Comparative Analysis of Computational Times of Lithium-Ion Battery Management Solvers and Battery Models Under Different Programming Languages and Computing Architectures

With the global rise in consumer electronics, electric vehicles, and renewable energy, the demand for lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is expected to grow. LIBs present a significant challenge for state estimations due to their complex non-linear electrochemical behavior. Currently, commercial battery management systems (BMSs) commonly use easier-to-implement and faster equivalent circuit models (ECMs) than their counterpart continuum-scale physics-based models (PBMs). However, despite processing more mathematical and computational complexity, PBMs are attractive due to their higher accuracy, higher fidelity, and ease of integration with thermal and degradation models. Various reduced-order PBM battery models and their computationally efficient numerical schemes have been proposed in the literature. However, there is limited data on the performance and feasibility of these models in practical embedded and cloud systems using standard programming languages. This study compares the computational performance of a single particle model (SPM), an enhanced single particle model (ESPM), and a reduced-order pseudo-two-dimensional (ROM-P2D) model under various battery cycles on embedded and cloud systems using Python and C++. The results show that reduced-order solvers can achieve a 100-fold reduction in solution times compared to full-order models, while ESPM with electrolyte dynamics is about 1.5 times slower than SPM. Adding thermal models and Kalman filters increases solution times by approximately 20% and 100%, respectively. C++ provides at least a 10-fold speed increase over Python, varying by cycle steps. Although embedded systems take longer than cloud and personal computers, they can still run reduced-order models effectively in Python, making them suitable for embedded applications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Batteries
Published
2024-12-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries10120439
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Advanced Battery Technologies Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.63

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Analysis of Computational Times of Lithium-Ion Battery Management Solvers and Battery Models Under Different Programming Languages and Computing Architectures

Moin Ahmed, Michael William Fowler, Aiping Yu, Zhongwei Chen et al.
8 citations
Batteries
Advanced Battery Technologies Research
1.63
article

Comparative Analysis of Computational Times of Lithium-Ion Battery Management Solvers and Battery Models Under Different Programming Languages and Computing Architectures

Moin Ahmed, Michael William Fowler, Aiping Yu, Zhongwei Chen, Zhiyu Mao, Yunpeng Liu
article en
8 citations

Abstract

With the global rise in consumer electronics, electric vehicles, and renewable energy, the demand for lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is expected to grow. LIBs present a significant challenge for state estimations due to their complex non-linear electrochemical behavior. Currently, commercial battery management systems (BMSs) commonly use easier-to-implement and faster equivalent circuit models (ECMs) than their counterpart continuum-scale physics-based models (PBMs). However, despite processing more mathematical and computational complexity, PBMs are attractive due to their higher accuracy, higher fidelity, and ease of integration with thermal and degradation models. Various reduced-order PBM battery models and their computationally efficient numerical schemes have been proposed in the literature. However, there is limited data on the performance and feasibility of these models in practical embedded and cloud systems using standard programming languages. This study compares the computational performance of a single particle model (SPM), an enhanced single particle model (ESPM), and a reduced-order pseudo-two-dimensional (ROM-P2D) model under various battery cycles on embedded and cloud systems using Python and C++. The results show that reduced-order solvers can achieve a 100-fold reduction in solution times compared to full-order models, while ESPM with electrolyte dynamics is about 1.5 times slower than SPM. Adding thermal models and Kalman filters increases solution times by approximately 20% and 100%, respectively. C++ provides at least a 10-fold speed increase over Python, varying by cycle steps. Although embedded systems take longer than cloud and personal computers, they can still run reduced-order models effectively in Python, making them suitable for embedded applications.

BatteriesVol. 10(12)
University of Waterloo (CA), Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics (CN), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of Waterloo
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Advanced Battery Technologies Research
1.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.