Received: 19 May 2021

DOI: 10.1049/esi2.12038

REVIEW
- -
Revised: 12 July 2021 Accepted: 29 July 2021

- IET Energy Systems Integration

Battery charging topology, infrastructure, and standards for

electric vehicle applications: A comprehensive review

Siddhant Kumar | Adil Usman | Bharat Singh Rajpurohit

School of Computing and Electrical Engineering, Abstract

Indian Institute of Technology Mandi, Mandi, India
Correspondence
Adil Usman, School of Computing and Electrical
Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Mandi,
Mandi 175075, India.
Email: adilusman@ieee.org
The proposed study reports the essential parameters required for the battery charging
schemes deployed for Electric Vehicle (EV) applications. Due to efficient power delivery,
cost‐effectiveness, and environmental acclimation, EVs have emerged as a suitable alter-
native to the Internal Combustion (IC)‐based engines. However, prominent challenges for
leveraging the EVs are the suitable availability of battery charging infrastructure for high
energy/power density battery packs and efficient charging topologies. Despite the chal-
lenges, EVs are gradually being implemented across the globe to avoid oil dependency,
which currently has a 5%–7% decline rate of post‐peak production. The vast deployment of
EVs as private and commercial vehicles has created a major challenge for the grids in
maintaining the power quality and peak load demand. This study, therefore, reviews the
various battery charging schemes (battery charger) and their impact when used in EV and
Hybrid EVapplications. The available constituents of the battery chargers such as ac‐dc/dc‐
dc converter topologies, modulations, and control techniques are illustrated in detail. The
comprehensive study classifies the charging topologies depending upon the power and
charging level. Some appropriate battery charging converter topologies that are suitable for
domestic, industrial, and commercial applications like EVs are suggested in the study. In
addition, a decision‐making inference is developed through a flow chart that decides on the
suitable selection of the converter topology based on the required applications. Further-
more, the charging infrastructures along with the converters' design standards are also
discussed concisely, which adds a significant contribution to the review article.

KEYWORDS
AC‐DC power converter, battery charger, charging station, DC‐DC power converters, electric vehicle (EV),
hybrid electric vehicle (HEV)

1 | INTRODUCTION the development of efficient battery chargers, EVs have

Among various other factors, steady degradation of the
ecological system is due to the high emission of toxic gasses
from gasoline engines, which are commercially deployed in
automobiles as one of their applications. The applications of
energy sources like gasoline are rising drastically, which could
plummet to half of its current volume in the next 10–14 years
[1]. Apart from industrial and domestic applications, automo-
tive vehicles are the most prominent entities of carbon emis-
sion [1, 2]. Due to the proliferation in battery technologies and
asserted themselves as the alternate transport medium. If EVs
are widely deployed, then they can completely halt carbon
(CO2) emission at the operating site [2]. Now, automobile in-
dustries have gradually adapted the EV technology for trans-
portation. The battery‐operated vehicles, based on their
application, have been categorised as Electric Vehicles (EVs),
Hybrid EVs (HEVs), and Plug‐in Hybrid Vehicles (PHEVs).
HEVs are the bridge between gasoline and fully EVs and have
a provision of more than one energy sources as a fuel. The
PHEVs are the HEV that have the facility to recharge the

-
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
© 2021 The Authors. IET Energy Systems Integration published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Institution of Engineering and Technology and Tianjin University.

IET Energy Syst. Integr. 2021;3:381–396. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/esi2 381


382
- KUMAR
battery pack by plugging in the charging cable. PHEV is ad-
vantageous since a heavy battery pack is not required for
recharging. Most of the EVs, now, have the facility of charging
cable, and thus, fall into the category of PHEV [3].
With the burgeoning renewable energy applications and
charging infrastructures, the demand for EVs is escalating.
However, in the present existing infrastructure, the application
of EVs is limited since they can be charged only at off‐working
hours. Therefore, the development of new and advanced fast
charging infrastructure has led to the opportunity of charging
schemes, paving the way for multi‐enhanced applications of
EVs [4, 5].
Power electronic converters are the operational and control
unit of EVs. Applications of such devices are immense due to
their high efficiency, more power capacity, low cost, lightweight
etc. The most prominent challenges for wide application are
the battery charging method and available infrastructure [6].
Various charging schemes are proposed in [4, 7–9] for various
battery‐driven vehicles.
Currently, the automobile industries are manufacturing the
charger with specifications depending upon the charging
infrastructure standards available locally. Limited adoption and
a gradual expansion are the contrary trade‐off for the proper
deployment of the technology. PHEVs are, therefore,
preferred because of their fuel flexibility and are popular for
industrial and commercial applications. Battery charging
infrastructure, methodology, and the energy/power density of
the battery pack are the most prominent challenges for the
application of EVs [4, 5, 10]. Once the infrastructure of battery
charging is developed fully, EVs can take over the market.
The growing demand and parallel deployment of EVs are,
currently, posing a major challenge to the grid power quality.
The vast deployment of EVs will invite tremendous harmonics
distortion to the utility. Power factor correction (PFC) circuits
along with active rectification, therefore, are used to minimise
the harmonic distortion, thus improving the efficiency [9–11].
The proposed study intends to summarise existing battery
charging topologies, infrastructure, and standards suitable for
EVs. The proposed work classifies battery‐charging topologies
based on the power and charging stages. A decision‐making
flowchart further aids in selecting suitable battery chargers
for desired applications. The flow of the proposed study is as
follows: Section 2 deals with the EV power components,
Section 3 illustrates battery charging schemes. Section 4 illus-
trates modulation and control strategies while section 5 em-
phasises the choice of battery charging topology with the help
of a flow chart. Section 6 discusses the available charging in-
frastructures and battery charging standards, respectively.
2 | ELECTRIC VEHICLE
COMPONENTS
A typical block diagram of the EV is shown in Figure 1. Each
block is designed for specification and topology suitable for its
required applications. The existing battery charging topologies
are listed subsequently in Table 1.
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
FIGURE 1 Block diagram of a typical electric vehicle
The block ‘Grid’ represents an external power source
(single phase or three phase) used to power up/charge the
battery. The ac‐dc converter is single phase or three phase
based on the application (on‐board or off‐board). In addition,
the converters can be bidirectional if the application is meant
for vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G). Grid interconnected bidirectional
ac‐dc converters suffer from issues such as frequency syn-
chronisation (with grid), PFC, and high‐quality isolation, thus
compromising with the cost and weight [8, 11, 36, 37].
The battery pack consists of batteries and ultracapacitors
(UCs). A battery pack may comprise lead‐acid, nickel metal
hydride (NiMH), or lithium‐ion (Li‐ion) batteries. In modern
battery‐powered vehicles (BPVs), li‐ion batteries are used for
their high energy density, superior specific energy, less
discharge rate, compact size, and low maintenance re-
quirements [38].
The dc‐ac converter drives the traction motors connected
at the load side of the battery pack. Initially, the motor used to
be unidirectional, but in modern BPVs, bidirectional dc‐ac
converters are used for regenerative braking technology. The
dc‐dc converters are used to drive the dc loads. The PHEVs
have the flexibility of fuels that has been shown with the
‘Gasoline Engine’ block in Figure 1 as an alternative fuel
source [39, 40].
In modern EVs, ac‐dc converters are used for battery
charging applications but, as discussed, in many cases dc‐dc
converters also play a significant role in EVs [27] either for dc
loads or in the second stage of the ac‐dc converters. Thus, the
selection of the optimum design is equally crucial [31, 41, 42].
Apart from efficient converter charging schemes, the literature
reports that the battery chemistry (responsible for charging and
discharging rates) is an important aspect. In [2, 38, 43] available
batteries associated with chemistry, classification, material, ef-
fects of charging speed etc. are thoroughly discussed. Further, it
elaborates the suitable battery choice based on application. A
battery pack consists of a suitable battery and UC. Without the
UC, an intense decrease in battery state‐of‐charge is observed,
which decreases the life cycle of the battery.
A battery (large energy capacity, low power density) has
more time constant, slow response than UC (low energy ca-
pacity, high power density); therefore, batteries cannot provide
 TABLE 1 Various AC‐DC and DC‐DC converter topologies

Topology/no. of
KUMAR

switches Stage Phase Switching frequency Modulation Isolation Drawbacks Remarks

ET AL.

