Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract—In this work, the problem of battery state of charge In indirect methods, SoC is evaluated using information
estimation is investigated using a model based approach. An from other estimated or measured quantities, such as the open
experimentally validated model of a battery developed by AllCell circuit voltage (VOCV ) [3] which is direct function of SoC,
Technologies, specific for light electric vehicles (electric scooter
or bicycles) is used. Two state of charge estimation algorithms experimentally evaluated. For a large variety of Lead-Acid
are developed: an extended Kalman filter and an adaptive and Li-ion batteries the SoC estimation with this method is
extended Kalman filter. The adaptive version of Kalman filter is straightforward due to the linear decrease of the VOCV with
designed in order to adaptively set a proper value of the model reference to SoC. When the voltage relationship VOCV (SoC)
noise covariance, using the information coming from the on-line shows a flat region for a wide range of SoC values, it is hard
innovation analysis. A comparison between the two approaches
is conducted that shows that the adaptive Kalman filter can deal to translate the VOCV measurement to SoC [1], [4].
with the problem of incorrect value of the model noise covariance Other kind of methods have been used in literature, such as
matrix producing lower estimation error. artificial neural networks and impedance spectroscopy. These
Index Terms—Estimation; Battery; Kalman filter; Adaptive. methods are usually suitable for laboratory application, since
they require a large computational effort [5] and very accurate
I. I NTRODUCTION measurements [1].
For all these reasons, other methods have been investigated,
Light electric vehicles, such as electric bikes or scooters, especially for vehicle on-board application based on real mea-
offer many benefits over their traditional counterparts such as surements, as the case of e-bikes considered in this work. In
range, e-bikes and e-scooters can go further than conventional this paper two model based estimation methods are developed
bicycles with little effort. In electric vehicle architecture, and validated with experimental data: an extended Kalman
battery pack is one of the crucial elements of the powertrain, filter (EKF) and an adaptive extended Kalman filter (AEKF).
in terms of range available and driving performance. The EKF is a successful model-based method to estimate
Lithium-ion batteries have become the battery of choice the state of a non-linear state-space model developed for a
not only for hybrid and electric vehicle, but also for light physical system. The estimation is based on the comparison
vehicle applications, thanks to their high specific energy, between the model output and the measurements from the
energy density, cycle/calendar life as well as their reduced real system. The physical system is modeled in such a way
need for maintenance compared to flooded lead acid batteries. that the state and output equations are affected by gaussian
One of their few drawbacks is the difficulty estimating the white noises. A complete knowledge of the noises statistical
amount of remaining energy. properties is assumed [6]. The a priori covariance values of
An accurate estimation of the energy available inside the measurement and process noises are crucial for the stability
battery is essential to excellent powertrain operation and and the convergence property of the EKF. A choice of constant
prevent stranding the rider. Knowing the remaining energy also values for these parameters is not always straightforward: often
helps in preventing overcharge and overdischarge of batteries, the state variables do not correspond to physical measurable
vital to safe use and long life of lithium-ion batteries. quantities and a statistical analysis is hard to perform. For this
The available energy inside the battery is represented by reasons, noises added in the equations become design param-
the state of charge (SoC). SoC cannot be directly measured, eters for the filter with effect on the estimation performance.
hence the estimation of this quantity must be performed. The estimated state with EKF in case of battery applications
In literature different methods have been developed for SoC is the state of charge: SoC estimation with EKF is performed
estimation. Following the Coulomb counting definition, SoC in [7]–[10].
