models can be used for optimization strategy about
energy consumption [10], [11], acceleration duration [12], and
intelligent EVs [28], [29].
jerk [14], however, these objectives do not take into account the
In general, these life models can be classified as three types:
impact of the acceleration process on battery life. As mentioned
physics-based models [30]–[34], empirical models [35] and
above, comparatively high energy is consumed during an accel-
semi-empirical models [16], [36]. The physics-based models are
eration process, similarly, the discharge rate of power battery is
highly accurate, but the models are too complicated to be used
also very large in an acceleration process of intelligent EVs. In
for calculation of optimization problems; although the empiri-
addition, the loss of battery capacity will be more serious with
cal models are simple and suitable for optimization calculations,
the larger discharge rate of power battery [15]. In this paper,
the models’ accuracy is not high and can not accurately reflect
instead, the minimization of battery capacity loss which can be
the battery aging. Due to its simplicity without reducing accu-
used as an indicator of battery life is chosen as the optimization
racy, semi-empirical models have been used for state-of-health
objective.
(SOH) estimation and as part of the Battery Management System
However, until now, the battery life models are generally
(BMS) system such as state-of-charge (SOC) estimation [25],
identified from recycled charge and discharge experimental
[37]. Besides, semi-empirical models have also been used for op-
data [16]–[18], which can not be used directly for acceleration
timal energy management considering battery aging [29], [38].
speed optimization, due to the constant charge and discharge rate
Therefore, according to its advantages and widespread appli-
and so on. To optimize in actual driving conditions, a control-
cations, in this paper, a control-oriented battery life model is
oriented battery life model which can describe quantitatively
derived based on the semi-empirical models.
the loss of battery capacity is derived. According to the presup-
These researches indicate that time, temperature, discharge
posed assumptions and the changing trend of a battery capacity
rate, and the depth of discharge (DOD) are main external factors
loss during an acceleration progress, battery capacity decay rate
for battery capacity loss, usually semi-empirical life model can
can be obtained which is no longer confined to fixed conditions
be expressed as [16]
such as the constant charge or discharge rate, constant temper-
−31700+ 370. 3C rate
ature and constant depth of discharge (DOD). Depending on Qloss (t) = B(Ah (t))z e( RT )
. (1)
the battery capacity decay rate, an integral performance index
which can be used directly for acceleration speed optimization Here, Qloss (t) is the percentage of capacity loss, B is the pre-
is established. exponential factor, R is the universal gas constant, T is the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
GAO et al.: ACCELERATION SPEED OPTIMIZATION OF INTELLIGENT EVS IN CONSIDERATION OF BATTERY AGING 8011

where (1) and (3) are used. Here, the power law factor z = 0.5,
M1 and M2 are constants and can be expressed as
−31700 370.3
M1 = Be( RT ) , M2 = . (5)
S0 RT
At the time t + Δt, the percentage of battery capacity loss
can be expressed as

Qloss (t + Δt) = M1 eM 2 i(t) [Āh (t + Δt)]0.5 , (6)

according to the second assumption, the equivalent variable Ah-

throughput Āh (t + Δt) can be approximately obtained by the
following formula
Fig. 1. The changing trend of a battery capacity loss during an acceleration
progress.
Āh (t + Δt) = Āh (t) + ΔAh (t), (7)

and the equivalent variable Ah-throughput’s increment ΔAh (t)