Six switches [12–15], two‐ Single‐stage DAB [14], Single‐
level full‐bridge [16] Two HB‐LC resonant phase
[12], two‐stage FB BB [12–15]
[13, 16], single‐stage
BDHB with active
shunt filter [15]
Low (<25 kHz) [13, 14, New modulations Galvanic isolation [12–15] Comparatively large Snubber circuit is not required,
16], High (>50 kHz) technique [14]. PWM non‐isolated [16] transformer is lightweight, soft‐switching
[12, 15] [16], Phase shift required at lower range extends due to new
control for ZVS [12, operating frequency modulation technique, linear
15], bipolar [13] [12, 15], DQ‐frame power relationship [14]. Two
controller has slow additional LC resonant
response [16] circuits are used to provide
optimal performance [12].
Provide reactive power to
utility, five operation modes
[13]; omit output ripple
capacitor [15], on‐board
charging, for high power
application, DQ‐frame
controller provides zero
steady‐state error [16]

Eight switches [17–19]
Single‐stage DAB [19],
Two stage [17], half‐
bridge [18]
Three [19], Medium [19], low [17] SVM [19], PWM [17], soft Galvanic isolation [17–19] Large transformer Reduction in size, weight, and
single high (>50 kHz) [18] switching for all requirement at lower high‐power density due to a
[17, 18] devices [18] frequency [19] high‐frequency transformer,
low harmonic distortion [18,
19], PFC with fewer switches,
low switching losses [17]

Twelve switches [20] DAB Single stage [11, 20, 24, Single [11, Low [25], Medium [20, Carrier based [20], PSM Medium frequency Snubber circuit [20], Better switching condition at
[11, 21–24]; DAB with 26], Two stage [21–23, 20–22, 23, 27], High [11, 21, 23, 25], SVM transformer [20], high additional drive circuit carrier‐based modulation
dual function circuit 25] 24, 25], (>50 kHz) [11, 24], [26], PWM [22], frequency transformer for four‐quadrant [20]. Minimal power
[25], matrix converter three very high [22] SHBM [24] [11, 21–25], non‐ switch operation [11]. conversion stage, high
[26] phase (500 kHz) [21] isolation [26] Efficiency at higher switching frequency
[23] frequency decreases operation and low switching
[23] losses, reduced size [11], wide
bandgap switches are used
[21], elimination of
transformer and DC link
capacitor [26]; SiC switches
are used [22]; ZCZVS, open‐
loop PFC [24]; reduction of
DC link capacitor, dual LV
charging circuit removes
power ripple at DC link [25]

Sixteen switches [11, 28] Single stage [28], Two‐ Three [28] Medium [28], High [11] Carrier based [28], PWM Transformer isolation [11, Snubber circuit, low load Beneficial switching conditions
stage [11] single [11] 28] operation [28], limited can achieve using carrier‐
phase ZVS range [11] based modulation. [28], unity
[11] PF, fast charger [11]
-

(Continues)
383

25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 384
-

T A B L E 1 (Continued)

Topology/no. of
switches Stage Phase Switching frequency Modulation Isolation Drawbacks Remarks

Nine switches with Two‐stage [29] Three‐ Low (<25 kHz) [29] PSM [29] Transformer isolation is Limited for domestic Motor (windings) is used as the
propulsion motor [29] phase not required applications inductor for DC converter
[29] [29]

Three‐level PFC, buck Quasi two‐stage [17] Single‐ Low (<25 kHz) [17] PWM [17] Transformer isolation is More switching loss Topology can be useful for
boost, 10 SW [17] phase not required higher power applications,
[17] large voltage range (buck or
boost), bidirectional
operation can be achieved
with more number of gate
driver [17]

Two FB inverter, DC‐DC Two stage [30–33] Single High (100 kHz) [30–32], PSM [32, 33], PSM & Two transformer isolation More number of Small size, low cost, 7 kW power
converter, eight SW phase medium [33] APWM [30], PWM [30], single components used, rating, completer ZVS
[30], eight SW [31], 14 [31– [31] transformer isolation complex operation switching, fewer conduction
SW [32], six SW [33] 33], [31–33] [32] losses, low secondary voltage
Two‐ stress [32], ZVZCS, SOC
phase control, interleaved operation
[30] [33]

Two full bridge Two stage Two phase High (>100 kHz) [34] PSM [34], FBM [35] Isolation is not required Primary switching loss Less conduction losses, high
interleaved DC‐DC [34], low (10 kHz) [35] [34], 3 transformer increases as output power application, less
converters [34], 3FB three‐ isolation [35] power increases [34], output inductor size, easy to
interleaved DAB, 18 phase bulky, expensive [35] increase power handling
switches [35] [35] capacity [34], high power
application, current
frequency 60 kHz [35]

Abbreviations: BDHB, bi‐directional half bridge; DAB, dual active bridge; FB, full bridge; FBM, full bridge modulation; HB, half‐bridge; PFC, power factor correction; PSM, phase‐shift modulation; PWM, pulse width modulation; SHBM, single half‐
bridge modulation; SOC, state‐of‐charge; SVM, space vector modulation; ZCS, zero current switching; ZVS, zero voltage switching.
KUMAR
ET AL.

25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

KUMAR ET AL.
instant energy to the load as compared to UC during accel-
eration. For achieving fast response, a parallel configuration of
batteries is used, but this arrangement increases the size and
weight. Therefore, UCs are used in the battery pack for the
initial torque provided by the traction motor. They are also
used during regenerative braking and reduce the size as well
[33]. When compared to the battery, a capacitor has large
charging and discharging cycles. During the run time of EVs
with regenerative braking, several charging and discharging
cycles occurs. The repetition of the acceleration and deceler-
ation phenomenon decreases the life cycle of the batteries.
Therefore, series and parallel combinations of batteries parallel
with UCs are used to achieve the desired energy and power
densities, respectively, to enhance the performance and life of a
battery pack [33, 40].
High power density/energy motors are preferably used in
EVs; however, the traction mechanism generates the difference
between the EVs and the IC engine vehicles, respectively.
Advancement in power electronics control has provided an
opportunity for different electric motors to find their appli-
cation in EVs and HEVs. The desired characteristics from a
motor for automotive application are high power, high starting
torque, high efficiency, wide speed range, fast dynamic
response, compact size, low noise, easy to control, high per-
formance, low cost etc. [44, 45]. There are various types of
motors available for automotive application such as dc motor,
ac inductor motor, brushless dc motor (BLDC), permanent
magnet synchronous motor (PMSM), and switched reluctance
motor. The PMSM and BLDC motors are widely being
deployed over induction motors in commercial and domestic
EV applications [46, 47]. Distinct motors have their advantages
and limitations, some of them are mentioned below.
DC motors were widely used in an early stage of EV
application. Their high starting torque and dynamic response
with easy control (speed) techniques make them suitable for
automotive applications. They have certain disadvantages such
as high maintenance and high noise because of the brushes and
commutators [48].
Induction motors are ac‐operated motors and for fixed
voltage and frequency provide a limitation on starting torque.
Thus, the variable voltage and frequency control technique is
used for their optimum performance. Although induction
motors are widely used and require low maintenance, their
control (consists of an inverter) schemes are complex
compared to dc motors [45].
The BLDC motors are a special type of PMSMs without
commutator and brushes. The commutation is done using
inverters. Because of electronics commutation, these motors
are compact, noiseless (less vibration) and require less main-
tenance. BLDC motors are preferred for low‐power automo-
tive applications [45, 48].
The PMSMs are very high performance motors and
available for high power applications. These motors are best
suited for high‐power and high‐performance vehicle applica-
tions. Similar to BLDC, they also consist of permanent mag-
nets in the rotor of the machine. A sinusoidal back
electromotive force (EMF) is a distinct characteristic of PMSM
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
- 385
compared to BLDC where back EMF has a trapezoidal char-
acteristic. PMSMs are the most preferable motor for auto-
motive applications like EVs [49].
The proposed study focusses on the comparison of distinct
converter topologies employed for effective battery charging
applications. A critical comparative analysis has been carried
out in successive sections. Some of the converters have been
compared and tabulated in Table 1. The table shows the
prominent battery charging topologies that can be adapted to
achieve an optimal system based on desired applications.
3 | BATTERY CHARGING SCHEMES IN
EVs
Battery‐driven vehicles' powertrain mainly consists of power
sources, power converters, and loads. Power converters are the
intermediate controllable unit between energy sources and loads
and are, therefore, enormously vital in BPVs for efficient
charging and discharging. Nowadays, power converters are ex-
pected to perform way more than power conversion from a
battery to loads only [50]. In advanced drive topology, they also
feed the power back to the grid efficiently. To achieve these
functions, switching devices such as metal oxide semiconductor
field effect transistor (MOSFETs) and insulated gate bipolar
transistor (IGBTs) are used with the help of a suitable control
mechanism. MOSFETs are operated at a very high frequency
(up to a few MHz), whereas IGBTs are feasible for a few kHz
but can withstand at very high current (power). High‐frequency
operation and control assist the converters to possess smaller
inductive and capacitive components. Therefore, the size of the
converters decreases with increasing operating frequency. With
this dynamic change, the power electronic converters became of
interest in the field of battery‐driven vehicles [51, 52].
As discussed, EVs can consist of different power con-
verters; therefore, suitable design topologies are available based
on the application. Power converters are categorised as high
and low power application converters (for EVs). High power
converters are used to drive traction motors and battery
charging [53], whereas low power converters are used for loads
such as cooling fans, lights, electronic gadgets etc. The dc‐dc
converters are used for both applications; thus, MOSFETs
or IGBTs are used based on power rating. Similarly, high po-
wer ac‐dc converters are used as battery chargers [33, 50].
Diode bridge rectifiers (single or three‐phase) are widely
used for ac‐dc power conversion. These uncontrolled rectifiers
inject large harmonics into the grid. A high peaky current (to
fulfil the average dc) is observed at the rectifier side while
extracting a high current from the grid. Some disadvantages
such as non‐sinusoidal input current (harmonic distortion),
output voltage harmonics, and poor input power factor
(because of the non‐sinusoidal input current drawn from the
grid) have been reported [7].
To overcome grid harmonic distortion issues, an electrical
network such as an active rectifier, a current filter, a PFC cir-
cuit, a resonant converter topology, and a capacitive filter is
used.

