Professional Documents
Culture Documents
I.
INTRODUCTION
This paper is concerned with supercapacitors
(electrochemical capacitors) and their applications in electric
drive vehicles in place of or in combination with batteries. The
electric drive vehicles considered are hybrid vehicles and fuel
cell vehicles. Special attention is given to sizing the
supercapacitor unit to minimize volume and cost and the
control strategies that take advantage of the high efficiency
and charge acceptance of supercapacitors compared to
batteries. Present vehicle applications of supercapacitors
include their use in braking systems and stop-go hybrids and
future applications in charge sustaining and plug-in hybrids.
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
Constant current
Current A
50
100
150
200
250
Time sec
83.7
36.1
25.1
7.1
4.1
2.7-2.0V
Ah
1.16
1.0
1.05
.39
.28
Time sec
88.9
44.9
29.5
21.1
15.2
2.7-1.35
Ah
1.25
1.25
1.23
1.17
1.06
Constant power
2.7-2.0V
Power W
W/kg
Time sec
Wh
55
743
164
2.5
155
2094
58.1
2.5
252
3405
23.8
1.66
303
4095
16.6
1.4
350
4730
11.9
1.16
400
5405
8.3
.92
500
6756
4.3
.60
Weight 74 g, volume 38 cm3
pouch packaged
Pulse efficiency 95% P= .95x.05 V2/R = .95x.05x (2.7)2/.0015 =231
(W/kg)95% = 3120, (W/L)95% = 6078
Wh/kg
33.8
33.8
22.4
18.9
15.7
12.4
8.1
Time sec
172
62.8
35.4
28.3
22.4
17.3
10.8
Capacitance.F
3556
3870
4060
3801
4130
2.7-1.35
Wh
2.63
2.7
2.42
2.38
2.18
1.92
1.5
Wh/kg
35.5
36.5
32.7
32.2
29.5
25.9
20.3
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
Device
Maxwell
Maxwell
Vinatech
Vinatech
Ioxus
Ioxus
Skeleton
Technol.
Skeleton
Technol.
Yunasko*
Yunasko*
Yunasko*
Yunasko*
Yunasko*
Ness
Ness
Ness (cyl.)
LS Cable
BatScap
JSR Micro
(graphitic
carbon/
AC) *
V
rate
C
(F)
RC
sec
Wh/kg
(1)
2885
605
336
342
3000
2000
R
(mOhm)
(3)
.375
.90
3.5
6.6
.45
.54
2.7
2.7
2.7
3.0
2.7
2.7
W/kg
Match.
Imped.
8836
9597
9656
6321
7364
8210
Wgt.
(kg)
Vol.
lit.
4.2
2.35
4.5
5.6
4.0
4.0
W/kg
(95%)
(2)
994
1139
1085
710
828
923
1.1
.55
1.2
2.25
1.4
1.1
.55
.20
.054
.054
.55
.37
.414
.211
.057
.057
.49
.346
3.4
3200
.47
1.5
9.0
1730
15400
.40
.284
3.4
2.7
2.75
2.75
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.7
3.8
850
510
480
1275
7200
5200
1800
3640
3160
3200
2680
1100
2300
(plast.c
ase)
.8
.9
.25
.11
1.4
1.5
.55
.30
.4
.25
.20
1.15
.77
.68
.46
.12
.13
10
7.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
.80
.54
1.211.6
6.9
5.0
4.45
4.55
26
30
3.6
4.2
4.4
3.7
4.2
10
7.6
2796
2919
10241
8791
1230
3395
975
928
982
1400
2050
2450
1366
24879
25962
91115
78125
10947
30200
8674
8010
8728
12400
18225
21880
12200
.145
.078
.060
.22
.119
.068
.38
.65
.522
.63
.50
..144
.387
.097
.055
.044
.15
.065
.038
.277
.514
.379
.47
.572
.077
.214
(1) Energy density at 400 W/kg constant power, Vrated - 1/2 Vrated
(2) Power based on P=9/16*(1-EF)*V2/R, EF=efficiency of discharge
(3) Steady-state resistance including pore resistance
* All devices except those with * are packaged in metal/plastic containers: those with * are laminated pouched packaged
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
Vehicle configuration *
Conventional ICE
Insight
NREL default
Micro-HEV**
Caps-LA bat, 4 kw EM
Caps-LA bat, 1 kw EM
75.2
59.7
53.8
75.9
73
Mild-HEV
NMH bat, 10 kW EM
77
83.6
Ultracaps, 10 kW EM
77.7
83.9
*Insight CD =.25, AF=1.9m2 , W=1036 kg, CVT, 50 kW 3 cyl.