absolute temperature, z is the power law factor, Ah (t) is the between the time t and t + Δt can be computed as
total ampere-hour throughput (Ah-throughput) given by
 t+Δ t
 t 1 i(t)
ΔAh (t) = i(τ ) dτ = Δt. (8)
Ah (t) = |i(τ )| dτ, (2) 3600 t 3600
0
Thus, at the time t + Δt, the percentage of battery capacity loss
and Crate is the discharge rate given by can be obtained by combining the equations (4), (6), (7), and (8),
i  0.5
Crate = , (3) Qloss (t + Δt) = M1 eM 2 i(t) Āh (t) + ΔAh (t)
S0
 0.5
It should be noted that the above life model is only suitable Q2loss (t) i(t)
= M1 eM 2 i(t) + Δt .
for predicting a new battery’s cycle life which always works in M12 e2M 2 i(t) 3600
certain temperature, discharge rate and the depth of discharge (9)
cycling conditions. However, in an acceleration process of in-
telligent EVs, because the discharge current and temperature of Since the percentage of battery capacity loss Qloss (t + Δt) is
power battery varies with time, the above battery life model can nonlinear power function, it needs to be linearized by using
not be used to evaluate the loss of battery capacity. Therefore, in Taylor expansion on Δt, as
order to compute the percentage of battery capacity loss on an 
Qloss (t) M1 eM 2 i(t) i(t)
accelerating process, a control-oriented battery life model for Qloss (t + Δt) = M1 eM 2 i(t)
+ Δt
varying discharge current, temperature and other factors need to
M
M1 e 2 i(t) 7200Qloss (t)
be derived.  2
1 i(t) M13 e3M 2 i(t) i(t)
A condition that an intelligent EV’s speed will accelerate from − (Δt)2
zero to a certain value at the terminal time tf will be set. The 2 7200 Qloss (t)3
changing trend of a battery capacity loss during an acceleration
progress is shown in Fig. 1. In this paper, several assumptions + · · · + Rn (Δt) . (10)
are given as follows:
1) At the time t, the loss of battery capacity has reached
Therefore, by ignoring higher order items of Δt, Qloss (t + Δt)
to Qloss (t), and it can be equivalent to the result of the
can be reformulated as
battery aging at a fix condition such as constant charge
and discharge rate and constant working temperature; M12 e2M 2 i(t) i(t)
Qloss (t + Δt) = Qloss (t) + Δt. (11)
2) Δt is a time increment infinitely closing to 0, between the 7200Qloss (t)
time t and t + Δt, the cell battery discharge current i(t)
can be thought as a certain value; According to the third assumption, the percentage of battery
3) Compared to the loss of battery capacity Qloss (t0 ) at the capacity loss can be approximated as
initial acceleration time t0 , the change of the battery ca- Qloss (t) ≈ Qloss (t0 ). (12)
pacity loss ΔQloss (t) for a small enough time interval Δt
during an acceleration process can be ignored. Therefore, according to (11) and (12), the incremental equation
According to the first assumption, the equivalent variable Ah- for the battery capacity loss can be expressed as
throughput Āh (t) can be obtained as follows
M12 e2M 2 i(t) i(t)
Q2loss (t) ΔQloss (t) = Qloss (t + Δt) − Qloss (t) = Δt,
Āh (t) = , (4) 7200Qloss (t0 )
M12 e2M 2 i(t) (13)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8012 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

TABLE I
VEHICLE PARAMETERS

and thus the battery capacity decay rate during the acceleration
progress can be expressed as
M12 e2M 2 i(t) i(t)
Qloss (t) = . (14)
7200Qloss (t0 )
Here, Qloss is the battery capacity decay rate during acceleration
process and can be used to evaluate the index of battery capacity
loss Qloss (t) in the process of vehicle acceleration, Fig. 2. Characteristic parameters of cell battery changes. From top to bottom,
 t 2 2M 2 i(t) the figures show the cell battery discharge resistance changes and the cell battery
M1 e i(t) open circuit voltage changes under different SOC values.
Qloss (t) = dt. (15)
t0 7200Q loss (t 0)