386
- KUMAR
The current filter or ac filters comprise the inductor (L),
capacitor (C), LC or LCL. The objective of these filters is to
limit the supply current response in its grid‐supplied shape
while injecting the high‐density dc into the battery or next
stage [36]. At low power and high operating frequencies, the
capacitor input filter can also serve this purpose. The capacitor
provides its charge at the switching instant [17, 54, 55].
The rectified power (ac‐dc) is fed to another converter,
which regulates the voltage level. The conversion of power
through two converters is stated as two‐stage power conver-
sion and the converters are called two‐stage converters. In this
way, the conventional rectifier can be termed as a single‐stage
power converter. It has been reported that two‐stage power
converters are more feasible for high‐power applications. Also,
they provide low output ripple [29, 39]. Thus, they are used for
high‐density battery charging applications. At the final stage,
depending on the type of traction motor, dc‐ac or dc‐dc
converters are used to power up the motor.
Harmonic distortion imposed on the grid by the battery
charger is one of the significant challenges of the application.
Heat dissipation from the bridge rectifiers decreases its effi-
ciency, whereas heatsinks increase the converter size and cost.
In modern battery chargers, PFC circuits are integrated with
the converter for distortion minimisation. The active rectifi-
cation with zero voltage switching (ZVS)/ZVS technique is
used to limit the power dissipation, thereby reducing the
converter size [6, 30].
A high operating frequency also decreases the converter
size (inductor and capacity), whereas at a higher frequency the
converter suffers from electromagnetic (EM) emission. A high
rate of change of voltage and current introduces the EM field
through the converter layout. The interference of the EM field
to the gate drive results in the distortion in switching. The
distorted switching scheme introduces additional harmonics
into the supply. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) issues are
introduced more by high‐frequency fast charging as compared
to low or moderate charging respectively. The high switching
level converter requires a faster transition to avoid high
switching losses, consequently, introduces large EM distur-
bances. For reduction of harmonics, a large EM filter is
required [56]. A suitable EMI filter further increases the size of
the converter. A large EMI filter is a bottleneck for high power
switching converters. The EMI suppression standards are listed
in Table 2.
3.1 | DC‐DC converter
The following subsection explains the application of dc‐dc
converters in EVs. Usually, dc‐dc converters are used to
drive dc loads as illustrated in Figure 1. They are also used in
the second stage of ac‐dc power conversion. In conventional
BPVs, they are used to drive traction motors. Gradually, bidi-
rectional dc‐dc converters took place to feed the power to the
battery (regenerative braking mode). The literature reports that
in modern EVs, ac‐dc and dc‐ac converters are used for the
battery charging and traction motor. Thus, the application of
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
dc‐dc converters is limited to dc loads and for the second stage
of ac‐dc converters only. In some cases, dc‐dc converters are
also used for charging the battery directly from the dc grids
[18, 43, 60, 61].
The two widely used isolated dc‐dc converters, apart from
the conventional non‐isolated dc‐dc converter, for battery
charging applications are illustrated in Figure 2. The galvanic
isolation increases the safety margins in high‐power operations
as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2a shows a full‐bridge isolated
converter and Figure 2b shows a two‐level isolated dc‐dc
converter. As the number of levels increases, the output cur-
rent injection capability increases since multiple legs contribute
to the total current. The multilevel converter with a certain
phase shift in the individual response contributes to the output
ripple minimisation. Thus, it can provide better ripple rejection
at a lower operating frequency. Therefore, a small ripple
rejection filter is required in the integrated system. The con-
verter's leg operated at a lower switching frequency can mini-
mise EMI issues [56] since current sharing reduces the
magnetic flux. Although multilevel converters can handle high
power, with a small ripple filter, they are recommended for low
power applications only. At high power, they start injecting the
harmonics into the grid. A three‐phase multilevel converter is
recommended for high‐power fast battery charging applica-
tions [50]. As the level increases, the converter's complexity
and cost increase. Therefore, it is preferred for off‐board
charging applications.
In [33], the author proposes a highly dense (interleaved)
dc‐dc boost converter for ultra‐fast charging. In [62], different
topologies of buck, boost, and buck‐boost converters are
presented. In this work, single‐pole‐triple through switches
have been used instead of single‐pole‐double through switches.
They are advantageous in reducing the number of inductive
components. In this topology, one inductor is used; therefore,
the size and weight of the converter reduce. Cao and Ye [63]
propose that the switched capacitor (SC)‐based MOSFET is
more efficient since it replaces IGBTs with SC MOSFET
(high‐frequency application). The hardware prototype has also
been explained for agreement of the statements. It is found
that SC MOSFETs‐based converters are more efficient for low
voltage loads, whereas the boost converter is used for high
voltage loads. A few of the other dc‐dc converters are listed in
the comparison Table 1.
3.2 | AC‐DC converter
This subsection discusses the ac‐dc converter topologies in
detail. Figure 1 shows that the battery pack is connected to the
grid through the ac‐dc converter. Parameters such as charging
time, quality, harmonic distortion at the input etc. depend on
the ac‐dc converters [4, 12, 64]. In [9, 41, 43], the importance
of the above parameters is extended along with power density,
reliability, efficiency, low cost, weight, and volume of con-
verters for EVs application. Similarly, [5, 65] discuss the eco-
nomics of rapid charging of the battery in EVs and elaborate
the market modelling for ac‐dc converter topologies in detail.

