Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

State of charge estimation based on a new dual-polarization-

resistance model for electric vehicles
Xiaowei Zhao, Yishan Cai, Lin Yang*, Zhongwei Deng, Jiaxi Qiang
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Li-ion batteries have been widely used as the power source of electric vehicles. However, the acquisition
Received 6 November 2016 of precise state of charge via battery management system remains a problem. A root cause is the complex
Received in revised form characteristics of battery polarization, which is affected by the load current. In order to improve the
11 June 2017
accuracy and reliability of battery state of charge estimation, this paper focuses on the following three
Accepted 16 June 2017
aspects: (1) A novel dual-polarization-resistance model is established based on the Thevenin model, in
Available online 18 June 2017
which the polarization resistance can be adaptively adjusted in accordance with the load current, making
the battery model more robust. (2) An Extended Kalman Particle Filter is applied in state of charge
Keywords:
Electric vehicles
estimation, and an improved Euler method is proposed for temporal propagation of the state vector,
State of charge estimation which effectively increases the calculation accuracy. (3) The proposed state of charge estimation algo-
Dual-polarization-resistance model rithm is demonstrated through a set of experiments. By using the dual-polarization-resistance model,
Extended Kalman particle filter the maximum state of charge estimation error based on Extended Kalman Filter is reduced to 2.3%, while
Improved Euler method using conventional Thevenin model, the maximum error can be as high as 6.2%. Furthermore, by
employing Extended Kalman Particle Filter on the dual-polarization-resistance model, the maximum
error can further reduce to 1.8%.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 1.1. Review of SOC estimation method

In recent years, electric vehicles (EVs) have been playing an
important role in relieving oil crisis aggravated by traditional ve-
hicles [1]. As the number of EVs increases, the emissions of
greenhouse gas and PM2.5 will be reduced [2]. The low-voltage
cells need to be connected in large numbers to meet the power
demand of each EV [3]. Meanwhile, Lithium-ion batteries are
widely used in EVs because of their high energy density [4]. But
there are still numerous problems in the commercialization of EVs,
one of which is precise estimation of the state of charge (SOC) of the
battery pack, which is an index of battery residual energy and po-
wer output capability. With an accurate estimation of SOC, the
abuse of batteries can be avoided, which improves the driving
safety [5]. However, due to the strong time-varying and nonlinear
characteristics of battery cells, accurate estimation of SOC still re-
mains a challenge [6].
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yanglin@sjtu.edu.cn (L. Yang).
Many approaches to estimate battery SOC have been proposed.
The advantages and disadvantages of each method are elaborated
in details. There are four main types of methods to estimate the
SOC: Ampere-hour counting, open-circuit-voltage (OCV) methods,
neural network algorithms and model-based methods [5]. Ampere-
hour counting calculates the SOC by measuring the load current
and counting the accumulated charge, which is easy to implement
[7]. But this method may introduce accumulated error from current
measurement. Therefore, strict requirements are needed on sensor
precision [8], and OCV methods are used to calibrate the initial SOC
[9]. OCV methods utilizing the relationship between OCV and SOC
are simpler than others, since the OCV is proportional to the stored
energy [9]. Nevertheless, the battery pack voltage needs settling
time to recovery, so it's not appropriate to apply OCV methods in
online calculation [10]. As for the neural network algorithms [11],
they hold unique superiorities in solving nonlinear problems by
using multiple layers of neurons. In Ref. [12], the artificial neural
network was used to estimate the available capacity for lead-acid
batteries, which was validated to be more accurate than the
Peukert-equation based models. In Ref. [13], the immune

