4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Battery Modeling and Parameter Extraction for Drive Cycle Loss Evaluation of a Modular Battery System for Vehicles Based on a Cascaded H-Bridge Multilevel Inverter

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS
Volume 56, Issue 6, Pages 6968-6977

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TIA.2020.3026662

Keywords

Batteries; Harmonic analysis; Integrated circuit modeling; Vehicle dynamics; Voltage control; Batteries; inverters; multilevel systems; vehicles

Funding

  1. Swedish Energy Agency [44807-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article deals with the modeling and the parameterization of the battery packs used in cascaded H-bridge multilevel propulsion inverters. Since the battery packs are intermittently conducting the motor currents, the battery cells are stressed with a dynamic current containing a substantial amount of low-order harmonic components up to a couple of kHz, which is a major difference in comparison to a traditional two-level inverter drive. Different models, such as pure resistive and dynamic RC-networks, are considered to model the energy losses for different operating points (OPs) and driving cycles. Using a small-scale setup, the models parameters are extracted using both a low-frequency, pulsed current, and an electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) sweep. The models are compared against measurements conducted on the small-scale setup at different OPs. Additionally, a drive cycle loss comparison is simulated. The simple resistive model overestimates the losses by about 20% and is, thus, not suitable. The dynamic three-time-constant model, parameterized by a pulsed current, complies with the measurements for all analyzed OPs, especially at low speed, with a maximum deviation of 3.8%. Extracting the parameters using an EIS seems suitable for higher speeds, though the losses for the chosen OPs are underestimated by 1.5% 7.9%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available