4.6 Article

State of charge estimation for lithium-ion battery using an electrochemical model based on electrical double layer effect

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 326, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2019.134966

关键词

Lithium ion battery; Electrical double layer; Parameter identification; SOC estimation

资金

  1. NSFC [21501071]
  2. Six Talents Peak Project of Jiangsu Province [2016-XNYQC-003, 2015-XNYQC-008]
  3. Special Funds for the Transformation of Scientific and Technological Achievements in Jiangsu Province [BA2016162]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20140557]
  5. National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2015BAG07B00]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper focuses on an efficient fundamental approach of the electrochemical model of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), especially considering the effect of Electrical Double Layer (EDL) potential on the over-potential of batteries. Firstly, the electrode solid phase and electrolyte liquid phase in LIBs are modelled by electrochemical theory, especially emphasizing the influence of EDL structure. Three-parameter parabola method is effectively employed to simplify the model. Furthermore, a parameter identification method based on genetic algorithm is proposed according to the structure characteristics of EDL model. The accuracy of model is verified by comparing the output voltage of the EDL model under 0.1-2C charging/discharging, 1C pulse discharging and New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) condition with the experimental terminal voltage. Finally, the battery SOC estimation method is developed by using the extended Kalman filter (EKF) algorithm based on EDL model and is verified by the 1C pulse discharge and the NEDC condition experiments. The results show that the proposed algorithm can accurately estimate the SOC value of LIBs. In addition, the algorithm has a strong correction effect on the initial SOC error and convergence. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据