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.06.094
0360-5442/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52
evolutionary programming was applied to the neural-network
based SOC estimation method for nickel-metal hydride batteries,
overcoming the disadvantages of the Back-Propagation algorithm.
Despite the high accuracies of neural network algorithms, massive
data are required for model training, which must be accurate and
comprehensive. Otherwise, the error of SOC estimation may be
magnified [14].
More recently, in order to obtain accurate SOC estimation, a lot
of effort is made to improve the model-based estimation ap-
proaches. The lithium-ion battery models can be divided into two
kinds: the electrochemical model and equivalent circuit model
(ECM) [11]. The electrochemical models describe the inner elec-
trochemical reaction process of the cell, including the reactions of
anode material, cathode material and separator [15]. In Ref. [16],
the pseudo 2 dimensional (P2D) model was proposed to describe
the microcosmic behaviors of Lithium-ion under different load
current conditions. In Ref. [17], the pseudo 3 dimensional model
was established based on P2D model, which could describe the
thermal characteristic of the cell more effectively. In Ref. [18], a new
combined electrochemical model based on the Shepherd model,
Unnewehr Universal model and the Nernst model was proposed to
obtain a good performance in illustrating the inner actions.
Nevertheless, compared with ECM models, the electrochemical
models have higher computational cost and lower real-time per-
formance [15]. The closed-loop methods based on ECM models are
widely applied in SOC estimation because of their accurate and
robust performance. So far, there are four main types of filters in the
estimation: Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) [19], Unscented Kalman
Filter (UKF) [20], Particle Filter (PF) [21], and Unscented Particle
Filter (UPF) [22]. Gregory L. Plett [23] proposed EKF algorithm
based on nonlinear battery models, which obtained good SOC
estimation performance. Li et al. [15] pointed out that the state
equation in EKF is essentially the first-order Taylor expansion of
nonlinear model, which can not accurately estimate the true SOC
under drastic current conditions. Li et al. [24] also pointed out that
the observation noise and system noise in EKF must follow
Gaussian distribution, otherwise unreliable estimation result may
occur. For this reason, the UKF algorithm with higher accuracy was
proposed. Sun et al. [7] proposed an adaptive UKF method to es-
timate the SOC of lithium-ion battery, and experimental results
indicated this algorithm had good performance. In Ref. [25], the PF
method based on Monte Carlo sampling was presented to estimate
initial SOC. Compared with EKF this method can accelerate the
determination of initial value. In Ref. [10], the EKF-UKF combina-
tion method was employed, in which the EKF was used to update
model parameters and the UKF was used to estimate SOC. This
method was also mentioned in Ref. [11]. Similarly, another com-
bination method UKF-AUKF was proposed to reduce the initial SOC
errors and decrease the voltage sensor drift in Ref. [15]. All the
aforementioned filters are heavily reliant on the accuracy of the
battery model for an accurate estimation.
1.2. Contribution of the paper
A key contribution of this study is that a novel dual-
polarization-resistance (DPR) model is established based on The-
venin model, which improves the accuracy and reliability of SOC
estimation. Compared with the aforementioned methods, there are
two innovative advantages: (1) In the DPR model, the polarization
resistance value can be adjusted in accordance with operating
current, making the battery model more robust. (2) An Extended
Kalman Particle Filter (EKPF) is applied in SOC estimation, and an
improved Euler method is proposed for temporal propagation of
41
the state vector, which can effectively increase the calculation
accuracy.
1.3. Organization of the paper
Section 2 describes the testing battery cells and equipment used
for model parameter identification and algorithm verification. In
Section 3, a novel DPR model based on Thevenin model is proposed
to improve the robustness under different current inputs. Section 4
introduces the proposed SOC estimation algorithm. Section 5 ver-
ifies the presented method under Urban Dynamometer Driving
Schedule (UDDS) cycles and constant-current schedule cycles.
Conclusions are drawn in Section 6.
2. Battery and equipment
The commercial LiFePO4 batteries are widely applied in all kinds
of experiments. And Table 1 illustrates some basic properties of
these batteries. The Digatron universal battery tester (UBT) 300-
060 employed to carry out all the tests is used to charge and
discharge the batteries. There are several modes for selection in the
tester, e.g., the constant-current mode, constant-voltage mode and
constant-power mode. Other information like time, voltage, cur-
rent, power, temperature, watt-hours and ampere-hours can be
acquired by the computer interface. The detailed specification is
listed in Table 2. And the procedures and connection methods of the
test are shown in Fig. 1. The cell voltage and current are calibrated
by a sampling circuit board by setting the measuring precisions of
voltage and current to ±1 mV and ±10 mA, respectively. An envi-
ronmental chamber is used to keep the experimental temperature
at 25
C.
3. DPR model
Constructing a battery model with high fidelity is a key step for
model-based SOC estimation method. A good ECM battery model
should reflect the dynamic characteristic of the battery and espe-
cially consider the polarization effect under different load current
conditions. Therefore, a novel DPR model is established in this
study.
3.1. Model analysis and parameter identification
The dynamic relaxation effects are described by the ECMs with
paralleled resistor-capacitor (RC) networks [26], including the first-
order RC component (Thevenin model) and multi-order RC
component [27]. Considering the dynamic response caused by the
combined effect of electrochemical polarization and concentration
polarization, the second-order RC model with two different RC time
constants attract more attentions [28], e.g., in Ref. [29], a compre-
hensive electrical battery model based on the second-order RC
networks was proposed, accounting for all dynamic characteristics
of the battery. The schematic diagram of the ECMs is shown in
Fig. 2. The models both contain three parts: (1) the first part is the
open-circuit voltage (OCV), denoted by UOCV; (2) the second part is
Table 1
Basic property of the LiFePO4 battery.
Voltage/V 3.2
Capacity/Ah 8
The maximum charging rates/C 2
The maximum discharging rates/C 4
42 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Table 2 8
Parameters of the Digatron UBT 300-060 universal battery tester. >
> Ut ¼ Uocv þ IRb þ Up1 þ Up2
>
>
>
>
Maximum discharging current/A 300 >
< dUp1 ¼  1 U þ 1 I
Maximum charging current/A 300
dt Cp1 Rp1 p1 Cp1 (2)
Voltage range/V 0e60 >
>
Error (current measurement)/mA ±0.5% but not better than ±50 >
>
>
> dUp2 1 1
Error (voltage measurement)/mV ±5 >
: ¼ U þ I
Error (temperature measurement)/K ±0.1 dt Cp2 Rp2 p2 Cp2