III. PROBLEM FORMULATION L(x(t), u(t), t) expressed as

Based on the description of the above acceleration condition,
M12
in order to minimize the battery capacity loss during an accel- L(x(t), u(t), t) = e2M 2 i(t) i(t). (18)
eration process, the following optimal control problem can be 7200Qloss (t0 )
established,
Following, we establish the explicit relationship between the
 tf
integral function L, the state variable x(t) and the control vari-
min J = L(x(t), u(t), t) dt able u(t). According to the power balance equation of discharge
t0
process and equivalent circuit of power battery, the following
s.t. ẋ(t) = f [x(t), u(t)] equations can be obtained,
μ[x(t), u(t)] ≤ 0
Pb (t) = Pb0 (t) + Ib (t)2 R0 , (19)
γ[x(t0 ), u(tf )] = 0 (16)
Pb (t) = Voc Ib (t), (20)
where x(t) is state variable, u(t) is control variable, J is cost
function minimized by control variable u(t), L(x(t), u(t), t) is where Pb (t) is the instantaneous power of battery pack, Pb0 (t)
integral function, μ is the inequality constraint, γ is the boundary is the instantaneous output power of battery pack, Voc is the
condition. battery pack open circuit voltage, R0 is the equivalent internal
For the optimal control system of speed optimization for an resistance of battery pack, and Ib (t) is the discharge current of
intelligent EV, the vehicle speed is usually chosen as the state battery pack, which is given by
variable and the motor torque is taken as the control variable,
but this intelligent EV doesn’t have a multi-speed transmission, Ib (t) = Npara i(t), (21)
so that the motor speed can also be chosen as the state variable.
According to the vehicle longitudinal dynamics equation, the where the number of paralleled cells in a battery pack Npara =
state equation can be expressed as 20. Thus, the discharge current of battery pack Ib (t) can be
obtained by combining (19) and (20),
πρCD Ar 2 30i20 ηt 30G(f + θ)i0
ẋ(t) = − x (t) + 2
u(t) −
60mi0 πmr πmr
(17) Voc Voc2 Pb0 (t)
Ib (t) = − − , (22)
where x(t) is motor speed as state variable, u(t) is motor torque 2R0 4R02 R0
as control variable, and these concerned values of vehicle pa-
rameters are given in Table I. where Voc and R0 can be thought as constants, because the
In this paper, the percentage of the cell battery capacity loss change of Voc and R0 is small enough and shown in Fig. 2 as
during an acceleration process is chosen as the integral function the range of state of charge (SOC) at 40%–90%.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
GAO et al.: ACCELERATION SPEED OPTIMIZATION OF INTELLIGENT EVS IN CONSIDERATION OF BATTERY AGING 8013

The output power of the battery will be lost in the inverter

and the motor, and the corresponding power equation is
Pm (t)
Pb0 (t) = , (23)
ηm (t)ηiv (t)
Tm (t)nm (t)
Pm (t) = , (24)
9550
where Pm (t) is the instantaneous output power of motor, ηm (t)
is the instantaneous operating efficiency of motor, ηiv (t) is
the instantaneous operating efficiency of inverter, Tm (t) is
motor torque, and nm (t) is motor speed. The equation be-
tween i(t), Tm (t) and nm (t) can be established by combin-
ing (21), (22), (23) and (24), as
V o2c T m (t)n m (t)
Vo c
2R 0 − 4R 02
− 9550R 0 η m (t)η i v (t)
i(t) = . (25)
Npara
Thus, the equation between the integral function L, state vari-
able Tm (t), and control variable nm (t) can be obtained. Mean-
while, because the efficiency of motor and inverter is changing
over time, the mathematic equation between the integral func-
tion L, state variable Tm (t), and control variable nm (t) can not
be built immediately. Thus the integral function considering the
optimal battery life need to be fitted and can be expressed as

L1 (x(t), u(t), t) = p1 x(t)2 u(t)2 + p2 x(t)u(t)2

+ p3 x(t)2 u(t) + p4 x(t)u(t)
+ p5 u(t) + p6 x(t) + p7 , (26)

wherein, the values of these parameters {p1,2,...,7 } are 1.24 ×

10−11 , 2.55 × 10−8 , 2.60 × 10−10 , 4.18 × 10−6 , 4.25 × 10−3 ,
1.52 × 10−5 , and 0.0195, respectively. As shown in Fig. 3(a),
the fitting formula curve almost coincides with the real data
curve, and the coincidence degree is as high as 99.62%, there-
fore, the accuracy of the fitted performance function meets the
requirements and conforms to the standard form that can be used
to solve the optimal control system.
As a comparison, considering the performance of energy con-
sumption can be fitted:
L2 (x(t), u(t), t) = p8 x(t)2 + p9 x(t)u(t) + p10 ,
where the values of these parameters {p8,9,10 } are 2.69 × 10−4 ,
1.10 × 10−4 , and 0.591, respectively. As shown in Fig. 3(b), the
fitting performance function considering the energy consump-
tion of the battery also shows good accuracy.
According to the actual operating characteristics of the mo-
tor, inequality constraint and boundary condition in the optimal
problem are
Fig. 3. Fitting results of performance function. (a) Represents the perfor-
mance function fitting considering considering battery life. (b) Presents the
performance function fitting considering battery energy consumption.
IV. SOLUTION
In order to solve the optimal control system of speed optimiza-
tion, the above optimal control problem need to be transformed
into a standard nonlinear programming problem. The time in-
(27) terval t0 –tf is divided into N steps and the optimal control
problem is discretized on the ΔT with the forward difference
as follows,
N +1
min J = L[x(k), u(k)]ΔT
k =0
s.t. x(k + 1) = x(k) + f [x(k), u(k)]ΔT