Engine
** Carbon/carbon supercapacitors, 20 Wh, 5 kg (cells)
Figure 3: Minimum engine power for efficiency operation for various size
engines
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
Table 5: Mild-HEV and Micro-HEV Advisor simulation results using carbon/carbon and hybrid supercapacitors
Mid-size passenger car: weight 1660 kg, Cd .3, Af 2.2 m2, fr .009
Weight of the
Energy storage system
Energy stored
ultracaps (kg)*
Mild HEV 20 kW motor
Yunasko hybrid
12
300 Wh
6
150 Wh
JM Energy hybrid
11
100 Wh
Yunasko C/C
22
100 Wh
Maxwell C/C
28
100Wh
Skeleton 2014 C/C 3200F
13
115
High power LiTiO battery
14
1120
mpg
FUDS
mpg
FEDHW
mpg
US06
47.4
45.3
47.8
46.0
47.2
47.8
40.6
46.5
46.0
47.2
46.4
47.5
47.0
40.3
32.2
31.6
31.9
31.6
32.2
31.9
30.5
25.5
36.8
26.8
80%
27%
19%
41.4
41.2
41.2
41.3
40.2
12%
28.9
28.5
28.6
28.3
28.0
7%
with the capacitors was higher than with the batteries. For
example, for the FUDS cycle the efficiency was 98% with the
capacitors and 91% with the lithium battery.
C. Fuel Cell Vehicles
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
0.3
2.2
0.01
0.3
1500
75
87.6
106
440
510
17.2
100
432
1.5
405
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
Table 8: Efficiencies of lithium batteries and carbon/carbon supercapacitors at peak power demand conditions
Mild hybrid vehicles
Eng. Pow
Electric
Battery
battery
Battery
Vehicle type
kW
motor kW
kWh
kW/kg (1)
efficiency
Compact
97
15
1.0
1.4
94
Mid-size
125
25
1.5
1.5
93.5
Full-size
160
50
2.0
2.3
90
Small SUV
140
25
1.5
1.5
93.5
Mid-size SUV
150
40
2.0
1.8
92
Delivery truck
200
50
3.0
1.5
93.5
Fuel cell vehicles
Fuel cell Electric
Battery Battery kW/kg
Battery
Vehicle type
kW
motor kW
kWh
(1), (3)
efficiency (3)
Compact
60
95
1.0
8.6
78.5
Mid-size
75
110
1.5
6.6
84
Full-size
100
140
2.5
5.0
89
Small SUV
85
120
1.5
7.2
82.5
Mid-size SUV
100
125
2.0
5.6
86
Delivery truck
125
200
4.0
4.5
90
Supercap
Wh
75
100
100
100
150
200
Supercap
Wh (4)
75
100
100
100
150
200
Supercap
kW/kg (2)
.9
1.1
2.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
Supercap
kW/kg (2)
5.7
5.0
6.3
5.4
3.8
4.5
Super cap
efficiency
97.5
97
96
97
97
97
Super cap
efficiency
90
91.5
88.5
91
93.5
92
(1) Energy density of the battery is 90 Wh/kg based on the weight of cells, (W/kg)95% = 1200
(2) Energy density of supercap is 4.5 Wh/kg based on cell weight, (W/kg)95% = 3000
(3) fuel cell provides 50% of peak power
to meet the other requirements. On the other hand, the weight
Table 9: Comparisons of the fuel economy of mild hybrid and fuel cell
of the supercapacitor is determined by the minimum energy
vehicles using supercapacitors and high power lithium batteries
storage requirement. The power and cycle life requirements
Mild hybrid vehicles
are usually easily satisfied. Hence the unit can be a more
Eng. Electric Supercap. Batteries
optimum solution for many applications and its weight can be
Vehicle type
Pow motor
mpg
mpg
less than that of the battery even though its energy density is
kW
kW
(1)
(2)
less than one-tenth that of the battery.
Compact
97
Mid-size
125
Full-size
160
Small SUV
140
Mid-size SUV 150
Delivery truck 200
Fuel cell vehicles
15
25
50
25
40
50
47.4/49.8
41.1/44.2
38.1/43.5
39.1/43.0
36.2/39.5
12.2/10.7
45/47.7
40.3/43.1
38.5/42.0
37.8/42.1
34.3/38.4
11.8/10.7
Supercap.
Batteries
Fuel Electric
Battery
mpg
mpg
Vehicle type cell motor
kWh gasol. Equiv gasol. Equiv
kW
kW
(3)
(3)
Compact
60
95
1.0
83.8/79
80.3/78.1
Mid-size
75
110
1.5
78.4/71.9
73.5/70.6
Full-size
100
140
2.5
67.4/64.2
64.5/63.5
Small SUV
85
120
1.5
72.7/70.4
70.9/71.4
Mid-size SUV 100
125
2.0
65/61.6
61.5/61.2
Delivery truck 125
200
4.0
19.6/15.7
18.8/16.1
(1) Carbon/carbon supercapacitor 1200 F from Yunasko
(2) LiTiO battery from Altairnano 3.8 Ah
(3) mpg FUDS cycle/ mpg Highway cycle
V.
COST CONSIDERATIONS
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference 2014, Florence, Italy, December 17-19, 2014