Fig. 1. Layout of the Li-ion battery test on UBT 300-060.

the rapidly changed voltage, described by an equivalent ohmic In this study, the problem of local optimal solutions of multi-RC
resistance Rb; (3) the third part is the transition response, which networks is discussed before the model selection. The terminal
consists of the polarization resistance Rpi and polarization capacitor voltage and current curves of LiFePO4 battery cell during charge
Cpi. Upi is the voltage across Cpi and Ut is the terminal voltage. The process based on previous experimental data are shown in Fig. 3.
electrical behaviors of the Thevenin model and the second-order RC The second-order RC model is used to simulate the dynamic
model can respectively be expressed by Eqs. (1) and (2). response of the cell voltage and the parameter identification results
are shown in Table 3. It can be found that the two sets of results are
(1) Thevenin model different. However, both of them achieve high simulation accuracy
where the maximum absolute error (MAE) is less than 3 mV. There
8 are usually multi-solutions for the high-order RC models. In these
< Ut ¼ Uocv þ IRb þ Up
> models, the RC networks can adjust their time constants to achieve
dUp 1 1 (1) the local minimum errors between the fitting voltage curves and
>
: ¼ Up þ I
dt Cp Rp Cp measurement data. As the RC networks increase, this phenomenon
will become much more obvious. If the identified model parame-
ters change irregularly with SOC, the stability of battery model will
(2) The second-order RC model

Fig. 2. Thevenin model and the second-order RC model.

 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52
Fig. 3. Data fitting results of the second-order RC model.
Table 3
Parameters in the second-order RC model.
Parameter UOCV (V) Rb(mU)
Fitting result 1 3.311 9.657
Fitting result 2 3.311 10.630
decrease which is detrimental to SOC estimation. However, for the
first-order RC model, there is only one time constant and the multi-
solution problem does not exist.
In order to determine the number of RC networks in the initial
cell model, the simulation results of Thevenin model and the
second-order RC model are also compared based on discharge
current pulses (5A). Each pulse lasts 30 s and the voltage simulation
results are shown in Fig. 4. It can be found that the Thevenin model
and the second-order RC model both have high simulation accu-
racy. The maximum absolute error (MAE) of Thevenin model
appearing at the end of discharge process is 11.2 mV when the SOC
is 45%. Meanwhile, the MAE of the second-order RC model is
10.7 mV when the SOC is 75%. For the experiment cell, the simu-
lation accuracy is not improved significantly with the increase of RC
networks, and the simulation error between two models is negli-
gible. Therefore, the Thevenin model is designated as the initial cell
Fig. 4. Simulation results of Thevenin model and the second-order RC model: (a) SOC ¼ 45%; (b) SOC ¼ 75%.
43
model for SOC estimation. The parameters of Thevenin model un-
der different current rates are identified according to following
process: (1) the 30s discharge pulse with 0.5C rate is applied to the
battery every 10% SOC in the range of 0e100%; (2) change the pulse
rate to 1C, 2C and 3C respectively and repeat step (1); (3) change
the discharge pulse to charge pulse and repeat steps (1) and (2); (4)
use the SimPowerSystems tool box in Matlab to identify the pa-
rameters in Thevenin model based on testing data.
The identification results are shown in Fig. 5. The polarization
resistance in Fig. 5b reflects the dynamic characteristic of the bat-
tery under transient condition, so it is denoted as Rp,t.
3.2. Model update
The Thevenin model has high simulation accuracy under tran-
sient conditions. For verifying the simulation accuracy under
constant-current condition, the fully discharged cell is charged at
Rp1 (mU) Rp2 (mU) Cp1 (F) Cp2 (F) MAE(mV)
3.832 5.398 2083 12388 2.3
6.623 1.804 4274 103340 2.1
the 2 C rate. The experimental voltage and model voltage curves are
shown in Fig. 6. It can be found that the model voltage is higher
than the experimental voltage when SOC is above 10%. The ohmic
resistance Rb, which is usually represented as a function of SOC and
operating current, is unaffected by charging time, so it has little
effect on model voltage error. Meanwhile, when the SOC is above
10%, the Li-ion battery has been charged for a long time, and the
polarization voltage Up is in steady state. Therefore, the error be-
tween model voltage and experimental voltage is mainly caused by
Rp,t, which means that the Rp,t identified under transient conditions
can not reflect the dynamic response of cell voltage well under
constant-current conditions. The polarization resistance under
constant-current conditions can be calculated as follows:
Rp;c ðSOCÞ ¼ ðUt  Uocv ðSOCÞÞ=I  Rb ðSOCÞ (3)
where Ut is the terminal voltage during charge process; Uocv(SOC)
44 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Fig. 5. Parameter identification results of Thevenin model: (a) Rb; (b) Rp,t; (c) CP.
 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52
Fig. 6. Parameter correction for polarization resistance.
represents the open circuit voltage; I is the load current; Rb(SOC) is
the ohmic resistance. When the Rp,t is replaced by the Rp,c in cell
model, the adjusted model voltage curve, which is in good agree-
ment with terminal voltage curve, will be obtained, as shown in
Fig. 6. For this study, the Rp,c identified under different constant-
current conditions is shown in Fig. 7.
According to the parameter identification results, two sets of
polarization resistance parameters are obtained for different
operating current conditions. Therefore, the adjustment of polari-
zation resistance value according to operating current becomes the
key to ensure model accuracy. As stated above, the function of
polarization resistance can be updated as follows:
8 R ¼ w R þ 1  w R
< p p p;c p p;t
 