KUMAR ET AL.
They highlight that a suitable converter topology with an
effective design is critical in achieving its application in
PHEVs.
Single‐stage converters are lightweight and low cost and
are, therefore, preferred as onboard charging. The different
single and two‐stage ac‐dc converters topologies are explained
in [12, 20, 21, 40, 55]. In [12], the converter topology consists
of two half‐bridge (HB) circuits, each port consists of an HB.
The input port HB consists of four MOSFETs whereas the
output (DC link) consists of two switches. An LC filter has
been used on each side to reduce the ripples. The inductor
reduces the sudden changes in current whereas the capacitor
sinks the voltage spikes. In [66], a Dual Active Bridge (DAB)
single‐stage with a PFC scheme has been presented. The
proposed scheme achieves ZVS to have higher efficiency with
lower total harmonic distortion (THD). The isolated con-
verters such as DAB or resonant converters (full‐bridge con-
verter) are used for high‐power applications. The inductor in
series with the transformer is used to provide the desired step‐
up or step‐down voltage levels. The inductor in series with a
capacitor (resonant tank network) is inferred as series resonant
converters. The advantages of such converters are galvanic
isolation between the input‐output voltage levels and ZVS and
zero current switching (ZCS) [67] to minimise the switching
losses.
The authors in [13] propose a single‐phase two‐stage
bidirectional ac‐dc converter. It has been used as on‐board
charging in PHEVs. Two single‐stage ac‐dc converters are
shown in Figure 3. Figure 3a is a matrix‐based isolated single‐
phase ac‐dc converter, whereas Figure 3b shows a non‐isolated
three‐phase ac‐dc converter for fast charging; the latter con-
verter has an advantage over the former. The converter in
Figure 3b does not have the transformer and so is less bulky
compared to the converter shown in Figure 3a. Based on the
application, both topologies can be bidirectional. Figure 3a is
considered a slow charger because of the single‐phase single‐
stage topology. The same topology with multilevel/three‐
phase topology is used for fast charging. Since Figure 3b is a
three‐phase topology, it requires a comparatively less capacitive
bank for ripple reduction. An absence of the transformer and
less capacitor usage are other advantages of the given topology.
The power conversion in two stages is extensively used for
high power applications. Unlike the single stage, power con-
version takes place through two stages/converters. First, ac is
converted into dc (with some ripples). Then this dc is con-
verted into high‐frequency ac and high‐frequency ac is con-
verted into more suitable dc (controlled response with fewer
ripples) [11].
Two‐stage converters are bulky because more components
are used; therefore, single‐stage converters are more suitable for
on‐board charging (non‐commercial application) [21, 37].
Single‐stage converters are reported as slow chargers for low to
medium power rating applications. Two‐stage ac‐dc converters
are considered fast chargers. The second stage converter seeks
more power from the first stage while producing smooth output
voltage. Two‐stage converters have complex design, are bulky
and expensive. So, they face challenges in on‐board charging [11,
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
- 387
21, 39]. In [68], the author proposes that the same limitation can
be avoided if it is used as an off‐board charger. Two‐stage
converters have more degrees of freedom and thus have more
control over the operation. The study [19] reports that two‐stage
(dc‐ac, for traction) converters are more suitable for the
regenerative braking system. In some cases, where a dc traction
motor is used, a bi‐directional dc‐dc converter is also used for
regenerative schemes [41]. Figure 4 shows a few two‐stage ac‐dc
converters, whereas other topologies have been listed and
compared in Table 1. A three‐phase two‐stage topology is
shown in Figure 4a. This topology is used for off‐board high‐
power fast‐charging applications.
Figure 4b shows a simple non‐isolated two‐stage ac‐dc
converter. Non‐isolation restricts low power application and
usage of large dc‐link capacitors.
The applications of EVs are enormously increasing. One of
the hurdles in its success is the range anxiety issue. Therefore,
to charge the battery in real‐time or opportunity charging,
wireless power transfer (WPT) battery charging technology is
emerging [27]. In (WPT) technology, energy is transferred
through the air to charge the battery. The WPT can help get rid
of the range anxiety issue. It can also reduce the size of the
battery pack because of more wireless charging opportunities.
An inductive or capacitive transmitter and receiver is installed
at the charging station and vehicle, respectively. The beauty of
this technology is that the battery is charged in real‐time by the
infrastructure installed at the driving road or traffic signals.
Although this technology is not that efficient and mature, it is
an emerging area of interest in the scientific community.
Figure 5 shows the ac‐dc topology for the inductive power
transfer (IPT) technology. Figure 5a shows the IPT with the
single‐stage ac‐dc converter topology shown in Figure 3a,
whereas Figure 5b indicates a two‐stage wireless battery
charging with an ac‐dc converter based on the topology shown
in Figure 4a. Power transfer efficiency is an important aspect to
be considered in WPT technology. The efficiency depends on
the distance between two coils.
4 | MODULATION AND CONTROL
TECHNIQUES
Pulse‐width modulation technique avails the converter to reach
specific average voltage levels. The modulator controls the
width of switching pulses fed to the switches. In other words,
by modulating the switching pulses the output response can be
controlled. Since various modulating and control techniques, as
reported in literature are used in industrial applications,
therefore, it has a vital significance in EVs too[12].
The application depends on the converter topology. One of
the conventional Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) techniques
compare the saw tooth wave to the dc level to generate pulses
of specific width. Articles [11, 14, 20, 28] discuss distinct
control strategies for single‐stage and two‐stage converters,
respectively. Norrga and Norrga et al. in [20, 28] explain carrier‐
based modulation; [11, 17, 21, 39] deal with phase‐shift mod-
ulation technique (allows soft‐switching ZVS/ZCS); Castelino

388
- KUMAR
TABLE 2 Standards for converter design [57, 58]
Operations
Charging plugs, socket, and connectors, conductive
charging/levels/modes
Communication for PHEVs
Wireless power transfer communication
DC charging communication
Charger efficiency and power quality
Communication security
Electromagnetic interference suppression
Harmonic injection
Interconnection of utility grid with distributed power
sources (EVs)
Abbreviations: IEC, International Electrotechnical Council; PHEVs, Plug‐in Hybrid Electric Vehicle; SAE, Society of Automotive Engineers; UL, Underwriters' Laboratories.
et al. [19] propose a space vector modulation scheme to
calculate the duty ratio of the proposed converter. The same
scheme also recommends its application for achieving PFC
PWM, which is also suggested by [37, 69].
As discussed in [20, 28], switching losses and output ripples
are reduced by using the carrier‐based PWM technique. The
modulations used for the half and full bridge are known as single
half‐bridge modulation and full‐bridge modulation techniques,
respectively. These are widely used in DAB converters.
Several control topologies are available for the power
converter. In today's scenario, the controller domain is not
limited to the supervision of a subjected entity, but it also
enhances the overall efficiency by achieving ZVS and ZCS
losses [12, 15, 43, 68]. The increase in efficiency using ZVS/
ZCS allows an increase in the operating frequency to reduce
the power stage (inductor and capacitor) size [15]. The litera-
ture reports that the implementation of a closed‐loop control
scheme is challenging and with deviation in operating param-
eter, complete ZVS/ZCS may not achieve. Articles [20, 28]
report that for better control over the entire power electronic
system, a separate gate drive topology with optimum
communication should be used. The significance of commu-
nication between the switches draws special attention when
bidirectional power flow is implemented, since in bi‐directional
operation negative power may flow such as from the vehicle to
other units or the motor to the battery if the regenerative
braking system is implemented [11, 12, 68]. Article [6] elabo-
rates the different optimisation techniques for charging appli-
cations in PHEVs, whereas in [70], the authors present the
trends for future standards and fast charging mechanisms using
diverse control and modulation techniques applicable for EVs.
The control techniques for the single‐stage ac‐dc converter
are simpler than the two‐stage converters since a lesser
number of switches are used. A simple proportional‐integral,
proportional‐integral‐derivative, etc. controller with a suitable
compensator can control the desired quantity. The digital signal
processor or field‐programmable gate array are also used to
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
Standards
IEC SAE
IEC 62196 SAE J1772
IEC61851 J2931/1
IEC 61980 SAE J2954
IEC61851‐24 SAE J2847/2
IEC61851 SAE J2894
IEC 15118 J2931/7
IEC 60940 SAE J2954
IEC1000‐3 SAE‐J2894
IEEE 1547 [59], UL 62109 [10] (IEC SAE J2954 (unidirectional power flow G2V), J2931/5
does not have) (communication)
control and for communication as discussed in [20, 28]. The
papers [14, 19] use two phase‐controlled square waves for
bidirectional power flow whereas, in [69] pulse width variation
provides escalation in PFC.
As discussed, the design of a single‐stage ac‐dc converter is
less complex, but it suffers from ripples at lower operating
frequency. Filters are used to minimise the ripples but make
them bulky [20, 55, 71]. In other cases, bulky snubber circuits
are used in the absence of soft switching techniques [28]. Two‐
stage converters are used to reduce the ripples for reducing the
output filter capacitor for high‐power applications. Their
control techniques have more degrees of freedom to control
the desired parameters. The desired parameters are controlled
using current or voltage as a state variable at two of the stages
[37, 41, 55]. For instance, input or dc‐link current variables are
used to control output current at the second stage [37, 55]. A
deteriorated dynamic response is observed if the output dc is
used as a state variable. Kumar et al in [37] report that inductor
ripple currents are increased if the input current is a state
variable to be controlled; therefore, THD increases. THD
below a certain level (5 percent. IEEE standard) is crucial
when EVs are used in V2G mode. V. Monteiro et al. in [68]
suggest using predictive current control technique for THD
reduction. This technique also improves power quality at lower
THD. The comparison of different ac‐dc and dc‐dc converters,
for PHEVs, is summarised in Table 1.
Some recent research on the power converter topologies
for battery charging applications laid stress on the battery‐
charging infrastructure for the respective type of EVs. How-
ever, the charging scheme is restricted to a particular type of
topology. For instance, in [72] the authors discuss only the
single‐phase bidirectional ac‐dc converter for plug‐in electric
vehicles, whereas the application of dc‐dc converter topologies
is confined. Similarly, in article [35] the discussion is made only
on the front‐end ac‐dc topologies for a universal battery
charger scheme as an application for electric transportation;
here again, the dc‐dc converter schemes and other topologies

