Publication:
Comparative analysis of equivalent circuit battery models for electric vehicle battery management systems

dc.contributor.authorTekin, Merve
dc.contributor.authorKaramangil, Mehmet İhsan
dc.contributor.buuauthorTEKİN, MERVE
dc.contributor.buuauthorKARAMANGİL, MEHMET İHSAN
dc.contributor.departmentMühendislik Fakültesi
dc.contributor.departmentOtomotiv Mühendisliği Bölümü
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0003-2831-3175
dc.contributor.researcheridAAH-8619-2019
dc.contributor.researcheridAAG-8571-2021
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-17T07:51:27Z
dc.date.available2025-01-17T07:51:27Z
dc.date.issued2024-03-23
dc.description.abstractLithium -ion batteries need to be controlled by a Battery Management System (BMS) to operate safely and efficiently. BMS controls parameters, such as current, voltage, temperature, state of charge (SoC),state of health (SoH), state of power (SoP) and etc. The battery models and several prediction algorithms that the BMS uses to carry out these checks are essential to the system's performance. Therefore, the battery model is crucial to the BMS. This model is used to optimize the performance, capacity, lifetime and safety of the battery. Using the accurate battery model for BMS and electric vehicles can improve energy efficiency, extend battery life and reduce safety risks. Therefore, it is important that the model can accurately reflect the battery behavior under different load conditions. In this study, the performance of Rint, Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV), Thevenin, and Dual Polarization (DP) battery models, which are widely known in the literature, to simulate static and dynamic voltage behavior is compared. A 18650 NMC battery was used for this purpose, and Hybrid Pulse Power Characterization (HPPC), Dynamic Stress Test (DST), Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), and Constant Current (CC) discharge tests were performed. The performance of the models for the four tests is compared. The maximum error values for WLTP are 2.98 % in Rint, 1.32 % in PNGV, 2.80 % in Thevenin, and 1.09 % in DP. Comparing the performances of models for all tests, it is found that the DP model is the most accurate model under both constant and dynamic current conditions.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.est.2024.111327
dc.identifier.eissn2352-1538
dc.identifier.issn2352-152X
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85188628247
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2024.111327
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X24009125
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11452/49542
dc.identifier.volume86
dc.identifier.wos001218062000001
dc.indexed.wosWOS.SCI
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.bapFGA-2023-1314
dc.relation.journalJournal of Energy Storage
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectLithium-ion batteries
dc.subjectPolarization
dc.subjectBattery modeling
dc.subjectBattery management system
dc.subjectThevenin model
dc.subjectRint model
dc.subjectPngv model
dc.subjectDual polarization model
dc.subjectScience & technology
dc.subjectTechnology
dc.subjectEnergy & fuels
dc.titleComparative analysis of equivalent circuit battery models for electric vehicle battery management systems
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.departmentMühendislik Fakültesi/Otomotiv Mühendisliği Bölümü
local.indexed.atWOS
local.indexed.atScopus
relation.isAuthorOfPublicatione53bdd63-bdb2-44ee-9939-d07ba4dd3881
relation.isAuthorOfPublication28dc729c-b0e6-44bb-b6e7-3e4cc105d73d
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverye53bdd63-bdb2-44ee-9939-d07ba4dd3881

Files