: dw p dI
¼ f I;
dt dt
where wp is the weighting factor of Rp, in the range of 0e1. This
function can not only make up for the deficiency of Thevenin model
with one time constant, but also avoid the multi-solution problems
in the high-order RC models. When the operating current keeps
stable, the wp gradually rises and Rp approaches Rp,c. When the
operating current fluctuates dramatically, the wp decreases and Rp
approaches Rp,t.
Fig. 7. Polarization resistance under constant-current conditions.
45
Fig. 8. Terminal voltage and model voltage curves under dynamic-current condition.
3.3. Determination of wp
The dwp/dt should be a function of the operating current I and its
changing rate dI/dt. In order to establish this expression, two sets of
experiments are designed to investigate the variation of wp. In the
first experiment, the operating condition of Li-ion battery changes
from dynamic-current state to constant-current state and the sec-
ond experiment is carried out in reverse order.
(1) From dynamic-current condition to constant-current
condition
The Li-ion battery with the initial SOC of 50% is under dynamic-
current condition for 2 min. The absolute value jdI/dtj is set to
1.25C/s and the operating current rate is between -1C and 0.25C.
(4) The terminal voltage and model voltage curves are shown in Fig. 8.
During the dynamic-current process, the MAE of transient model
(Thevenin model with Rp,t) is 10.3 mV, however, the MAE of
constant-current model (Thevenin model with Rp,c) is18.1 mV.
Fig. 9 shows the response voltages in the process of going from
dynamic-current condition to constant-current condition, and the
current rates in constant-current stage are ±0.5C, ±1C and ±2C,
respectively. The simulation voltage error between cell model with
Rp,t and cell model with Rp,c increases with the increase of current,
and as time goes by, the experimental terminal voltage approaches
constant-current model voltage. Although there still remains an
error in constant-current model during 2C discharge process ac-
cording to Fig. 9e, the MAE is less than 9.2 mV after 733 s, which is
very negligible. The time between the beginning of constant-
current process and the coincidence of the terminal voltage and
the constant-current model voltage can be considered as the time
during which the wp increases from 0 to 1. Therefore, the rela-
tionship between dwp/dt and I can be obtained by curve fitting
method, which is shown in Fig. 10.
(2) From constant-current condition to dynamic-current
condition
The Lithium-ion battery with the initial SOC of 100% is dis-
charged at a constant current of 1Ce50% SOC, followed by pulse
excitation. The test is divided into 9 groups according to the ab-
solute value jdI/dtj and average current, which is shown in Table 4.
Fig. 11 shows the terminal voltage and model voltage curves in the
process of going from constant-current condition to dynamic-
current condition. During the constant-current process (the first
46 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Fig. 9. Terminal voltage and model voltage curves under constant-current process: (a) 0.5C; (b) 0.5C; (c) 1C; (d) 1C; (e) 2C; (f) 2C.

15 s), the voltage error between the constant-current model and average current. The variable which represents the standard devi-
measurement data is small, but the MAE of transient model is ation of the operating current in 30 s is expressed as follows:
23.3 mV. However, the error of transient model rapidly decreases
during the dynamic-current process, and the convergence speed of vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u
transient model is much faster than the convergence speed of u1 X 30
e30 ¼t ðI  Iave Þ2 (5)
constant-current model in Fig. 9. Meanwhile, the precision of 30 i¼1 i
constant-current model decreases obviously under dynamic-
current process. Especially in Fig. 11g~i, the MAE of constant- where Iave is the average current in 30 s. When e30 is large, the wp
current model is more than 60 mV in 4 min, which indicates that should also decrease without considering jdI/dtj. According to the
the model with Rp,c is not applicable for dynamic-current condition analysis results, Eq. (4) can be updated, as shown in Eq. (6).
and the mean error of constant-current model increases with
 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52 47