0 ≤ x(t) ≤ nm ,m ax (28) μ[x(k), u(k)] ≤ 0

0 ≤ u(t) ≤ Tm ,m ax [nm (t)] (29) γ[x(k), u(k)] = 0 (31)

x(t0 ) = 0, x(tf ) = nm (tf ) (30)

where N = (tf − t0 )/ΔT . Define a variable X̄ , and it satisfies
where nm ,m ax is the maximal motor speed, and Tm ,m ax is the
maximal torque that motor can output. X̄ = [x(0), x(1), . . . , x(N ), u(0), u(1), . . . , u(N )]T .

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8014 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

Fig. 4. Distribution of motor operating points.

Thus the standard nonlinear programming problem can be ex-

pressed as follows,
min J = g(X̄)
s.t. h(X̄) = 0
z(X̄) ≤ 0 (32)
with
N +1
g(X̄) = L[x(k), u(k)]ΔT (33)
k =0

h(X̄) = x(k) − x(k + 1) + f [x(k), u(k)]ΔT = 0. (34)

Consequently, this optimal control problem can be solved by
SQP algorithm.

V. SIMULATION RESULTS
The simulation results compared to the strategy of minimiz-
ing battery energy consumption are shown in Figs. 4–7, in which
Lif e represents the speed optimization strategy of minimizing
battery capacity loss, and Energy represents the speed opti-
mization strategy of minimizing energy consumption. Besides,
the effect of temperature on battery capacity loss is shown in
Fig. 8. Moreover, the simulation result considering both battery
life and energy consumption is shown in Figs. 9 and 10, in which
Lif e − Energy represents the speed optimization strategy con- Fig. 5. Model simulation results (Vehicle speed form 0 to 100 km/h within
14 s, θ = 0). (a) Represents the driving parameters performance. (b) Represents
sidering both battery life and energy consumption. Finally, all the performance index.
simulations are conducted at the centigrade temperature of 25 ◦ C
except those in Subsection C.
Obviously, there are differences in the acceleration modes of
the two strategies, which lead to the difference in speed pro-
A. Flat Road Condition file, as shown in the Fig 5(a). Moreover, because the differences
The simulation is conducted on the flat road. According to between speed profiles, the distance traveled by the vehicle is
the simulation results of the motor operating point distribution not the same under the two strategies, and the distance con-
as shown in the Fig 4, under an acceleration condition from 0 sidering the battery life is longer. However, due to the motor
to 100 km/h within 14 seconds, the acceleration mode of the working initially at low rotational speed with large torque, the
intelligent EV considering the battery life is that the vehicle optimal discharge current of battery pack considering battery
accelerates firstly with motor peak torque, and then the motor life is larger than the one considering energy consumption be-
torque decreases with the increase of motor speed; as a com- fore 7.8 second, and large discharge current will cause overheat
parison, the acceleration of intelligent EV considering energy and damage to the motor. Therefore, battery capacity loss con-
consumption is small firstly and then gradually increases until sidering battery life is larger before 11.7 second as shown in the
the motor torque reaches the peak torque. optimal profile of battery capacity loss from the Fig 5(b).
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
GAO et al.: ACCELERATION SPEED OPTIMIZATION OF INTELLIGENT EVS IN CONSIDERATION OF BATTERY AGING 8015

TABLE II
SIMULATION RESULTS

Fig. 6. Distribution of motor operating points.

Finally, the battery capacity loss considering the battery life is

significantly less than the one considering energy consumption;
for energy consumption of the battery pack, energy consumption
is smaller than the one considering the battery life, but, there is
not much difference, the specific values are shown in Table II.
Besides, to eliminate the effect of the different distances trav-
elled by the two strategies and quantitatively compare the energy
economy under the two strategies, battery energy consumption
per meter is defined as the index of energy economy similar to
fuel consumption per hundred kilometers for traditional vehi-
cles. The energy consumption per meter considering battery life
is 3.49 kJ/m, while the energy consumption per meter consider-
ing battery energy is 4.46 kJ/m. Obviously, the energy economy
considering battery life is better than the one considering battery
energy consumption during the acceleration process from 0 to
100 km/h within 14 seconds.