KUMAR ET AL.
F I G U R E 2 DC‐DC converter topologies, applicable for battery
charging in PHEVs. (a) Bidirectional full‐bridge (FB) DC‐DC boost
converter. (b) High power FB interleaved boost converter
are confined. Moreover, articles [25, 54] discuss the advanced
charging mechanism adopted for the on‐board charging
schemes but again restrict the study to a specific topology. This
study has considered several limitations of the earlier work and
concluded through an inference on the choice of the convertor
topology and control strategy.
5 | CHOICE OF CONVERTER
TOPOLOGY FOR BATTERY CHARGING
APPLICATIONS
Efficient loads, power conversion devices, and battery packs
make an EV efficient. This section discusses the selection of
optimal converter topologies for battery charging applications.
A choice of a suitable charger depends exclusively on the ap-
plications. The selection of suitable power converter follows an
inverted pyramid. Once the selection fulfils the desire, it ter-
minates [32, 34]. The choice begins with the type of input
power supply, voltage level (there are three battery charging
voltage levels available, listed in Table 3). It narrows down as
per the applications that is the required rate of charging (type
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
- 389
F I G U R E 3 Single‐stage AC‐DC converter topologies, applicable for
battery charging in PHEVs. (a) Isolated bidirectional ac‐dc matrix
converter. (b) Three‐phase non‐isolated bidirectional ac‐dc matrix
converter
of battery pack as well), efficiency (topology, components used,
operating frequency, stress on the components, and type of
switching), control over different parameters, power quality
(THD) at the supply side, size, and cost.
A low‐cost converter that is efficient, has high power
density, high safety margin, less harmonic distortion at supply,
and is of smaller size, is always desired for all applications. A
converter with fewer components (active and passive) and high
operating frequency (reduction in passive components size)
suffers from low power density, EMI, low controllability, high
component stress (require large size/rating components), and
lower safety margins, while the converter with sophisticated
topologies suffers in terms of efficiency, size, and cost. Further,
it requires more PWM pulses with a complex control. An
optimum trade‐off is generally made in the selection of con-
verter topology, which extensively depends on the complex
applications.
A flow chart in Figure 6 recommends the suitable selection
of converter (but not restricted to) based on the challenges
discussed in the above sections. As mentioned, voltage levels
are one of the important parameters for the selection of battery
chargers; however, in Figure 6 the choice of voltage level is not

390
- KUMAR
F I G U R E 4 Two‐stage ac‐dc converter topologies, applicable for battery charging in PHEVs. (a) Three‐phase two‐stage isolated ac‐dc bidirectional
converter. (b) Two‐stage non‐isolated ac‐dc converter
F I G U R E 5 Topologies for wireless battery charging. (a) Bidirectional single‐stage matrix‐based converter for inductive power transfer (IPT). (b). Three‐
phase two‐stage ac‐dc converter with IPT
shown since it is assumed that the selected topology can be
designed for the provided voltage level and power rating.
It is crucial to note that chargers with more switches in-
crease the size and cost of the charges (as discussed); therefore,
conventional charging topology with galvanic isolation (for
high power) is suitable for most of the applications. A charger
with more switches increases the switching complexity whereas
the implementation of EMC compliance, PFC, snubber, etc.
increases the size and cost further.
At high power, mode‐3 charging, maintaining the power
quality (input‐output) is a very important aspect. Thus,
charging with more devices is recommended to maintain the
stability and power quality of the grid.
6 | CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
AND STANDARDS
Efficient charging infrastructure is one of the vital issues for
efficacious EV charging schemes. Lack of good battery charging
infrastructure (charging stations and/or charger) increases the
charging time and, consequently, limits the effective application
of EVs. The unavailability of the infrastructure leads to onboard
charging (more charging opportunity) and a heavy battery pack
(to overcome range anxiety), long charging time, and separate
chargers for different sites (single‐phase or three‐phase) are
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
required [6, 10, 74]. The charging infrastructure also impacts the
grid power quality used for charging. An inefficient charger in-
troduces the harmonics to the utility that creates an adverse
impact on utility transformers, which leads to instability. Though
the active rectifiers with PFC can improve the power quality,
they are directly reflected on the costs.
The success of EV application, however, depends on
efficient battery charging with wide acceptability and utility
coordination (balancing of peak load demand) [75]. A large
investment for infrastructure deployment is one of the other
barriers for wide‐scale application along with the available
infrastructure standards.
Battery charging infrastructure standards are being devel-
oped by different organisations based on the available market.
These standards have different configurations such as charging
plugs, power ratings (ac and dc), communication protocol,
power quality, efficiency etc. The changing infrastructure
configuration varies due to different standards and countries'
policies. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) consti-
tutes charging infrastructure policies for the United States,
while the International Electrotechnical Council (IEC) EV's
standards are widely used in Europe. The SAE and IEC are the
two widely accepted organisations for EV regulations. The
SAE covers all the standards associated with EVs, including
utility grid interconnection standards, whereas, IEC does not
have grid interconnection norms [10]. It is mainly provided by
 25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
KUMAR ET AL.
- 391

TABLE 3 Standard converter rating and voltage levels for battery charging [10, 57, 58]

Charging type Voltage source Power rating Expected charging time Battery pack rating
Slow‐mode (level 1) 120 Vac 1.4–1.9 kW 3–11 h 5–15 kWh (PHEVs); 16–50 kWh (EVs)
230 Vac
48 Vdc
Moderate mode (level 2) 230 Vac 4–19.2 kW 1–3 h
400 Vac
200–450 Vdc

Fast mode (level 3) 208–600 Vac 4–7.2 kW [73]; 50–100 kW 0.4–6 h 15–42 kWh (PHEV); 100 kWh (EVs)
600 Vdc

FIGURE 6 Flow chart for the choice of converter topologies for the PHEVs battery charging applications

the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
and Underwriters' Laboratories (UL).
Some countries have their charging standards different
(have some similarities) from IEC and SAE standards. Japan,
China, and India have their own charging infrastructure that is
CHArge de MOve (CHAdeMO), Guobiao (GB/T), and
Bharat AC/DC‐001, respectively [10, 35, 57, 58, 69–71, 76, 77].
Table 3 lists some of the standards essential for EVs.
The SAE and IEC are different in terms of charging plugs
[10], supply voltage, component ratings, some terminologies
etc.; otherwise they are similar. Charging potentials/power
(based on the charging speed) are segregated in three folds.
The IEC defines them in terms of ‘Modes’, whereas SAE
called them ‘Levels’ [10, 57, 58].
The charging potential/level for the battery charger is
based on the charging modes, converter rating, battery pack
etc. The chargers are categorised in the three modes/levels
according to the supply voltages and application power ratings.
Table 2 discusses the available charging modes.
Different charging levels are intended for different
charging ratings and periods; thus, they are called low,
moderate, and fast charging modes/levels. The slow‐mode
or level‐1 or type‐1 charging type is designed for on-
board or portable applications for domestic applications. As
listed in Table 2, low power rating charges (smaller size
and long charging duration) can be carried with EV or
mounted on‐board, thus, it is mostly designed for personal
use [24, 78].