is evaluated as the ratio between the available capacity inside The AEKF is developed to deal with the problem of
the battery and the nominal capacity [1]. This requires to choosing the noises covariances in order to improve the
compute the integral of the battery current; hence this method estimation performance with respect to the EKF. With the
is very sensitive to the SoC initial condition, not always known AEKF, covariance parameters are not taken as constant, but
precisely, and the integration can easily diverge in case of adaptively updated. The AEKF has been applied to different
additional noise [2]. engineering fields: robotic applications, tank reactor moni-
IPexp(k) [A]
of rate of charge or discharge current in normalized form:
0
I(k)
C-rate = [1/h] −2
Qnom
−4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
where I(k) is the battery current and Qnom is the battery time [s] x 10
5
VP (k) [V]
equivalent to xx times the nominal battery capacity2 . 3.5
exp
3
4.5 3.7
VOCV [V]
3.6
4
3.5
1.3675 1.368 1.3685 1.369 1.3695 1.37
3.5 time [s] x 10
5
3 (d)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
SoC [−] Fig. 3: Experimental test for dynamic parameters identification: (a) Battery
P (k); (b) Measured voltage V P (k); (c) Zoom of battery current
current Iexp
Fig. 2: Open circuit voltage: identified VOCV function of SoC exp
P (k) around a pulse performed at SoC = 50%; (d) Zoom of the measured
Iexp
voltage at SoC = 50%
2 A rate of C/5 corresponds to a constant current value able to discharge The symmetrical current pulses have a duration of 10s at
the battery in 5 hours; 2C is the current corresponding to the double of the a current level of ±1C. The different SoC levels between
capacity, at which the battery will be discharged 1/2 hour. two consecutive pulses are reached discharging the battery
3 CC-CV protocol: the battery is charged at a constant current (1C) until
the voltage reaches the upper voltage limit, followed by a phase where the with a low constant current at C/40. Although the pulses are
voltage is hold at constant value until the current drops to zero. performed at different levels of SoC, the dependence of these
parameters on SoC is not taken into account as a wide variation R0−identification test
of the parameters values on the SoC has not been registered
during testing. 20
Iexp(k) [A]
Least Square method (LS) has been used for the identifi-
cation. Parameters values are identified minimizing the sum S 10
of the squared difference between the experimental measured
R
P (k) in Figure 3(b), and the voltage predicted by
voltage Vexp 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
the model (3): 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Tf
! time [s]
P 2
min(S) = min ∑ Vexp ( j) − g(x( j), u( j)) (4) (a)
j=T0
where T0 and T f are the initial and final time instants of the VRexp(k)
4.2
experimental test. In (4), the model input u( j) corresponds Vmod(k)
4
to the current profile of Figure 3(a), while the state x( j) is
evaluated integrating the model (1) starting from the test initial 3.8
condition: SoC(0) = 100%, VCT (0) = VDi f (0) = 0V .
Voltage [V]
3.6
duce the battery behavior. For this reason the dependence of R0 3 3.9
j=T0,i 4
where T0,i and T f ,i are the initial and final time instants of 2
each batch i respectively. As shown in Section II, the output
0
function g(·) has a linear dependence on the parameter R0,i and 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
the input u(k), and it is non linear with reference to the model SoC [−]
state x(k). To apply the LS method, the input u(k) and the Fig. 5: Identified resistance R0 (SoC) function of state of charge
state x(k) are known at each time instant, the former from the
test current profile (Figure 4(a)) and the latter obtained from R (k) is compared
In Figure 4(b) the experimental voltage Vexp
the model by integrating equation (1) where the parameters
with the model output voltage Vmod (k), evaluated from the
identified in Subsection III-B are substituted; this is possible
model output equation (2) where VOCV and the dynamic
since the current measurements are accurate and the values
parameters identified in the previous subsections are used
SoC(0) = 100% and VCT (0) = VDi f (0) = 0V are considered as
along with R0 (SoC) just identified. The matching between the
initial conditions. R (k) is quantified using
Vmod (k) and the measured voltage Vexp
For each batch i, the average state of charge SoCi is
the voltage error ẽLS (k) defined as:
calculated, to relate the identified resistance values R0,i to
R
the corresponding SoCi . The dependence R0 (SoC) is thus ẽLS (k) = Vexp (k) −Vmod (k) (6)
The RMS value4 of ẽLS (k) is evaluated considering the Validation test
whole SoC discharge range from 0% to 100% SoC, called
RMS0,100 , and also for the reduced SoC range from 10% to 20
IVexp(k) [A]
90% SoC, called RMS10,90 . The numerical values of RMS0,100
10
and RMS10,90 are shown in Table I.
Voltage [V]
D. Model validation
A new experimental test, called validation test, has been 3.6
performed on the battery pack at BOL in order to validate the
3.4
model. This test represents a generic usage scenario for the
battery, related to the light electric-vehicle application. 3.2
Starting from a fully charged condition, reached following
CC-CV protocol, the battery pack is fully discharged with the 3
current profile in Figure 6(a). It is made by different steps at 99% SoC 1% SoC
2.8
3 different levels of C-rate, up to a maximum current value 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
V (k), is time [s]
of 2C. The validation test measured voltage, called Vexp
shown in Figure 6(b). (b)
The model validation is shown in Figure 6(b), where the V (k); (b) Comparison between
V (k) is compared with the model Fig. 6: Validation test: (a) Battery current Iexp
experimental voltage Vexp V
measured voltage, called Vexp (k), and the model output voltage Vmod (k)
output voltage Vmod (k) evaluated with (2) using the identified
parameters and the current profile in Figure 6(a) given as input.