B. Slope Road Condition
The simulation is conducted on the road with 10% slope. Ac-
cording to the simulation results of the motor operating point
distribution as shown in Fig. 6, under an acceleration condition
from 0 to 60 km/h within 7 seconds, the acceleration mode of
the intelligent EV with the optimization strategy considering the
battery life or the battery energy consumption is similar with the
one on the flat road. Similarly, due to the motor working initially
at low rotational speed with large torque, the optimal discharge
current of battery pack considering battery life is larger than
the one considering energy consumption before 3.8 second as
shown in Fig. 7(a), and large discharge current will cause over-
heat and damage to the motor. Therefore, battery capacity loss
considering battery life is larger before 6.4 second as shown in
the optimal profile of battery capacity loss from the Fig. 7(b).
Fig. 7. Model simulation results (Vehicle speed form 0 to 60 km/h within 7 s,
θ = 10%). (a) Represents the driving parameters performance. (b) Represents
the performance index.
Battery capacity loss and energy consumption also have sim-
ilar results, the battery capacity loss considering the battery life
is less than that considering the battery energy consumption; and
the Energy’s battery energy consumption of the battery pack
is smaller than the one considering the battery life, the specific
values are shown in Table III.
Similarly, the energy consumption per meter considering bat-
tery life is 6.93 kJ/m, while the energy consumption per meter
considering battery energy is 8.43 kJ/m. Obviously, the en-
ergy economy considering battery life is better than the one

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8016
TABLE III
SIMULATION RESULTS
Fig. 8. Battery capacity loss profile at different temperature accelerated con-
ditions. (a) Represents the battery capacity loss profile considering battery life.
(b) Represents the battery capacity loss profile considering energy consumption.
considering battery energy consumption during the acceleration
process from 0 to 60 km/h within 7 seconds.
C. Different Temperature Conditions
Similar with Subsection A, the simulation is conducted on the
flat road with an acceleration condition at different temperatures
from 0 to 100 km/h within 14 seconds.
According to Eq. (15), because M1 and M2 are constants re-
lated to absolute temperature T , the temperature can affect the
battery capacity loss, different temperatures result in different
battery capacity loss. Depending on the simulation results of
battery capacity loss profiles as shown in Fig. 8, the battery
capacity loss is several times higher than that at lower temper-
atures when the temperature is higher. Moreover, because the
capacity loss of the battery at higher temperature is particularly
severe, it is necessary to control the battery temperature in a
reasonable range in order to avoid excessive battery loss.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018
Fig. 9. Distribution of motor operating points.
TABLE IV
SIMULATION RESULTS
D. Speed Optimization Considering Both Battery Life and
Energy Consumption
From the above two groups of results in Subsection A and B,
it can be seen that it is better to consider the battery life opti-
mization strategy than the battery energy consumption strategy
during an acceleration process, and considering the battery life
optimization strategy can protect the battery. However, due to
the simulation analysis in Subsection A and B, the motor at low
rotational speed will work in the peak torque area for a long
time, which is a great damage to the motor. Therefore, in order
to avoid this problem, an appropriate weighting factor α can be
set to get a new objective function that takes into account both
the battery and motor’s life.
L(x, u, t) = L1 (x, u, t) + αL2 (x, u, t). (35)
Here, the weighting factor α = 1. Different weighting factors
lead to different optimization results, the optimal weight factor
can be obtained by traversing the value of the weight factor α in
which the range is from zero to positive infinity and drawing a
battery capacity loss and battery energy consumption trade-off
curve.
The simulation is conducted on the flat road with an accelera-
tion condition from 0 to 100 km/h within 14 seconds. According
to the simulation results of the motor operating point distribu-
tion, motor output torque decreases with increasing speed and
did not reach the peak torque area. According to the discharge
current profile shown in Fig. 10(a), because the discharge cur-
rent is small at first and then increases as the motor speed in-
creases, the problem can be avoided that motor is overheated or
even damaged by the large discharge current at the beginning.
The values of the battery capacity loss and the battery pack en-
ergy consumption are shown in Table IV, battery capacity loss
can be reduced by 9.6% while the energy consumption is only
GAO et al.: ACCELERATION SPEED OPTIMIZATION OF INTELLIGENT EVS IN CONSIDERATION OF BATTERY AGING 8017