8 2 3
> 2 3 hk Dt
>
> " # 1 0 " # 6 Q 7
> SOCkþ1 6 7
>
>
< xkþ1 ¼ 6 7 SOCk 6 7Ik
z4 Dt 5 þ 6 7
Up;kþ1 0 1 Up;k 4 Dt 5
>
> CP RP
>
> CP
>
>
:
Ut;kþ1 ¼ gðxkþ1 ; Ikþ1 Þ ¼ Uocv;kþ1 þ Up;kþ1 þ Rb Ikþ1
(7)

where Dt is the time between step k and step kþ1, which in this
case is 0.1 s, hk is the charge-discharge efficiency, Q is the capacity of
the Li-ion battery. In fact, Eq. (7) represents the first order lineari-
zation of the nonlinear system, and it is the explicit Euler formula
which is widely used in EKF. The EKF demands a high calculation
accuracy of the ECM, nevertheless, the explicit Euler formula is a
single step method, and the precision is comparatively low.
Fig. 10. Data fitting result of dwp/dt. Therefore, in this work the explicit Euler formula is replaced by
improved Euler formulas, which can improve the calculation ac-
curacy of the battery model effectively. The improved Euler formula
Table 4 of the Thevenin model is shown as follows:
Test on Li-ion battery under transient conditions.
2 3
" #
2 3 hk Dt
Group number T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 1 0  
6 Q 7
SOC 6
Dt 7 6 7
SOC
jdI/dtj (C/s) 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 x
kþ1 ¼ 
kþ1
z4 5 U k þ6 7I (8)
Average current (C) 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 2 2 2
Up;kþ1 0 1 p;k 4 Dt 5 k
Cp Rp
Cp

 
8 Rp ¼ wp Rp;c þ 1  wp Rp;t wp 2½0; 1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> dwP
>
> e30 < 0:5C; jdI=dtj  0:3C=s ¼ 2:06  104 I 2 þ 2:46  105 I þ 5:99  104
>
> dt
>
>
>
>
>
>
< dwP
e30 < 0:5C; 0:3C=s < jdI=dtj  0:4C=s ¼0 (6)
>
> dt
>
>
>
>
>
> dwP
>
> e30 < 0:5C; 0:4C=s < jdI=dtj ¼ 0:1=s
>
>
>
> dt
>
>
>
>
>
>
: dwP
e30  0:5C ¼ 0:2=s
dt

4. SOC estimation algorithm

21 30
" #   
Li-ion battery can be considered as a strong time-varying SOCþ 6
Dt 7
xþ ¼ z6
kþ1
Dt 1  7 SOCk
nonlinear system and SOC is an inner hidden state of this system, kþ1 þ
Up;kþ1 4 Cp Rp 5 Up;k
which is immeasurable. In this study, the Extended Kalman Particle 0 1
Cp R p
Filter (EKPF) algorithm is employed for SOC estimation which 2 3
performs remarkably.
hk Dt 2
0
3
6 Q 7
6 7 6 7
þ6 7I  4 Dt 2 5Ik (9)
4 Dt 5 kþ1 2
Cp Rp
Cp
4.1. Improved Euler method
 

SOCkþ1
The discrete-time state equations of the Thevenin model
b
x kþ1 ¼ ¼ 1=2 x þ
kþ1 þ xkþ1 (10)
Up;kþ1
derived from Eq. (1) can be described as follows:
48
Fig. 11. Terminal voltage and model voltage curves under dynamic-current conditions: (a) T1; (b) T2; (c) T3; (d) T4; (e) T5; (f) T6; (g) T7; (h) T8; (i) T9.
The improved Euler formula includes three expressions: firstly,
it uses explicit Euler formula to obtain a preliminary approximation
x-xkþ1-, which is called forecast value; secondly, the forecast value
is substituted into the dynamic equation to obtain another
approximation xþ xkþ1þ, which is called correction value; finally,
after taking the average of the two calculation results the final
result can be obtained. In this way, a forest-correct system is
established for this state equation, which greatly improves the
calculation precision of ECM.
4.2. Extended Kalman Particle Filter
For Li-ion battery, the state equation to describe the nonlinear
X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52
system can be expressed as follows:

xkþ1 ¼ Ak xk þ Bk uk þ wk
(11)
yk ¼ Ck xk þ Dk uk þ vk
where xk is the system state vector at time index k, which includes
two state variables: battery SOC and battery polarization voltage
Up. The input uk is the operating current. The terminal voltage Ut
represents the output of the state-space equation yk. wk represents
model noise and vk represents measurement noise. The time-
varying matrices Ak, Bk, Ck and Dk reflect the dynamic changes of
the system.
Before using the filter equations, both wk and vk are assumed as
 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52
white noises which are mutually uncorrelated and that the
covariance matrices of them are shown as follows [28]:
   where f(x) and h(x) are nonlinear functions, and wk represents
Q n ¼ k;
E wn wTk ¼ (12)
0 nsk;
  