392
- KUMAR
The moderate‐mode or level‐2 or type‐2 charging facility is
designed for public and private locations. As the name sug-
gests, the charging time is less compared to the Mode‐1
charging scheme. Thus, Mode‐2 charging is dedicated to
moderate‐to‐long EV drive time or personal and public
application. Moderate charging, commercially, can gain success
because of its moderate size with easy to install features. High‐
performance EVs (cars) are provided type‐2 charging on board
and thus need only a power outlet for connecting from the
mains [75, 79].
Level‐3 or type‐3 or fast charging is intended for fast
charging speed, as the name suggests. Since the charging time
required is less than an hour, it is dedicated to commercial
applications. The charging stations are installed with type‐3
chargers in the cities and highways. The power level, type‐3
charger, is kept high; typically three‐phase off‐board charging
is required with safety measures.
In many countries, the existing power grid infrastructure is
not tuned for supplying adequate power for mass battery
charging current at the required power quality. At a larger scale,
type‐2 and 3 charging schemes can lead to distortion of the
power quality and even the life of the distribution transformer,
since the large current surge distorts the transformer di-
electrics, involves power loss, and even distorts the supplied
voltage. Thus, mass battery charging is one of the challenges
that can be faced by the electrical grid.
Disturbances created in the transformer and, subsequently,
on the grid can hugely impact the reliability of the electrical
grid. Therefore, real‐time condition monitoring of the power
equipment and the grid is very crucial. Communication chan-
nels are widely used for transmitting data to the centralised
control unit. Once the wide data is collected, it is processed to
extract useful information. Based on the past available data,
nowadays, machine learning algorithms are also used to predict
future dynamics [80].
Smart grids consist of a communication network with
central control. A huge data set is received through the
communication channel. Information on the grid system is
required for better control over the grid dynamics. A smart
grid is required because without control over the charging time,
the utility grid may get disturbed. One of the easiest ap-
proaches to control the peak load congestion on the grid is to
use a multi‐tariff electricity charge. In this approach, charging
hours can be shifted during off‐peak load. Such approaches use
smart metring techniques. Some of the other techniques
to overcome the peak power demand have been discussed in
[75, 81].
In [24, 78, 79] elaborate battery charging infrastructure for
EVs based on various algorithms have been discussed. An
activity‐based approach using multiday travel data for charging
infrastructure has also been discussed [79]. The design of
the prototype focusses on the supply of reactive power to
the grid when it is working as a V2G mode. It provides
normal battery charging if it works in the G2V mode. The
design consideration is such that it affects less the battery
life or state of charge even though the system provides
reactive power to the grid.
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
In future, EVs will be employed to a very dynamic grid
environment where they will have to face market uncertainties
associated with power availability (present and future); a
charged battery pack may be used as an energy source (V2G)
for peak power demand [12]. In all such cases, multitasking
EVs will have to ensure profit maximisation while saving time.
Their efficient operation would greatly depend on the market
and/or peer‐to‐peer communication. The prediction problem
associated with maximising profitability is solved by the arti-
ficial intelligence algorithm on the data provided by the grid
and peer‐peer communication [79, 82].
7 | CONCLUSION
The comprehensive literature review carried out emphasises
the significant power converter topologies, infrastructures, and
standards vital for the effective battery charging application in
EVs. The charging topologies are classified based on different
parameters like voltage levels, rated power, charging speed,
number of stages, and number of components. A decision‐
making flow chart is proposed to decide on the suitable to-
pology to be deployed for various industrial and commercial
applications like EVs. In addition, effective modulation tech-
niques, converter compensation, and charging infrastructure
schemes are also proposed in the study, which are some of its
unique contributions. Some of the key observations of the
study are as follows:
� Cost‐effective and lightweight charges (On‐board) are
preferred for non‐commercial applications, whereas
charging speed (Off‐board) is preferred for commercial and
high performance EVs applications.
� Availability of three potential levels (charging‐speed) in the
charging infrastructure (Level 1, 2, and 3) listed in Table 2.
� The IEC and SAE are the two most widely used standards
for charging converters and topologies (listed in Table 3).
� Off‐board charging techniques can lower down the cost and
weight of EVs once the charging stations are readily
available.
� A huge infrastructure is required for the wireless battery
charging technology.
The deployment of EVs as the alternative mode of
mobility and transportation is emerging tremendously. Effi-
cient operation and size reduction of the different components
of these vehicles with environmental concerns have given rise
to their wide application. However, in future, wide bandgap
(WBG) semi‐conductor devices will be in use drastically, which
will lead to a further decrease in size and increase power
handling capabilities of the power electronics converters. Since
WBG devices operate at very high frequencies, they introduce
a high frequency noise spectrum; thus, their implementation
requires an effective noise filter. In addition to the existing
techniques, some new techniques for increasing grid power
quality and stability for the wide application of EV charging
should be employed.