It is noticeable that the identified model describes the battery the gaussian noises on the state and the output equations, as
behavior with an output voltage close to the measurements. Kalman assumptions:
The matching between Vmod (k) and Vexp V (k) is not as close as
(
in Figure 4(b) where the experimental voltage Vexp R (k) is the x(k + 1) = A x(k) + B u(k) + v(k)
(7)
same used for the resistance R0 identification. V (k) = g (x(k), u(k)) + w(k)
The accuracy of the identified state space model is a crucial
point to obtain good SoC estimation performance with a model where v(k) ∼ N (0, Q) and w(k) ∼ N (0, R) are white gaussian
based estimation algorithm, as presented in the next section. noises with zero mean and covariance matrices Q for the model
state equation and R for the output equation respectively.
IV. STATE OF CHARGE ESTIMATION The EKF algorithm is based on the implementation of
ALGORITHMS Prediction Step and Correction Step [7], whose equations are
The SoC estimation problem for an e-bike application is repeated in Table II.
addressed, with the purpose to define an algorithm suitable TABLE II: Summary of Extended Kalman filter algorithm equations
for on board implementation, in order to improve the battery
usage and the vehicle power management. To this end, two Prediction Step:
algorithms are discussed: an extended Kalman filter and an x̂− (k) = A x̂(k − 1) AT + B u(k − 1) (8a)
adaptive extended Kalman filter. −
P (k) = A P(k − 1) A + Q T
(8b)
Correction Step:
A. Extended Kalman Filter L(k) = P− (k)C(k)T (C(k)P− (k)C(k)T + R)−1 (9a)
To estimate the state of the battery model defined in Section x̂(k) = x̂− (k) + L( k)[Vexp (k) − g x̂− (k), u(k) ]
(9b)
II an EKF is proposed due to the non linearity of the output
P(k) = (I − L(k)C(k))P− (k) (9c)
equation. The model in (3), is written with the inclusion of
q
4 RMS value of a generic vector x(n) is defined as RMSx = 1
N ∑N
n=1 |x(n)|
2 The quantity x̂(k) is the estimated state and P(k) = E[e(k) ·
where N is the number of elements in vector x(n). e(k)T ] is the covariance matrix of the estimation error defined
as: e(k) = x(k) − x̂(k). In the prediction step, x̂(k) and P(k) g(x̂− (k), u(k)). In d(k) the predicted voltage is computed by
are projected to the next time step using the dynamic model the model output equation when the state in the prediction
equation (7) and the noise covariance Q. The superscript minus step, x̂− (k), is taken into account.
indicates that these quantities in (8a) and (8b) have not yet The innovation covariance matrix is computed as:
been corrected using the measurements [7]. In the correction
step, the state estimation x̂− (k) and its covariance P− (k) are 1 N
corrected by using the information from the measurements Vexp
D̂(k) = ∑ d(i)d(i)T
N i=i
(11)
0
and the adapted Kalman gain L(k). L(k) is evaluated through
using a moving average of the innovation d(k), over a moving
(9a), and Vexp (k) in equation (9b) refers to the actual voltage
estimation window of size N, where i0 = k − N + 1 is the first
measured. x̂(k) is the state estimation, obtained to reduce the
instant inside the window. Matrix D̂(k) represents the actual
difference between the experimental voltage Vexp (k) and the
performance of the estimation process, so that it is a crucial
model response g (x̂− (k), u(k)). element to be used in defining the adaptive law for matrix Q.
∂ g(x,I)
Matrix C(k) = ∂ x , used in the filter equations The choice of the window length N become a design parameter
x̂− (k),u(k) for the algorithm: it must be not so small to correctly represent
(9a) and (9c), is the linearized output matrix with respect to
the estimation performance and at the same time, for on-board
the state x(k), obtained from the linearization of the model
implementation, it has to consider the memory available on a
output function g(x, u) and evaluated in the linearization point
physical board.
