Advertisement

Online Parameter Identification for State of Power Prediction of Lithium-ion Batteries in Electric Vehicles Using Extremum Seeking

  • Chun WeiEmail author
  • Mouhacine Benosman
  • Taesic Kim
Article

Abstract

Accurate state-of-power (SOP) estimation is critical for building battery systems with optimized performance and longer life in electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles. This paper proposes a novel parameter identification method and its implementation on SOP prediction for lithium-ion batteries. The extremum seeking algorithm is developed for identifying the parameters of batteries on the basis of an electrical circuit model incorporating hysteresis effect. A rigorous convergence proof of the estimation algorithm is provided. In addition, based on the electrical circuit model with the identified parameters, a battery SOP prediction algorithm is derived, which considers both the voltage and current limitations of the battery. Simulation results for lithium-ion batteries based on real test data from urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS) are provided to validate the proposed parameter identification and SOP prediction methods. The proposed method is suitable for real operation of embedded battery management system due to its low complexity and numerical stability.

Keywords

Battery management system extremum seeking lithium-ion battery parameter identification state of power 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

References

  1. [1]
    V. Minh and J. Pumwa, “Simulation and control of hybrid electric vehicles,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 10,no. 2, pp. 308–316, April 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Han, H. Aki, S. Han, B. Kwon, and J. Park, “Optimal charging strategy for a residential PEV battery considering bidirectional trade and frequency regulation,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 14,no. 2, pp. 587–597, April 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Cao and B. Cao, “Neural network sliding mode control based on on-line identification for electric vehicle with ultracapacitor-battery hybrid power,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 7,no. 3, pp. 409–418, June 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Wongsathan and A. Nuangnit, “Optimal hybrid neurofuzzy based controller using MOGA for photovoltaic (PV) battery charging system,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 16,no. 6, pp. 3036–3046, December 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    G. Plett, “Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs - Part 3. State and parameter estimation,” J. Power Sources, vol. 134,no. 2, pp. 262–276, August 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    G. Plett, “Sigma-point Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs: Part 2. Simultaneous state and parameter estimation,” J. Power Sources, vol. 161,no. 2, pp. 1369–1384, October 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Z. Chen, Y. Fu, and C. Mi, “State of charge estimation of lithium-ion batteries in electric drive vehicles using extended Kalman filtering,” IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 62,no. 3, pp. 1020–1030, March 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. D. Rubio, “Stable Kalman filter and neural network for the chaotic systems identification,” Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 354,no. 16, pp. 7444–7462, November 2017.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    E. Lughofer, S. Kindermann, M. Pratama, and J. D. Rubio, “Top-down sparse fuzzy regression modeling from data with improved coverage,” International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, vol. 19,no. 5, pp. 1645–1658, October 2017.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. D. Rubio, E. Lughofer, J. A. Meda-Campana, L. A. Paramo, J. F. Novoa, and J. Pacheco, “Neural network updating via argument Kalman filter for modeling of Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy models,” Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, vol. 35,no. 2, pp. 2585–2596, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. D. Rubio, E. Lughofer, P. Angelov, and J. Novoa, “A novel algorithm for the modeling of complex processes,” Kybernetika, vol. 54,no. 1, pp. 79–95, 2018.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. Giordano, V. Klass, M. Behm, G. Lindbergh, and J. Sjoberg, “Model-based lithium-ion battery resistance estimation from electric vehicle operating data,” IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 67,no. 5, pp. 3720–3728, May 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Roscher, O. Bohlen, and D. Sauer, “Reliable state estimation of multicell lithium-ion battery system,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., vol. 26,no. 3, pp. 737–743, September 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    C. Gould, C. Bingham, D. Stone, and P. Bentley, “New battery model and state-of-health determination through subspace parameter estimation and state-observer techniques,” IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 58,no. 8, pp. 3905–3916, October 