Optimization and Estimation of the State of Charge of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles

Lithium batteries have become one of the best choices for current consumer electric vehicle batteries due to their good stability and high energy density. To ensure the safety and reliability of electric vehicles (EVs), the battery management system (BMS) must provide accurate and real-time information on the usage status of the onboard battery. This article highlights the precise estimation of the state of charge (SOC) applied to four models of lithium-ion batteries (Turnigy, LG, SAMSUNG, and PANASONIC) for electric vehicles in order to ensure optimal use of the battery and extend its lifespan, which is frequently influenced by certain parameters such as temperature, current, number of charge and discharge cycles, and so on. Because of the work’s novelty, the methodological approach combines the extended Kalman filter algorithm (EKF) with the noise matrix, which is updated in this case through an iterative process. This leads to the migration to a new adaptive extended Kalman filter algorithm (AEKF) in the MATLAB Simulink 2022.b environment, which is novel or original in the sense that it has a first-order association. The four models of batteries from various manufacturers were directly subjected to the Venin estimator, which allowed for direct comparison of the models under a variety of temperature scenarios while keeping an eye on performance metrics. The results obtained were mapped charging status (SOC) versus open circuit voltage (OCV), and the high-performance primitives collection (HPPC) tests were carried out at 40 °C, 25 °C, 10 °C, 0 °C and −10 °C. At these temperatures, their corresponding values for the root mean square error (RMSE) of (SOC) for the Turnigy graphene battery model were found to be: 1.944, 9.6237, 1.253, 1.6963, 16.9715, and for (OCV): 1.3154, 4.895, 4.149, 4.1808, and 17.2167, respectively. The tests cover the SOC range, from 100% to 5% with four different charge and discharge currents at rates of 1, 2, 5 and 10 A. After characterization, the battery was subjected to urban dynamometer driving program (UDDS), Energy Saving Test (HWFET) driving cycles, LA92 (Dynamometric Test), US06 (aggressive driving), as well as combinations of these cycles. Driving cycles were sampled every 0.1 s, and other tests were sampled at a slower or variable frequency, thus verifying the reliability and robustness of the estimator to 97%.