KUMAR ET AL.
This report, therefore, introduces numerous batteries'
charging techniques and topologies suitable for EV applica-
tions. The run‐through model of the EV charging mechanism
is illustrated in the Appendix of the study. The report is useful
for researchers and scientists developing new converter to-
pologies for efficient battery charging schemes.
DATA AVAI L A BI L I T Y S TAT E M EN T
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were
generated or analysed during the current study.
OR C ID
Siddhant Kumar https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3552-0877
Adil Usman https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8329-060X
Bharat Singh Rajpurohit https://orcid.org/0000-0001-
9843-6002
RE FE R ENC ES
1. Yeh, S., et al.: An integrated assessment of the impacts of hydrogen
economy on transportation, energy use, and air emissions. Proc. IEEE.
94(10), 1838–1851 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2006.883719
2. Amjadi, Z., Williamson, S.S.: Power‐electronics‐based solutions for plug‐
in hybrid electric vehicle energy storage and management systems. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 57(2), 608–616 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/
TIE.2009.2032195
3. Wang, L., Madawala, U.K., Wong, M.‐C.: A wireless vehicle‐to‐grid‐to‐
home power interface with an adaptive DC link. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel.
Top. Power Electron. 9(2), 2373–2383 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/
jestpe.2020.2992776
4. Yilmaz, M., Krein, P.T.: Review of battery charger topologies, charging
power levels, and infrastructure for plug‐in electric and hybrid vehicles.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 28(5), 2151–2169 (2013). https://doi.org/
10.1109/TPEL.2012.2212917
5. Al‐Alawi, B.M., Bradley, T.H.: Review of hybrid, plug‐in hybrid, and
electric vehicle market modeling studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 21,
190–203 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.048
6. Rahman, I., et al.: Review of recent trends in optimization techniques for
plug‐in hybrid, and electric vehicle charging infrastructures. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 58, 1039–1047 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2015.12.353
7. Musavi, F., et al.: Evaluation and efficiency comparison of front end AC‐
DC plug‐in hybrid charger topologies. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid. 3(1),
413–421 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2011.2166413
8. Kong, P.Y., Karagiannidis, G.K.: Charging schemes for plug‐in hybrid
electric vehicles in smart grid: a survey. IEEE Access. 99, 6846–6875
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2614689
9. Jiang, J., Bao, Y., Wang, L.Y.: Topology of a bidirectional converter for
energy interaction between electric vehicles and the grid. Energies. 7,
4858–4894 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3390/en7084858
10. Das, H.S., et al.: Electric vehicles standards, charging infrastructure, and
impact on grid integration: a technological review, Renew. Sustain. En-
ergy Rev. 120, 109618 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.
109618
11. Vaishnav, S.N., Krishnaswami, H.: Single‐stage isolated bi‐directional
converter topology using high frequency AC link for charging and
V2G applications of PHEV. In: 2011 IEEE Vehicle Power and Pro-
pulsion Conference (VPPC), Chicago, 6–9 September 2011, pp. 2–5.
IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VPPC.2011.6043138
12. Koushki, B., et al.: A bi‐directional single‐stage isolated AC‐DC con-
verter for EV charging and V2G. In: 2015 IEEE Electrical Power and
Energy Conference (EPEC), London, 26–28 October 2015, pp. 36–44.
IEEE
13. Kisacikoglu, M.C., Kesler, M., Tolbert, L.M.: Single‐phase on‐board
bidirectional PEV charger for V2G reactive power operation. IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid. 6(2), 767–775 (2015)
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
- 393
14. Castelino, G., et al.: A bi‐directional, isolated, single‐stage, DAB‐based
AC‐DC converter with open‐loop power factor correction and other
advanced features. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Industrial
Technology, Athens, 19–21 March 2012, pp. 938–943. IEEE. https://
doi.org/10.1109/ICIT.2012.6210059
15. Koushki, B., Jain, P., Bakhshai, A.: A bi‐directional AC‐DC converter for
electric vehicle with no electrolytic capacitor. In: 2016 IEEE 7th Inter-
national Symposium on Power Electronics for Distributed Generation
Systems (PEDG), Vancouver, 27–30 June 2016. IEEE
16. Wong, N., Zhuge, K., Kazerani, M.: A comparative evaluation of control
techniques for grid‐side AC‐DC converter in a two‐stage level‐two
bidirectional battery charger. In: 2013 IEEE Transportation Electrifica-
tion Conference and Expo (ITEC), Detroit, 16–19 June 2013. IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ITEC.2013.6574497
17. Tang, Y., et al.: A three‐level quasi‐two‐stage single‐phase PFC converter
with flexible output voltage and improved conversion efficiency. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 30(2), 717–726 (2015)
18. Prasanna, U.R., Singh, A.K.: Novel bidirectional single‐phase single‐stage
isolated AC–DC converter with PFC for charging of electric vehicles.
IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrific. 3(3), 536–544 (2017)
19. Castelino, G., Basu, K., Mohan, N.: A novel three‐phase bi‐directional,
isolated, single‐stage, DAB‐based AC‐DC converter with open‐loop
power factor correction. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on
Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES), Bengaluru,
16–19 December 2012. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/PEDES.2012.
6484404
20. Norrga, S.: Experimental study of a soft‐switched isolated bidirec-
tional ac‐dc converter without auxiliary circuit. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 21(6), 1580–1587 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.
2006.882969
21. Xue, L., et al.: Dual active bridge‐based battery charger for plug‐in hybrid
electric vehicle with charging current containing low frequency ripple.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 30(12), 7299–7307 (2015)
22. Whitaker, B., et al.: A high‐density, high‐efficiency, isolated on‐board
vehicle battery charger utilizing silicon carbide power devices. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 29(5), 2606–2617 (2014). https://doi.org/10.
1109/TPEL.2013.2279950
23. De Almeida, B.R., De Souza Oliveira, D.: Modulation technique for a
single‐stage three‐phase bidirectional AC/DC converter with PFC and
high‐frequency isolation. In: 2015 IEEE 13th Brazilian Power Elec-
tronics Conference and 1st Southern Power Electronics Conference
(COBEP/SPEC), Fortaleza, 29 November–2 December 2015. IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/COBEP.2015.7420207
24. Weise, N.D., et al.: A single‐stage dual‐active‐bridge‐based soft switched
AC‐DC converter with open‐loop power factor correction and other
advanced features. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 29(8), 4007–4016
(2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2013.2293112
25. Nguyen, H.V., Du To, D., Lee, D.C.: Onboard battery chargers for plug‐
in electric vehicles with dual functional circuit for low‐voltage battery
charging and active power decoupling. IEEE Access. 6, 70212–70222
(2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2876645
26. Su, M., et al.: AC/DC matrix converter with an optimized modulation
strategy for V2G applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 28(12),
5736–5745 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2013.2250309
27. Peschiera, B., Williamson, S.S.: Review and comparison of inductive
charging power electronic converter topologies for electric and plug‐in
hybrid electric vehicles. In: 2013 IEEE Transportation Electrification
Conference and Expo (ITEC), Detroit, 16–19 June 2013. IEEE
28. Norrga, S., Meier, S., Östlund, S.: A three‐phase soft‐switched isolated
AC/DC converter without auxiliary circuit. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.
44(3), 836–844 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2008.921430
29. Shi, C., Khaligh, A.: A two‐stage three‐phase integrated charger for
electric vehicles with dual cascaded control strategy. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel.
Topics Power Electron. 6(2), 898–909 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/
JESTPE.2018.2797913
30. Ravi V., et al.: Analysis, design, and implementation of an APWM
ZVZCS full‐bridge DC–DC converter for battery charging in electric
vehicles. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 32(8), 6145–6160 (2017)