driving conditions, a control-oriented battery life model is de-

rived which describes quantitatively the battery damage, then
the state equation which depends on the vehicle longitudinal
dynamics and the constraint equations of the state variable and
the control variable are established. Finally, the speed optimiza-
tion problem which has been discretized is solved by the SQP
algorithm.
The simulation results of the acceleration process with fixed
terminal time and fixed terminal speed show that the speed pro-
file with optimal battery life is very different from the one with
the optimal energy consumption. Acceleration at the beginning
in the optimal acceleration process considering battery life is
larger than the one considering energy consumption, as a result,
further travel distances can be obtained, therefore, energy con-
sumption per meter can also has a better performance. Besides,
the optimal result of the battery capacity loss considering bat-
tery life are significantly less than the ones with optimal energy
consumption, and energy consumption has not significant dif-
ference between two optimization strategies. According to the
effect of temperature on battery capacity loss, in order to avoid
excessive battery capacity loss, it is necessary to control the
battery temperature in a reasonable range.
Furthermore, due to the large acceleration at the beginning
of acceleration process, the motor may be overheated caused
by an excessive operating current, in order to avoid this prob-
lem, an optimization strategy considering both battery life and
energy consumption is proposed. The results show that battery
capacity loss can be reduced by 9.6% while the battery en-
ergy consumption is only increased by 1.6% compared with
the strategy considering only the optimal energy consumption
in an acceleration process from 0 km/h to 100 km/h within
14 seconds.