(x̂− (k), u(k)).
With regards to the choice of the noise covariance matrices Starting from the evaluation of D̂(k), the innovation based
Q and R, matrix Q is chosen under the assumption that adaptive Kalman filter can be used, as demonstrated in [11].
there is no correlation between the noise on cross state The innovative contribution in [11] is the formulation of the
components [10], leading to a diagonal structure. The state filter in terms of maximum likelihood (ML) estimator. The
noise v(k) represents the model uncertainties as well as the advantage of this approach is to define the traditional EKF
approximation due to the non-linearities not considered, which estimator function of some adaptive parameters, usually the
cause the battery dynamic behavour not to be completely process and measure noise covariances Q and R. A ML equa-
represented by the model #[9]. The proposed matrix Q = tion is also defined, function of the same adaptive parameters.
In this work, the adaptive parameter considered is the process
"
1000 · R 0 0
0 0.1 · R 0 , which is defined with reference noise covariance matrix Q. The ML equation represents the
0 0 0.01 · R mathematical condition which allows to derive an adaptive
to the matrix R, shows a higher weight on the first component law for the matrix Q function of the innovation covariance
of the state x(k), since the main interest is in the SoC matrix D̂(k). Under the assumption that the measurement noise
estimation. covariance R is taken as constant, the ML equation in [11] can
The output noise covariance R is evaluated considering the
be transformed in:
voltage identification error ẽLS (k) defined in Subsection III-C.
From a statistical analysis of the error, it can be shown that 1 N
ẽLS (k) is well approximated by a Gaussian distribution with
Q̂(k) = ∑ ∆x̂(i) ∆x̂(i)T + P(k) − A P(k − 1) AT
N i=i
(12)
0
zero mean and covariance value R = 4.4725 · 10−4 .
where ∆x̂ is the state correction:
In the next subsection an adaptive version of the EKF is
presented. ∆x̂(k) = x̂(k) − x̂− (k) (13)
B. Adaptive Extended Kalman Filter evaluated as the difference between the state before and after
The AEKF approach used in this work is based on the work updates. From (9b) it can also be written as:
developed in [11] for INS/GPS application. An adaptive update
∆x̂(k) = L(k) d(k) (14)
of process covariance matrix Q can help in overcoming the
model uncertainties represented by the state and output noises. Substituting (14) into (12), Q̂(k) is approximated as [11]:
An adaptive choice for matrix R is not investigated, since a
reliable analysis of the measurement covariance R is possible Q̂(k) = L(k) D̂(k) L(k)T (15)
starting from the model validation, as discussed in the previous To conclude, the AEKF algorithm for the SoC estimation uses
subsection. the same equation of the EKF filter summarized in Table II,
In most of the adaptive solutions developed in literature, with the only difference that equation (8b) is now implemented
estimation performance are evaluated through the information using Q̂(k) as in (15):
represented by the innovation sequence d(k). The innovation
d(k) is defined: P− (k + 1) = A P(k) AT + Q̂(k)
0.6 0.6
SoC [−]
SoC [−]
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
time [s] time [s]
Fig. 7: Comparison between SoC estimation results with reference to the Fig. 9: Comparison between SoC estimation results with reference to the
R0 -identification test (Figure 4): reference Coulomb counting SoCcc (k), ˆ EKF (k)
validation test (Figure 6): reference Coulomb counting SoCcc (k), SoC
ˆ EKF (k) estimated with EKF and SoC
SoC ˆ AEKF (k) estimated with AEKF estimated with EKF and SoC ˆ AEKF (k) estimated with AEKF
0.1 0.1
eAE K F (k) eAE K F (k)
+5% +5%
0.05 eE K F (k) 0.05 eE K F (k)
+1% +1%
0 0
−1% −1%
−0.05 −5% −0.05 −5%
−0.1 −0.1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
time [s] time [s]
Fig. 8: Comparison between SoC estimation error eEKF (k) and eAEKF (k) Fig. 10: Comparison between SoC estimation error eEKF (k) and eAEKF (k)
with reference to the R0 -identification test (Figure 4) with reference to the validation test (Figure 6)
R
validation test in Figure 6 where the measured voltage is Vexp
1
V ˆ ˆ
and Vexp respectively. We refer to SoCEKF and SoCAEKF as
0.8
SoC [−]