394
- KUMAR
31. Bellur, D.M., Kazimierczuk, M.K.: DC‐DC converters for electric vehicle
applications. In: 2007 Electrical Insulation Conference and Electrical
Manufacturing Expo, Nashville, 22–24 October 2007, pp. 286–293.
IEEE
32. Lee, I.O., Lee, J.Y.: A high‐power DC‐DC converter topology for battery
charging applications. Energies. 10(7), 871 (2017). https://doi.org/10.
3390/en10070871
33. Vasiladiotis, M., Rufer, A.: A modular multiport power electronic
transformer with integrated split battery energy storage for versatile ul-
trafast EV charging stations. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 62(5),
3213–3222 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2367237
34. Jyotheeswara Reddy, K., Natarajan, S.: Energy sources and multi‐input
DC‐DC converters used in hybrid electric vehicle applications – a re-
view. Int J. Hydrogen Energy. 43(36), 17387–17408 (2018). https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.07.076
35. Waltrich, G., Hendrix, M.A.M., Duarte, J.L.: Three‐phase bidirectional
DC/DC converter with six inverter legs in parallel for EV applications.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63(3), 1372–1384 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
1109/TIE.2015.2494001
36. Koushki, B., et al.: Review and comparison of bi‐directional AC‐DC
converters with V2G capability for on‐board EV and HEV. In: 2014
IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC),
Components, Systems, and Power Electronics – From Technology to
Business and Public Policy, Dearborn, 15–18 June 2014, pp. 1–6. IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/itec.2014.6861779
37. Kumar, S., Usman, A.: A review of converter topologies for battery
charging applications in plug‐in hybrid electric vehicles. In: 2018 IEEE
Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting (IAS), Portland, 23–27
September 2018. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IAS.2018.8544609
38. Chung, S., Trescases, O.: Power‐mix control in a dual‐chemistry battery
pack for light electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrific. 3(3),
600–617 (2017)
39. Kuperman, A., et al.: Battery charger for electric vehicle traction battery
switch station. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 60(12), 5391–5399 (2013)
40. Pinto, J.G., et al.: Onboard reconfigurable battery charger for electric
vehicles with traction‐to‐auxiliary mode. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
63(3), 1104–1116 (2014)
41. Chiu, H., Lin, L.: A bidirectional DC–DC converter for fuel cell electric
vehicle driving system. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 21(4), 950–958
(2006)
42. Shi, L., et al.: Single‐phase bidirectional AC‐DC converters for plug‐in
hybrid electric vehicle applications. In: 2008 IEEE Vehicle Power and
Propulsion Conference, Harbin, 3–5 September 2008, pp. 3–7. IEEE
43. Usman, A., Kumar, P., Divakar, B.P.: Battery charging and discharging kit
with DAQ to aid SOC estimation. In: 4th IEEE Sponsored International
Conference on Computation of Power, Energy, Information and
Communication (ICCPEIC), Melmaruvathur, 22–23 April 2015, pp.
13–20. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCPEIC.2015.7259437
44. Wang, Z., et al.: Challenges faced by electric vehicle motors and their
solutions. IEEE Access. 9, 5228–5249 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/
ACCESS.2020.3045716
45. Muduli, U.R., et al.: Interrupt‐free operation of dual‐motor four‐wheel
drive electric vehicle under inverter failure. IEEE Trans. Transp. Elec-
trif. 7(1), 329–338 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/TTE.2020.2997354
46. Hashemnia, N., Asaei, B.: Comparative study of using different electric
motors in the electric vehicles. In: 2008 18th International Conference on
Electrical Machines, Vilamoura, 6–9 September 2008. IEEE. https://doi.
org/10.1109/ICELMACH.2008.4800157
47. West, J.G.W.: D.C. induction, reluctance and PM motors for electric ve-
hicles. Power Eng. J. 8(2), 77–88 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1049/pe:
19940203
48. Cai, W., et al.: Review and development of electric motor systems and
electric powertrains for new energy vehicles. Automot. Innov. 4(1), 3–22
(2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154‐021‐00139‐z
49. Mishra, A.K., Rajpurohit, B.S., Kumar, R.: Revampment of surface per-
manent magnet synchronous motor design for ameliorated torque profile
in e‐mobility applications. IET Electr. Syst. Transp. 11(2), 99–108 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1049/els2.12007
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
50. Jaganathan, S., Gao, W.: Battery charging power electronics converter and
control for plug‐in hybrid electric vehicle. In: 2009 IEEE Vehicle Power
and Propulsion Conference, Dearborn, 7–10 September 2009, pp.
440–447. IEEE
51. Naghizadeh, N., Williamson, S.S.: A comprehensive review of power
electronic converter topologies to integrate photovoltaics (PV), AC grid ,
and electric vehicles. In: 2013 IEEE Transportation Electrification
Conference and Expo (ITEC), Detroit, 16–19 June 2013. IEEE
52. Elsied, M., et al.: Efficient power‐electronic converters for electric vehicle
applications. In: 2015 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference
(VPPC), Montreal, 19–22 October 2015. IEEE
53. Lu, J., Mallik, A.: Dynamic strategy for efficiency estimation in a CCM‐
operated front‐end PFC converter for electric vehicle onboard charger.
IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrific. 3(3), 545–553 (2017)
54. Zhang, D., et al.: Analysis, design, and implementation of a single‐stage
multipulse flexible‐topology thyristor rectifier for battery charging in
electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 34(1), 47–57 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2018.2856905
55. Das, P., et al.: A nonlinear controller based on a discrete energy function
for an AC/DC boost PFC converter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron.
28(12), 5458–5476 (2013)
56. Zare, F.: EMI issues in modern power electronic systems. IEEE EMC
Soc. Newsletters. (22) 53–58 (2009)
57. IEC release: Standards for EV Charging. Geneva (2011)
58. SAE: SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Conductive Charge Coupler J1772_201710. https://www.sae.org/
standards/content/j1772_201710/ (2017). Accessed 24 June 2021
59. Basso, T.: IEEE 1547 and 2030 Standards for Distributed Energy Re-
sources Interconnection and Interoperability With the Electricity Grid.
https://www.nrel.gov/publications (2014). Accessed 24 June 2021
60. Ghiasi, M.I., Golkar, M.A.: Lyapunov based‐distributed fuzzy‐sliding
mode control for building integrated‐DC microgrid with plug‐in elec-
tric vehicle. IEEE Access. 5, 7746–7752 (2017)
61. Saxena, N., et al.: Implementation of a grid‐integrated PV‐battery system
for residential and electrical vehicle applications. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 65(8), 6592–6601 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2017.
2739712
62. Switch, T., Gummi, K., Ferdowsi, M.: Double‐input DC–DC power
electronic converters for electric‐drive vehicles – topology exploration
and synthesis using a single‐pole. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 57(2),
617–623 (2010)
63. Cao, Y., Ye, Z.: Simulation and analysis of switched capacitor dc‐dc
converters for use in battery electric vehicles. In: 2015 IEEE Power
and Energy Conference at Illinois (PECI), Champaign, 20–21 February
2015. IEEE
64. Gautam, D.S., et al.: An automotive onboard 3.3‐kW battery charger for
PHEV application. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 61(8), 3466–3474 (2012)
65. Schroeder, A., Traber, T.: The economics of fast charging infrastructure
for electric vehicles. Energy Pol. 43, 136–144 (2012). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.enpol.2011.12.041
66. Jauch, F.: Combined phase‐shift and frequency modulation of a dual‐
active‐bridge AC–DC converter with PFC. IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron. 31(12), 8387–8397 (2016)
67. Krismer, F., Biela, J., Kolar, J.W.: A comparative evaluation of isolated bi‐
directional DC/DC converters with wide input and output voltage range.
In: Fourtieth IAS Annual Meeting. Conference Record of the 2005 In-
dustry Applications Conference, 2005, Hong Kong, 2–6 October 2005,
pp. 599–606. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IAS.2005.1518368
68. Monteiro, V., et al.: Experimental validation of a novel architecture based
on a dual‐stage converter for off‐board fast battery chargers of electric
vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 67(2), 1000–1011 (2018). https://
doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2017.2755545
69. De Almeida, B.R., De Souza Oliveira, D.: Modulation technique for a
single‐stage three‐phase bidirectional AC/DC converter with PFC
and high‐frequency isolation. In: 2015 IEEE 13th Brazilian Power
Electronics Conference and 1st Southern Power Electronics Con-
ference (COBEP/SPEC), Fortaleza, 29 November–2 December 2015.
IEEE

KUMAR ET AL.
70. Morrissey, P., Weldon, P., O’Mahony, M.: Future standard and fast
charging infrastructure planning: an analysis of electric vehicle charging
behaviour. Energy Policy. 89, 257–270 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enpol.2015.12.001
71. Salehifar, M., Putrus, G., Barras, P.: Analysis and comparison of con-
ventional two‐stage converter and single stage bridgeless AC‐DC con-
verter for off‐road battery charger application. In: 8th IET International
Conference on Power Electronics, Machines and Drives (PEMD 2016),
Glasgow, 19–21 April 2016. IEEE
72. Singh, A.K., Pathak, M.K.: Single‐phase bidirectional ac/dc converter for
plug‐in electric vehicles with reduced conduction losses. IET Power
Electron. 11(1), 140–148 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1049/iet‐pel.2016.
0899
73. BMW: Electrify Inspiration the 2021 BMW i3 Electric Vehicle. BMW.
https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/bmwi/i3/sedan/overview.html (2021).
Accessed 24 June 2021
74. Van den Bossche, P.: Electric vehicle charging infrastructure. In: Pistoia,
G. (ed.) Electric and Hybrid Vehicles, pp. 517–543. Elsevier, Amsterdam
(2010)
75. Masoum, M.A.S., Moses, P.S., Hajforoosh, S.: Distribution transformer
stress in smart grid with coordinated charging of plug‐in electric vehicles.
In: 2012 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT),
Washington, DC, 16–20 January 2012. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/
ISGT.2012.6175685
76. Majumdar, S.: Charging Infrastructure for Electric Vehicles Revised
Guidelines & Standards‐reg. Ministry of Power, Government of India.
https://powermin.gov.in/sites/default/files/uploads/Revised_MoP_
Guidelines_01_10_2019.pdf (2019). Accessed 24 Jun. 2021
77. Ruiz, V., Di Persio, F.: Standards for the performance and durability
assessment of electric vehicle batteries – Possible performance criteria
for an Ecodesign Regulation, EUR 29371 EN, Publications Office of the
European Union, Luxembourg (2018)
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
- 395
78. Morrow, K., Karner, D., Francfort, J.: Plug‐in Hybrid Electric
Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Review Final Report Battelle En-
ergy Alliance Contract No. 58517. https://avt.inel.gov/pdf/phev/
phevinfrastructureReport08.pdf (2008). Accessed 24 June 2021
79. Dong, J., Liu, C., Lin, Z.: Charging infrastructure planning for promoting
battery electric vehicles: an activity‐based approach using multiday travel
data. Transp. Res. C Emerg. Technol. 38, 44–55 (2014). https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.trc.2013.11.001
80. Zhou, B., et al.: Optimal coordination of electric vehicles for virtual
power plants with dynamic communication spectrum allocation. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Inform. 17(1), 450–462 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.
2020.2986883
81. Da Silva, F.L., et al.: Coordination of electric vehicle charging
through multiagent reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid. 11(3), 2347–2356 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2019.
2952331
82. Rigas, E.S., Ramchurn, S.D., Bassiliades, N.: Managing electric vehicles in
the smart grid using artificial intelligence: a survey. IEEE Trans. Intell.
Transp. Syst. 16(4), 1619–1635 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.
2014.2376873
How to cite this article: Kumar, S., Usman, A.,
Rajpurohit, B.S.: Battery charging topology,
infrastructure, and standards for electric vehicle
applications: A comprehensive review. IET Energy Syst.
Integr. 3(4), 381–396 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1049/
esi2.12038
25168401, 2021, 4, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/esi2.12038 by Algeria Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [13/10/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
ET AL.
KUMAR

Run‐through model of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging mechanism in EV

APPEN DIX

FIGURE A1
-396