Fig. 10. Model simulation results (Vehicle speed form 0 to 100 km/h within
14 s, θ = 0). (a) Represents the driving parameters performance. (b) Represents
the performance index.
increased by 1.6% compared with the strategy considering the
optimal energy consumption. From the simulation results, op-
timization strategy that take both the battery life and energy
consumption into account can not only protect the battery
life with good energy economy, but also protect the motor
effectively.
VI. CONCLUSION
Currently, intelligent EVs speed optimization usually only
consider the optimal energy consumption, further more, in this
paper the factor of battery life is taken into account. In order
[10] E. J. Yao, M. Y. Wang, Y. Y. Song, and T. Zuo, “Estimating the cruising
to solve the problem that the battery life model is only suitable
for specific conditions and cannot be used to optimize in actual
REFERENCES
[1] S. S. Williamson, Energy Management Strategies for Electric and Plug-in
Hybrid Electric Vehicles. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2013.
[2] D. Chakraborty and A. K. Nandi, “Finding optimal driving region of
electric vehicles during acceleration,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Power
Electron., Drives Energy Syst., 2016, pp. 1–6.
[3] L. Wang, E. G. Collins, and H. Li, “Optimal design and real-time control
for energy management in electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.,
vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1419–1429, May 2011.
[4] K. Hamid and A. Bab-Hadiashar, “Adaptive intelligent energy manage-
ment system of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle,” Energy, vol. 69, pp. 319–
335, 2014.
[5] X. Xue et al., “Optimal control method of motoring operation for SRM
drives in electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 59, no. 3,
pp. 1191–1204, Mar. 2010.
[6] L. Keqiang, “Review of status and future prospects of automotive in-
telligent safety electronics,” Chin. J. Automotive Eng., vol. 2, pp. 4–17,
2011.
[7] P. R. Grant and B. Haycock, “Effect of jerk and acceleration on the
perception of motion strength,” J. Aircraft, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1190–1197,
2008.
[8] W. S. Vaz, A. K. Nandi, and U. O. Koylu, “A multiobjective approach to
find optimal electric-vehicle acceleration: Simultaneous minimization of
acceleration duration and energy consumption,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech-
nol., vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 4633–4644, Jun. 2016.
[9] J. F. Donoghue and J. H. Burghart, “Constant power acceleration pro-
files for electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. IE-34, no. 2,
pp. 188–191, May 1987.
range of electric vehicle based on instantaneous speed and acceleration,”
Appl. Mech. Mater., vol. 361, pp. 2104–2108, 2013.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8018 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 67, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018
[11] T. Lipp and S. Boyd, “Minimum-time speed optimisation over a fixed
path,” Int. J. Control, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 1297–1311, 2014.
[12] H. Imanishi, Y. Takada, and T. Wakisaka, “An acceleration control algo-
rithm for an electric motor driven vehicle in consideration of the reduction
of energy consumption,” Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. C, vol. 68, no. 669,
pp. 170–175, 2002.
[13] K. Hamid, A. Jemal, J. Bahman, G. Andrzej, S. Alex, and B.-H. Alireza,
“Intelligent battery energy management and control for vehicle-to-grid via
cloud computing network,” Appl. Energy, vol. 111, pp. 971–981, 2013.
[14] C. Debasri, V. Warren, and A. K. Nandi, “Optimal driving during electric
vehicle acceleration using evolutionary algorithms,” Appl. Soft Comput.,
vol. 34, pp. 217–235, 2015.
[15] A. Cordoba-Arenas, S. Onori, Y. Guezennec, and G. Rizzoni, “An accel-
eration control algorithm for an electric motor driven vehicle in consider-
ation of the reduction of energy consumption,” J. Power Sources, vol. 278,
pp. 473–483, 2015.
[16] J. Wang et al., “Cycle-life model for graphite-LiF eP O 4 cells,” J. Power
Sources, vol. 196, no. 8, pp. 3942–3948, 2011.
[17] N. Omar et al., “Lithium iron phosphate based battery–assessment of the
aging parameters and development of cycle life model,” Appl. Energy,
vol. 113, pp. 1575–1585, 2014.
[18] G. Ning, R. E. White, and B. N. Popov, “A generalized cycle life model
of rechargeable Li-ion batteries,” Electrochimica acta, vol. 51, no. 10,
pp. 2012–2022, 2006.
[19] J. Vazquez-Arenas, L. E. Gimenez, M. Fowler, T. Han, and S.-k. Chen, “A
rapid estimation and sensitivity analysis of parameters describing the be-
havior of commercial Li-ion batteries including thermal analysis,” Energy
Convers. Manage., vol. 87, pp. 472–482, 2014.
[20] A. K. Padhi, K. S. Nanjundaswamy, C. Masquelier, S. Okada, and J.
B. Goodenough, “Effect of structure on the Fe[sup 3+]/Fe[sup 2+] redox
couple in iron phosphates,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 144, no. 5, pp. 1609–
1613, 1997.
[21] N. Ravet, Y. Chouinard, J. Magnan, S. Besner, M. Gauthier, and M.
Armand, “Electroactivity of natural and synthetic triphylite,” J. Power
Sources, vol. 97, pp. 503–507, 2001.
[22] N. Recham et al., “Ionothermal synthesis of tailor-made LiF eP O 4
powders for Li-ion battery applications,” Chem. Mater., vol. 21, no. 6,
pp. 1096–1107, 2009.
[23] S. C. Nagpure, R. Dinwiddie, S. Babu, G. Rizzoni, B. Bhushan, and T.
Frech, “Thermal diffusivity study of aged Li-ion batteries using flash
method,” J. Power Sources, vol. 195, no. 3, pp. 872–876, 2010.
[24] J. Vetter et al., “Ageing mechanisms in lithium-ion batteries,” J. Power
Sources, vol. 147, no. 1, pp. 269–281, 2005.
[25] S. Onori, P. Spagnol, V. Marano, Y. Guezennec, and G. Rizzoni, “A new
life estimation method for lithium-ion batteries in plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles applications,” Int. J. Power Electron., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 302–319,
2012.
[26] J. Shim and K. A. Striebel, “Effect of electrode density on cycle perfor-
mance and irreversible capacity loss for natural graphite anode in lithium-
ion batteries,” J. Power Sources, vol. 119, pp. 934–937, 2003.
[27] M. Dubarry and B. Y. Liaw, “Identify capacity fading mechanism in a
commercial LiF eP O 4 cell,” J. Power Sources, vol. 194, no. 1, pp. 541–
549, 2009.
[28] A. Cordoba-Arenas, S. Onori, and G. Rizzoni, “A control-oriented lithium-
ion battery pack model for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle cycle-life studies
and system design with consideration of health management,” J. Power
Sources, vol. 279, pp. 791–808, 2015.
[29] L. Serrao, S. Onori, A. Sciarretta, Y. Guezennec, and G. Rizzoni, “Optimal
energy management of hybrid electric vehicles including battery aging,”
in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., 2011, pp. 2125–2130.
[30] C. Wang, W. Gu, and B. Liaw, “Micro-macroscopic coupled modeling
of batteries and fuel cells i. Model development,” J. Electrochem. Soc.,
vol. 145, no. 10, pp. 3407–3417, 1998.
[31] R. Spotnitz, “Simulation of capacity fade in lithium-ion batteries,” J.
Power Sources, vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 72–80, 2003.
[32] T. Yoshida et al., “Degradation mechanism and life prediction of lithium-
ion batteries,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 153, no. 3, pp. A576–A582, 2006.
[33] M. Safari, M. Morcrette, A. Teyssot, and C. Delacourt, “Life-prediction
methods for lithium-ion batteries derived from a fatigue approach i. in-
troduction: Capacity-loss prediction based on damage accumulation,” J.
Electrochem. Soc., vol. 157, no. 6, pp. A713–A720, 2010.
[34] M. Safari, M. Morcrette, and A. Teyssot, “Life prediction methods for
lithium-ion batteries derived from a fatigue approach ii. Capacity-loss pre-
diction of batteries subjected to complex current profiles,” J. Electrochem.
Soc., vol. 157, no. 7, pp. A892–A898, 2010.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on September 22,2023 at 10:44:59 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[35] J. Schmalstieg, S. Käbitz, M. Ecker, and D. U. Sauer, “A holistic aging
model for Li(N iM nC o)O 2 based 18650 lithium-ion batteries,” J. Power
Sources, vol. 257, no. 2, pp. 325–334, 2014.
[36] F. Todeschini, S. Onori, and G. Rizzoni, “An experimentally validated
capacity degradation model for li-ion batteries in PHEVs applications,”
IFAC Proc. Volumes, vol. 45, no. 20, pp. 456–461, 2012.
[37] K. Goebel, B. Saha, A. Saxena, J. R. Celaya, and J. P. Christophersen,
“Prognostics in battery health management,” IEEE Instrum. Meas. Mag.,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 33–40, Aug. 2008.
[38] S. Ebbesen, P. Elbert, and L. Guzzella, “Battery state-of-health percep-
tive energy management for hybrid electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh.
Technol., vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 2893–2900, Sep. 2012.
Bingzhao Gao received the B.S. and M.S. degrees
from Jilin University of Technology, Changchun,
China, in 1998 and 2002, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degrees in mechanical engineering from Yokohama
National University, Yokohama, Japan, and control
engineering from Jilin University of Technology,
Changchun, China, in 2009. He is a Professor with
Jilin University. His research interests include vehi-
cle powertrain control and vehicle stability control.
Lulu Guo received the B.S. degree in 2014 from
Jilin University, Changchun, China, where he is cur-
rently working toward the Ph.D. degree in control
theory and engineering. His research interests in-
clude advanced vehicle powertrain control and energy
management of HEVs.
Qing Zheng received the B.S. degree in 2016 from
Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, China, where
he is currently working toward the M.S. degree in ve-
hicle engineering from Jilin University, Changchun,
China. His research interests include advanced vehi-
cle powertrain and longitudinal control of EVs.
Bin Huang received the B.S. degree from Yanshan
University, Qinhuangdao, China, and the M.S. degree
from Jilin University, Changchun, China, in 2014 and
2017, respectively. His research interests include bat-
tery management system and energy management of
HEVs.
Hong Chen (M’02–SM’12) received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees in process control from Zhejiang Uni-
versity, Zhejiang, China, in 1983 and 1986, respec-
tively, and the Ph.D. degree in system dynamics and
control engineering from the University of Stuttgart,
Stuttgart, Germany, in 1997. Since 1999, she has been
a Professor with Jilin University, Changchun, China,
where she is currently a Tang Aoqing Professor and
also the Director of State Key Laboratory of Auto-
motive Simulation and Control. Her research interests
include model predictive control, optimal and robust
control, and nonlinear control and applications in mechatronic systems focusing
on automotive systems.