R n ¼ k;
E vn vTk ¼ (13)
0 nsk;
where E[$] is the statistical expectation operator. The EKF problem
is then: Utilize all the observed data {u0,u1,…,uk} and {y0,y1,…,yk} to
obtain the minimum mean squared error of state vector xk by
assuming wk and vk obey Gaussian process.
In practice, the assumptions of Gaussian noise on wk and vk are
rarely satisfied. Therefore, Monte Carlo sampling from state vector
distribution is applied into the development of the particle filter
(PF). Furthermore, when it comes to the non-Gaussian condition,
this sample-based estimation has superiority [30]. For PF, the
detailed computation process is described as follows [21]:
(1) Initialization (k ¼ 0): the system's state equations are the
same in the Extended Kalman filter, which are shown as
follows:
Fig. 11. (continued).
49

xkþ1 ¼ f ðxk Þ þ wk
(14)
zk ¼ hðxk Þ þ vk
model noise while vk reflects the measurement noise. The particles
are firstly drawn by using {xi 0}M i ¼ 1~p{x0}, and the weight of
each particle is set to 1/M.
(2) Importance sampling: the proposal distribution to be
sampled should be updated in time and the weights should
be normalized, then the particles can be sampled from it.
(3) Resample step: in order to obtain the new sample, previous
particles should be selected carefully according to each of
their weight.
(4) Normalization: all suitable samples should be normalized
into one.
The choice of the proposal function is important. Doucet et al.
[31] implement a particular type of PF that approximates the
optimal proposal function by the EKF, which is called Extended
Kalman Particle Filter (EKPF). In Ref. [32], the SOC estimation
method based on EKPF algorithm is proposed, nevertheless, an
improved Euler method proposed for temporal propagation of the
state vector is applied in this paper to improve the calculation
precision. The EKPF algorithm for SOC estimation is shown in
50 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Table 5
Extended Kalman particle filter algorithm for SOC estimation.

Step 1 Initialization: k ¼ 0
The particles are firstly drawn by using {xi 0}M i ¼ 1~p{x0}, and the weight of each particle is set to 1/M
Step 2 For k ¼ 1,2,…
State estimation for SOC:
(1) Particles update (for each particle):
(a) State estimate time update:
8
> iþ
< xk ¼ Ak1 b
i
> x k1 þ Bk1 Ik1
iþ
xiþ ¼ F b
k1 k1 þ Bk1 Ik  Gk Ik1 (16)
x
>
> k
:b i
x ¼ 1=2ðxi þ xiþ Þ
k k k
(b) Error covariance time update:
iþ
Pki ¼ ðAk1 þ Fk1 ÞPk1 ðAk1 þ Fk1 ÞT =4 þ Qk1 (17)
(c) Update the Kalman gain L:
Lik ¼ Pki CkT ðCk Pki CkT þ Rk Þ1 (18)
(d) State estimation measurement update:
iþ i i
xk ¼ b
b x k þ Lik ½yk  Ck b
x k  Dk uk  (19)
(e) Error covariance measurement update:
Pkiþ ¼ ðI  Lik Ck ÞPki (20)
(2) Importance sampling: assume the variance of the measurement noise is Qp, the particle weight is calculated according to the follow equation:
!
wik ¼ exp 1 ðy  yi Þ $pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2Q 1 (21)
p k k 2pQp

(3) Normalize the importance weights as:

P
wik ¼ wik = M i
i¼1 wk (22)
(4) Evaluate the effective sample size to judge the necessity of resampling:
P
Neff ¼ 1= M i 2
i¼1 ðwk Þ (23)
(5) The state estimation result is:
 
SOCk P
¼ M i i
i¼1 wk xk (24)
U p;k

Table 6
Testing process for algorithm validation.

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Number of cycles Total time

Charging at 1.5 C (1620s) UDDS Charging at 1 C (1200s) UDDS Discharging at 2.5 C (300s) Open circuit (620s) 4 25856s

Fig. 12. Simulink model of EKF algorithm.

 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52 51

5. Verification and discussion

In order to verify the SOC estimation accuracy of the proposed

Fig. 13. Current and voltage profiles in validation test.
Fig. 14. Simulation results of Li-ion battery: (A) SOC real value; (B) EKF with Thevenin
model; (C) EKF with DPR model; (D) EKPF with DPR model.
Table 5 and the dynamic matrices Ak, Bk, Ck and Dk are defined as
follows:
algorithm based on the DPR model, the UBT 300-060 is used to
produce operating current conditions. Calibrating the maximum
error of current sensor less than 10 mA, the SOC reference profile
can be calculated using the ampere hour counting with measured
data. The experimental test cycle is shown in Table 6, which lasts
7 h. The operating conditions include constant-current condition
and dynamic-current condition, and thus the proposed method can
be well verified in terms of the accuracy and robustness. The
Simulink model of EKF algorithm is shown in Fig. 12, including 5
Subsystems: looking-up table, calculation of the polarization
voltage Up, calculation of the polarization resistance Rp, computa-
tion module of Kalman gain and correction module of SOC and Up.
To validating the EKPF algorithm, 200 particles are used for the
estimator, and the program part of particle filter is written in the
form of M file in Matlab, which periodically updates each particle
by calling the EKF model.
The profiles of the current and the response voltage are shown
in Fig. 13. Fig. 14 presents the difference of the results in SOC esti-
mation of Li-ion battery between Thevenin model and DPR model.
Verification of the robustness should be carried out for the state
observer. Considering 40% offset of the true value (10%), the initial
state of charge (SOC) is set to 50%. It can be found that the
convergence speed of the EKF algorithm based on Thevenin model
is slow, and the simulation error cannot be eliminated at each end
of 1.5 C charge process. However, the SOC algorithms based on DPR
model have faster convergence speed and better accuracy, espe-
cially in constant-current process, the estimated value shows good
following performance, which indicates that the adjustment of
polarization resistance according to operating current achieves
better result. Table 7 summarizes the mean estimation error (MEE)
and MAE based on three estimation methods. Obviously, the results
of SOC estimation with DPR model have 1.8%e2.1% MEE and 3.9%e
4.4% MAE improvements than the results with Thevenin model.

6. Conclusions

2 3 The expectation of higher accuracy and reliability of SOC esti-

1 0 mation needs a battery model with better robustness. Therefore, a
8 6 7
>
> Ak ¼ 6
4
7 new dual-polarization-resistance (DPR) model is proposed for SOC
>
>
> Dt 5 estimation. In this model, the polarization resistance is adjusted in
>
> 0 1
>
> Cp Rp accordance with operating current. When the operating current is
>
>
>
> stable, the polarization resistance will converge to the value iden-
>
> 2 3
>
> hk Dt
>
> tified under constant-current condition, on the contrary, when the
>
> 6 C 7 current fluctuates significantly, the polarization resistance will
>
> 6 N 7
>
> 6 7
>
> Bk ¼ 6 7 converge to the value identified under pulse condition, making the
>
> 6 7
>
> 4 Dt 5 battery model more robust. At the same time, the EKPF is applied in
>
>
>
> the estimation of SOC, and the improved Euler method is applied
>
< CP
  for temporal propagation of the state vector, which significantly
vU vUOCV vRb (15)
>
> C ¼ ¼ þ I 1 improves the numerical accuracy of SOC estimation. Experimental
>
> k
vx vSOC k
vSOC
>
> results indicate that the maximum SOC estimation error based on
>
>
>
> 21 0 3 EKF with traditional Thevenin model is 6.2%, and by using the DPR
>
>
>
>  model the maximum errors based on EKF and EKPF methods are
> 6
>
> 6 Dt 7 7
> Fk ¼ 4
>
> Dt 1  5 2.3% and 1.8%, respectively.
>
> CP RP Future work will focus on the online parameter identification of
>
> 0 1 
>
> CP RP DPR model, in which the model parameters for different current
>
>
>
> 2 3
>
> 0 conditions will be obtained by adaptive algorithm. Furthermore,
>
>
>
> 6 7 this study is based on the new battery at room temperature, so the
: Gk ¼ 6 7
4 Dt 2 5 parameters compensation in DPR model at different environment
temperatures (especially the low temperature) and for aged battery
CP2 RP
is also the focus of future research, which will further improve the
robustness of states estimation.
52 X. Zhao et al. / Energy 135 (2017) 40e52

Table 7
Comparison of the MEE and MAE of the LiFePO4 battery.

Methods Model Initial error (%) Convergence time (s) MEE (%) MAE (%)

EKF Thevenin 40 943 2.9 6.2

EKF DPR 40 591 1.1 2.3
EKPF DPR 40 480 0.8 1.8

Acknowledgements state of charge estimation based on advanced data-driven algorithms for

This work is supported by National Key Technology R&D Pro-
gram under Grant 2013BAG03B01. The authors would like to ex-
press their appreciations for the fund.
References
[1] Feng T, Yang L, Zhao X, Zhang H, Qiang J. Online identification of lithium-ion
battery parameters based on an improved equivalent-circuit model and its
implementation on battery state-of-power prediction. J Power Sources
2015;281:192e203.
[2] He H, Xiong R, Peng J. Real-time estimation of battery state-of-charge with
unscented Kalman filter and RTOS m COS-Ⅱplatform. Appl Energy 2016;162:
1410e8.
[3] Lu L, Han X, Li J, Hua J, Ouyang M. A review on the key issues for lithium-ion
battery management in electric vehicles. J Power Sources 2013;226:272e88.
[4] Zhang S, Yang L, Zhao X, Qiang J. A GA optimization for lithium-ion battery
equalization based on SOC estimation by NN and FLC. Electr Power Energy
Syst 2015;73:318e28.
[5] Lin C, Mu H, Xiong R, Shen W. A novel multi-model probability battery state of
charge estimation approach for electric vehicles using H-infinity algorithm.
Appl Energy 2016;166:76e83.
[6] Xiong R, Sun F, He H, Nguyen TD. A data-driven adaptive state of charge and
power capability joint estimator of lithium-ion polymer battery used in
electric vehicles. Energy 2013;63:295e308.
[7] Sun F, Hu X, Zou Y, Li S. Adaptive unscented Kalman filtering for state of
charge estimation of a lithium-ion battery for electric vehicles. Energy
2011;36:3531e40.
[8] Kong SN, Moo CS, Chen YP, Hsieh YC. Enhanced coulomb counting method for
estimating state-of-charge and state-of-health of lithium-ion batteries. Appl
Energy 2009;86:1506e11.
[9] He H, Zhang X, Xiong R, Xu Y, Guo H. Online model-based estimation of state-
of-charge and open-circuit voltage of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles.
Energy 2012;39:310e8.
[10] Zhang X, Wang Y, Yang D, Chen Z. An on-line estimation of battery pack
parameters and state-of-charge using dual filters based on pack model. En-
ergy 2016;115:219e29.
[11] Wang Y, Liu C, Pan R, Chen Z. Modeling and state-of-charge prediction of
lithium-ion battery and ultracapacitor hybrids with a co-estimator. Energy
2017;121:739e50.
[12] Cha CC, Lo EWC, Shen W. The available capacity computation model based on
artificial neural network for lead-acid batteries in electric vehicles. J Power
Sources 2000;87:201e4.
[13] Cheng B, Zhou Y, Zhang J, Wang J, Cao B. Ni-MH batteries state-of-charge
prediction based on immune evolutionary network. Energy Convers Manag
2009;50:3078e86.
[14] Deng Z, Yang L, Cai Y, Deng H, Sun L. Online available capacity prediction and
lithium iron phosphate battery. Energy 2016;112:469e80.
[15] Li Y, Wang C, Gong J. A combination Kalman filter approach for state of charge
estimation of lithium-ion battery considering model uncertainty. Energy
2016;109:933e46.
[16] Doyle M, Fuller TF, Newman J. Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge
of the lithium polymer insertion cell. J Electrochem Soc 1993;140(6):
1526e33.
[17] Xu M, Zhang Z, Wang X, Jia L, Yang L. A pseudo three-dimensional electro-
chemical-thermal model of a prismatic LiFePO4 battery during discharge
process. Energy 2015;80:303e17.
[18] Plett GL. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-
based HEV battery packs: Part 2. Modeling and identification. J Power sources
2004;134(2):262e76.
[19] Liu X, Liu X, Yao H, Chen Z. Based-Vmin-EKF SOC estimation for power Li-ion
battery pack. KongzhiyuJuece/Control Decis 2010;25:445e8.
[20] Zhang W, Shi W, Ma Z. Adaptive unscented Kalman filter based state of energy
and power capability estimation approach for lithium-ion battery. J Power
Sources 2015;289:50e62.
[21] Wang Y, Zhang C, Chen Z. A method for state-of-charge estimation of LiFePO4
batteries at dynamic currents and temperatures using particle filter. J Power
Sources 2015;279:306e11.
[22] He Y, Liu X, Zhang C, Chen Z. A new model for state-of-charge (SOC) esti-
mation for high-power Li-ion batteries. Appl Energy 2013;101:808e14.
[23] Plett G. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-
based HEV battery packs: Part1. Background. J Power Sources 2004;134:
252e61.
[24] Li J, Lai Q, Wang L, Chao L, Wang H. A method for SOC estimation based on
simplified mechanistic model for LiFePO4 battery. Energy 2016;114:1266e76.
[25] Remmlinger J, Buchholz M, Meiler M, Bernreuter P, Dietmayer K. State-of-
health monitoring of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles by on-board
internal resistance estimation. J Power Sources 2011;196(12):5357e63.
[26] Dai H, Wei X, Sun Z, Wang J, Gu W. Online cell SOC estimation of Li-ion battery
packs using a dual time-scale Kalman filtering for EV applications. Appl En-
ergy 2012;95:227e37.
[27] Dong G, Wei J, Zhang C, Chen Z. Online state of charge estimation and open
circuit voltage hysteresis modeling of LiFePO4 battery using invariant imbe-
dding method. Appl Energy 2016;162:163e71.
[28] Petzl M, Danzer MA. Advancements in OCV measurement and analysis for
lithium-ion batteries. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2013;28(3):675e81.
[29] Chen M, Rincon-Mora GA. Accurate electrical battery model capable of pre-
dicting runtime and I-V performance. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2006;21(2):
504e11.
[30] Gordon NJ, Salmond DJ, Smith AFM. A novel approach to nonlinear/non-
Gaussian Bayesian state estimation. IEEE Proc Radar Signal Process
1993;140:107e13.
[31] Doucet A, Godsill S, Andrieu C. On sequential Monte Carlo sampling methods
for Bayesian filtering. Stat Comput 2000;10(3):197e208.
[32] Zhao Y, Zhou X, Liu Y. SOC estimation for Li-Ion battery based on extended
Kalman particle filter. China Mech Eng 2015;26(3):394e7.