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    A. Fotouhi, D. Auger, K. Propp, and S. Longo, “Electric vehicle battery parameter identification and SOC observability analysis: NiMH and Li-S case studies,” IET Power Electron., vol. 10,no. 11, pp. 1289–1297, September 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    X. Chen, W. Shen, M. Dai, Z. Cao, J. Jin, and A. Kapoor, “Robust adaptive sliding-mode observer using RBF neural network for lithium-ion battery state of charge estimation in electric vehicle,” IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 65,no. 4, pp. 1936–1947, April 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Y. Zhang, C. Zhang, and X. Zhang, “State-of-charge estimation of the lithium-ion battery system with time-varying parameter for hybrid electric vehicles,” IET Control Theory Appl., vol. 8,no. 3, pp. 160–167, Feburary 2014.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    W. Shen and H. Li, “A sensitivity-based group-wise parameter identification algorithm for the electric model of li-ion battery,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 4377–4387, March 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    T. Feng, L. Yang, X. Zhao, H. Zhang, and J. Qiang, “Online identification of lithium-ion battery parameters based on an improved equivalent-circuit model and its implementation on battery state-of-power prediction,” J. Power Sources, vol. 281, pp. 192–203, May 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    F. Sun, R. Xiong, H. He, W. Li, and J. Aussems, “Modelbased dynamic multi-parameter method for peak power estimation of lithium-ion batteries,” Applied Energy, vol. 96, pp. 378–386, August 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    R. Xiong, H. He, F. Sun, X. Liu, and Z. Liu, “Model-based state-of-charge and peak power capability joint estimation for lithium-ion battery in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” J. Power Sources, vol. 229, pp. 159–169, May 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    P. Malysz, J. Ye, R. Gu, H. Yang, and A. Emadi, “Battery state-of-power peak current calculation and verification using an asymmetric parameter equivalent circuit model,” IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 65,no. 6, pp. 4512–4522, June 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    J. Lu, Z. Chen, Y. Yang, and M. Lv, “Online estimation of state of power for lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles using genetic algorithm,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 20868–20880, April 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    M. Benosman and G. Atinc, “Multi-parametric extremum seeking-based learning control for electromagnetic actuators,” International Journal of Control, vol. 88,no. 3, pp. 517–530, April 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    M. Benosman, Learning-based Adaptive Control: An Extremum Seeking Approach, Theory and Applications, Elsevier, July 2016.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    M. Krstic, “Performance improvement and limitations in extremum seeking control,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 39, pp. 313–326, April 2000.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    M. Rotea, “Analysis of multivariable extremum seeking algorithms,” Proc. American Control Conf., Chicago, USA, pp. 433–437, June 2000.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    T. Kim and W. Qiao, “A hybrid battery model capable of capturing dynamic circuit characteristics and nonlinear capacity effects,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., vol. 26,no. 4, pp. 1172–1180, December 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    M. Verbrugge and E. Tate, “Adaptive state of charge algorithm for nickel metal hydride batteries including hysteresis phenomena,” J. Power Sources, vol. 126, pp. 236–249, Feburary 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    T. Kim, Y. Wang, H. Fang, Z. Sahinoglu, and T. Wada, “Model-based condition monitoring for lithium-ion batteries,” J. Power Sources, vol. 295, pp. 16–27, November 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Y. Pan and H. Yu, “Composite learning from adaptive dynamic surface control,” IEEE Trans. Automatic Control, vol. 61,no. 9, pp. 2603–2609, September 2016.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    M. Benosman, “Multi-parametric extremum seeking-based auto-tuning for robust input-output linearization control,” International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, vol. 26,no. 18, pp. 4035–4055, 2016.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Y. Tan, D. Nesic, and I. Mareels, “On the choice of dither in extremum seeking systems: a case study,” Automatica, vol. 44,no. 5, pp. 1446–1450, May 2008.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICROS, KIEE and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Information EngineeringZhejiang University of TechnologyHangzhou, ZhejiangChina
  2. 2.Mitsubishi Electric Research LaboratoriesCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceTexas AM University-KingsvilleKingsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations