On the Control of Energy Storage Systems for Electric Vehicles
Fast Charging in Service Areas

arXiv:1607.00150v1 [] 1 Jul 2016

Alessandro Di Giorgio, Francesco Liberati, Roberto Germanà, Marco Presciuttini,
Lorenzo Ricciardi Celsi, Francesco Delli Priscoli
Abstract— This paper presents a real time control strategy
for energy storage systems integration in electric vehicles
fast charging applications combined with generation from
intermittent renewable energy sources. A two steps approach
taking advantage of the model predictive control methodology
is designed on purpose to optimally allocate the reference
charging power while managing the priority among the plugged
vehicles and then control the storage for efficiently sustaining
the charging process. Two different use cases are considered:
in the former the charging area is disconnected from the grid,
so that the objective is to minimize the deviation of electric
vehicles charging power from the nominal value; in the latter
the focus is on the point of connection to the grid and the
need of mitigating the related power flow. In both cases the
fundamental requirement for feasible control system operation
is to guarantee stability of the storage’s state of charge over the
time. Simulation results are provided and discussed in detail,
showing the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

N OMENCLATURE
Mt
Pg
P cs
P̂ cs
P̄
P pv
Ps
P̂ s
P̌
P
P̂
T
tarr
m
y
ŷ
xm
x̂m

Set of vehicles to be controlled at time t
Active power flowing from the grid to the service area
Power delivered to the PEVs by charging station
Maximum power deliverable by charging station
Vector of PEVs reference charging power levels
Power generated by the photovoltaic panel
Power delivered by the storage
Maximum power deliverable by storage
Vector of PEVs minimum allowed charging levels
Vector of PEVs decided charging levels
Vector of PEVs maximum allowed charging levels
Sampling time
Arrival time of the mth vehicle
ESS state of charge
Maximum allowed ESS state of charge
State of charge of the mth vehicle
Maximum allowed state of charge of the mth vehicle

I. I NTRODUCTION
As electric vehicle (EV) technology is expected to increase
its share in mobility market, technical improvements of
This work is partially supported by the Sapienza-Ateneo 2013 project
”Planning and control of flexible electricity demand and generation from
renewable energy sources in Smart Grids”, no. C26A13LYTB, and the
Sapienza-Ateneo 2014 project ”ESSSGEM - Energy Storage Systems (ESS)
for Smart Grids (SG) Energy Management (EM). ESS control strategies for
the optimal energy management of a SG including dispersed renewable
energy generators and non-linear loads, as plug-in Electric Vehicles”, no.
C26A14YT4X.
A. Di Giorgio, R. Germanà, M. Presciuttini, L. Ricciardi Celsi and F. Delli
Priscoli are with the Department of Computer, Control and Management
Engineering, at ”Sapienza” University of Rome, Via Ariosto 25, 00185,
Rome, Italy, e-mail digiorgio@dis.uniroma1.it
F. Liberati is with the SMART Engineering Solutions & Technologies
(SMARTEST) Research Center, eCampus University, Via Isimbardi 10,
22060, Novedrate CO, Italy

fast charging stations (FCSs) and the related geographical
coverage represent key factors to allow green travels over
large distances. As a matter of fact the Connecting Europe
Facilities (CEF) initiative [1] co-financed by the European
Union TEN-T (Trans European Transport Network) programme, major EV manufacturers and leading energy companies is making investments to support four projects to build
a network involving 429 multi-standard fast charging stations
(FCSs) across 10 European countries. Each project covers a
specific area: Rapid Charge Network (UK and Ireland), Central European Green Corridor (Austria, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Bavaria and Zagreb), Corri-Door (France), Greening-NEAR
(Denmark and Sweden). Full accomplishment will facilitate
longer-distance zero-emissions travel covering over 10540
km of Europe’s major highways, encouraging use of EVs
even in extra-urban contexts. Each FCS is able to charge EVs
equipped with the most common technologies such as: CCS
(Combined Charging System), CHAdeMO and AC systems.
Despite the expected growth of EVs will produce a strong
reduction of CO2 emissions [2], the fast charging concept
raises several challenges ranging from the impact of EVs fast
charging on the distribution network to business models, as
analyzed in [3]. On the one hand the installation of a FCS
requires to properly size the point of connection (POC) to
the grid and face the related start-up and operational costs
which have to be evaluated against the expected number
of charging sessions over the expected FCS life time. On
the other EV charging implies a considerable pulsating load,
already investigated and recognized in the relevant literature
as detrimental factor for reliable power system operations [4]
[5]; furthermore, simultaneous fast charge sessions lead to a
huge increment of peak power demand, stressing strongly
the capacity of the grid, benefits of energy storage systems
(ESSs) are analyzed in order to mitigate these effects [6].
This is the reason why a reasonable scenario for sustainable
large scale deployment of FCSs consider their installation
in combination with renewable energy sources (RES) and
controlled ESSs for locally matching demand and supply,
then allowing to downsize the nominal power at POC and
mitigate the impact on the medium voltage distribution grid.
Taking into account this reference plant, in this paper a real
time strategy is proposed to control the ESS in two different
cases, as enabler of charging at minimum time and minimum
impact on the grid respectively. The remainder of the paper
is organized as follows. Section III presents the reference
scenario, in which the status of service area connection to
the grid plays the role of discriminant between stand alone
and grid connected case. Section IV details the formalization
of the problem in the most general case, covering both
addressed use cases. Section V shows and discusses the

Accepted for publication to the proceedings of the 24th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED16). 2016
IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future
media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for
resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.

performed simulations, while conclusions and future works
are presented in Section VI.

MINIMIZATION
OF
CHARGING
TIME

II. S TATE OF THE ART
The problems above mentioned are subject of studies in
literature. Optimal location and size of FCSs contribute to
cost reductions. In [7], characterized by a MINLP optimization approach, results are sensible to the correct inclusion
of EV and electric grid losses in the problem, while in
[8], the total cost of installation of fast charging station
and loss on distribution are proposed as objective functions
of the optimization model, and robustness and effectiveness
characterize the proposed algorithm. The importance of ESS
in peak power demand problem, is shown by authors in
[9], in which they have introduced a policy involving the
future power demand by the expected EVs: this method
does not achieve the optimal costumers’ satisfaction, but
it works in a ”best effort” way, guaranteeing fairness during insufficient supply energy. In [10] authors show how
ESS contributes also in economic field: through a MINLP
formulation which takes into account the capital costs of
the transformer, distribution feeder and ESS for the FCS,
authors extract the optimal size of ESS, achieving a total
costs reduction over 20%. In [11] authors propose a control
strategy, taking into account the historical charging load
data: considering the average charging load and the timeof-use electricity price, optimal charging/discharging period
for ESS is used to reduce costs about 10%. The relevance of
ESS covers several aspects: in [12] the model provided by
authors is centered on EVs charging schedule based on dayahead considerations; ESS is used to mitigate uncertainty and
inaccurate prediction. In [13] the proposed control strategy
(based on the distributed bus signaling method) utilizes a
dedicated ESS which compensates some negative effects
of fast charging session, providing ancillary services to the
grid without affecting predefined charging algorithm of EV
battery, extending in this way their life-time. In [14] ESS is
used as an energy buffer between the grid and the electric
vehicle to recharge; the control strategy is characterized by
a hierarchical structure composed by an active and reactive
power control, a state of charge ESS balancing control and
an EVs charge control. Results highlight how just the 30%
of power involved in charging sessions is provided by the
grid. In this paper a real time control strategy is presented
for energy storage system integration in electric vehicles
fast charging applications combined with generation from
photovoltaic panels. The characterizing aspect of the work
is a formulation of the control problem taking into account
simultaneous requirements from the drivers, asking for a
minimum time charging service, and the distribution system
operator, interested in mitigating the impact of EVs charging
on the grid while increasing RES hosting capacity.
III. R EFERENCE SCENARIO
The reference scenario at the basis of this study is constituted by a service area in which a fast charging station,
a photovoltaic panel and an ESS are included, as shown in
fig.1. The FCS allow to charge the EVs at different power
levels, including the typical 22 kW public level and higher.
The power which comes from the PV panel is stored by the

FCS

EV

EV

x
t
MINIMIZATION OF
SOC DEVIATION
FROM REFERENCES

BREAKER

ESS

GRID

P
t
MINIMIZATION OF
POWER WITHDRAWAL
AND FLUCTUATIONS

SERVICE
AREA

PV

Fig. 1.

Reference scenario.

ESS, which in turn release power during the execution of the
charging sessions. Grid structure is reduced to the POC and
is modeled as an infinite bus, such that voltage and frequency
can be considered equal to their nominal values. Two cases
are presented using the above scenario:
•

•

in the grid connected case, the EVs are recharged at
nominal power, which is delivered both by the ESS and
the grid, so that a fundamental requirement is to find
the optimal trade-off between the need of avoiding full
ESS charging or discharging and the one of mitigating
the power flow at POC level;
in the stand alone case the service area is electrically
disconnected from the grid, so that EVs are recharged
by the power stored in the ESS, with the possibility of
dinamically modulating the charging power over time,
then leading to the need of avoiding full ESS charging
or discharging while minimizing the deviation of EVs
charging power from the nominal value.
IV. C ONTROL PROBLEM FORMALIZATION

Since the two above mentioned cases are based on the
the same plant, sharing the presence of PV and ESS and
differentiating by the supplementary source represented by
the grid, the most general problem will be formalized, and
then detailed for each case. A first step in the problem
formalization requires the definition of proper charging setpoints for the EVs. As a matter of fact, in some situations
the power required by the EVs could exceed the power that
can be supplied by the charging station, denoted with P̂ cs .
In fact, while in the grid connected case the required power
will be fully provided by the storage and the grid, in the
stand alone case the power delivered to the EVs will depend
on the current state of charge of the storage (which could
be not enough to serve all the ongoing charging sessions).
In both cases, the proposed EV control scheme foresees the
repetition of both the charging setpoint definition step and
the MPC control step. In fact, both have to be executed
in order to make the control approach effective against
variations of the renewable output, new vehicles arrival at
the charging station, mismatches between the charging levels
commanded by the charging station and the actual ones, etc.
The next subsection details the problem of charging setpoints
definition.

A. Charging Setpoints Definition Problem
Let us denote with Mt the set of vehicles to be controlled
at time t and with xm (t) and x̂m , respectively, the current
state of charge and the maximum state of charge of the
generic vehicle m ∈ Mt .
For each vehicle, let us introduce the charging rate
x̂m − xm (t)
, ∀m ∈ Mt
(1)
T
where T is the sampling time. If P̄m (t) is not contained
within the allowed maximum and minimum charging limits
P̂m and P̌m , it takes the values of the limits themselves:


 P̌m if P̄m (t) < P̌m
P̄m (t) ←
(2)
P̂m if P̄m (t) > P̂ , ∀m ∈ Mt

 P̄ (t)
otherwise
m
P̄m (t) =

Since the available charging power P̂ cs at the charging
station could be not enough to recharge all the vehicles at
power levels P̄m (t), a charging setpoint definition step is
necessary, as detailed in the following.
A least square problem is defined with the aim of finding
a feasible repartition of the available charging power among
the charging sessions, in such a way that: (i) the cumulative
charging power delivered by the charging station does not
exceed P̂ cs (feasible maximum power charging); (ii) long
waiting times are penalized (thus striving the system towards
a balancing of the waiting times). The problem is formalized
as follows
T 

1
(3)
P̄(t) ← arg min P − P̄(t) A P − P̄(t)
2
P
subject to 1T P ≤ P̂ cs
where


e
(t − tarr
1 )

0
..


A=
0

.
(t −

e
tarr
|Mt | )



.

(4)

1 is a vector of ones, P ∈ R|Mt | and P̄(t) ∈ R|Mt | is the
vector whose general m-th component is P̄m (t). The arrival
time of the m-th vehicle is denoted with tarr
m ; e is a factor
to weight the recharging time balancing requirement.
For the sake of simplicity, P is modelled as a vector
of continuous variables, while it is known that current
reference charging protocols supporting charging station to
EV communication only allow for semi-continuous charging
variables (i.e., the charging level is either zero, or greater
than a positive quantity). However, the problem can be easily
extended to the semi-continuous case following the approach
in [15] (which is not done in this paper in order not to burden
the formulation).
B. Model Predictive Control (MPC) Problem
Once a feasible set of charging setpoints for the ongoing
charging sessions is defined, the general MPC problem can
be formalized as follows
min α[y(t + 1) − y ref ]2

T 

(5)
+ β P − P̄(t) A P − P̄(t)
2

+ γP g (t)2 + δ [P g (t) − P g (t − 1)]

Subject to:
y(t + 1) = y(t) − (1 + s )T P s (t) + T P pv (t)
0 ≤ y(t + 1) ≤ ŷ s
P s (t)(1 + s ) ≤ P̂ s
P g (t) + P s (t) = 1T P(t)
P̌ ≤ P ≤ P̄(t)

(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)

in which α, β, γ, δ are wight parameters, y ref represents the
reference state of charge value set for the storage and y(t)
its current state of charge; P pv is the power supplied by the
photovoltaic panel (PV); s represents the loss related to the
storage, while P s and P̂ s the storage delivered power and
the maximum deliverable power, respectively.
The above MPC iteration subsume the goals and constraints present in both the standalone case and in the
grid connected case. In particular, the objective function is
such that the following objectives are balanced: (i) limited
excursion of the storage state of charge from its reference
value, (ii) charging levels close to the setpoint values defined
in the setpoint definition problem, (iii) flattening of the peaks
in the power withdrawal from the grid and, finally, (iv)
limited variations in the power withdrawal from the grid.
Constraints include the dynamics of the storage and the
technical limits imposed by the storage itself and by the grid.
In particular, condition (6) expresses the balance equation of
the storage state of charge; its value is bounded as expressed
by (7). The power delivered by the storage can not overcome
its maximum value (8) and the CS output power is bounded
by a minimum absorption power and the relative reference
(10). Condition (9) expresses the power balance condition
for the service area.
The above MPC iteration can be specialized as follows in
the two case studies dealt with in this paper:
• Grid Connected Case. In the grid connected case, β = 0 in
the objective function, since P = P̄. In fact, the charging
sessions can always be served at maximum power and the
goal of the control problem is that of mitigating peaks in
the power grid withdrawals by acting on the storage (and
avoiding at the same time large excursions of the storage
state of charge from its reference value).
g
• Standalone Case. In the stand alone case, P
is equal
to zero. Therefore, the objective function to minimize
involves only the first two terms.
The first references generation problem requires the resolution of a nonlinear quadratic system characterized by real
variables and linear constraints. Instead, a mixed integer
quadratic programming problem has to be solved for the
tracking problem. IBM-Cplex is the solver chosen to address
them. Resolution is based on an iterative algorithm: at each
step, input information are used to compute the state at the
following step.
V. R ESULTS
A. Simulation setup
In order to perform simulations, a charging station which
is able to deliver 120 kW (P̂ cs ) and charge simultaneously 4
EVs (two 50 kW, one 43 kW and one 22 kW) is considered.
A super capacitor storage system is taken into account, with

Fig. 2. Reference generation: (a) time independent case; (b) time dependent
case.

maximum power flow P̂ s = 150kW , battery capacity ŷ =
300kW h and losses amounted to s = 10%; the reference
state of charge is set to 50% of the nominal battery capacity.
The PV profile is modeled as a measurable disturbance; its
nominal power output is 120 kW, with conversion losses
pv = 15%. A time window of 120 minutes is analyzed,
with sampling time T = 60s. The weight parameters α, β
and γ are put, respectively, equal to 10, 5 × 106 , 3 × 107 ,
while Pg ramping rate effect is analyzed in case of δ = 10
and δ = 5×106 . The time dependency is given setting e = 3.
Simulations have been performed using a Notebook Samsung, Intel Core i7, 2.20 GHz, 6 GB RAM, running Windows
8 Pro. The control framework has been built in Matlab
R2013a 32 bit, and the optimization problem at the basis
of the MPC has been solved at each iteration by using the
commercial solver Cplex v.12.6.1.
B. Reference generation
The first simulation is dedicated to the generation of power
references for charging, assessing the effect of the temporal
component, taking the grid connected case as example; as a
matter of fact fig. 2 reports the references, as resulting from
the last iteration of the simulated control strategy.
When e = 0 (time independent case), the system works
giving priority for charging to the EVs connected to the
plugs releasing the higher power level, as shown in the
subfigure (a). If the sum of the required power is less than the
maximum power deliverable by the system in that moment,
each EV is associated with a power reference equal to the
nominal charging power. When this condition is violated, a
redefinition of the references occurs, as depicted for example
at the minute 28. All EVs are simultaneously connected,
therefore the sum of the maximum charging powers exceeds P̂ cs ; the 22 kW charging session is subject to more
performance degradation, up to 80%, with the consequent
extension of the expected charging time, exceeding 80 minutes. Assuming the actual charging powers exactly track the
calculated references, the EVs with greater power demand
are expected to charge within a reasonable time: despite a
degradation of 32%, the EV connected to the 43 kW plug
leaves the service area in about 40 minutes, while the last
two EVs (50 kW) complete the charging operation in about
30 minutes, due to the less performance degradation (13%).
When e 6= 0 (time dependent case), the performances are
subject to the order of arrival; the higher e, the higher the
effect. Setting e = 3 it is already possible to appreciate how
the temporal component affects the reference generation, as
shown in the subfigure (b). Obviously, by choosing a smaller

Fig. 3. Stand alone system in time independent case: (a) ESS state of
charge and reference; (b) output, required and PV power.

Fig. 4. Stand alone system in time independent case: reference and power
for each plug.

value the behaviour of the system will be similar to the
previous case. The system reserves the best treatment to
the first EV arrived (22 kW) and its reference is maintained
constant for all the charging time. When the system is not
able to deliver the nominal required power to each vehicle
(minute 45), the latest arrived one (50 kW) receives the worst
performance; it is subject to a considerable reduction of the
power reference (80%), which comes back to its nominal
value as soon as the system is able to support it (an EV
earlier arrived is disconnected at the minute 47).
C. Test case 1: Stand alone plant
Several simulations have been performed varying the initial ESS’s state of charge. In the proposed set of simulations,
this value is equal to the state of charge reference value. In
the time independent case (fig.3) the aggregated profile of
the powers delivered by the FCS tracks the shape of the
aggregated reference profile, but not the exact value. This
behaviour is due to the fact that, with the chosen values
of the weights appearing in the target function, maintaining
the ESS’s state of charge near to its reference has a greater
priority than EVs charging. In fig.4 the power delivered
through each plug is depicted. In the time dependent case
(fig.5), the temporal component has also the effect of shifting
the weight on the EVs charging, as will be illustrated in
section V-E: this implies that the EVs receive a better
treatment and the nominal charging power is fully delivered
to each vehicle, as depicted in fig.6. As a consequence, it is
interesting to note that not only the charging operations end
30 minutes in advance with respect to the time independent
case, but also the critical situation in which the aggregated
required power is greater than the maximum deliverable by
the FCS is avoided, since each EV leaves the service area
in a short time and therefore it does not create a waiting
queue; this result is obtained at the cost of allowing a

Fig. 5. Stand alone system in time dependent case: (a) ESS’s state of
charge and reference; (b) output, required and PV power.

Fig. 7. Grid connected system in time dependent case with medium level
of storage charge and low level of δ: (a) ESS’s state of charge and reference,
(b) Grid, ESS and PV power and total power, (c) ESS and grid power

Fig. 6. Stand alone system in time dependent case: reference and power
for each plug.

Fig. 8. Grid connected system in time dependent case with medium level of
storage charge and high level of δ: (a) ESS’s state of charge and reference,
(b) Grid, ESS and PV power and total power, (c) ESS and grid power

larger excursion of the ESS’s state of charge with respect
to its reference in the time independent case, which however
remains within the acceptable operating range.
D. Test case 2: Grid connected plant
In the grid connected case the charging power profiles
are equal to the references by design, so that the times
of arrival have an impact on the generation of references
only, as discussed in subsection V-B. Simulations of this use
case have been focused on assessing the performance of the
control strategy at POC level for different values of δ (fig.7
and fig.8), taking into account the charging power references
generated according to the time dependent strategy. In this
set of simulations, it is not reported the power delivered to
each vehicle but the aggregated one. The reference ESS’s
state of charge (50%) is considered again as initial value.
Different values of δ produce the following implications:
in those moments EVs charging operations require a significant change in the contribution from the grid, the power
grid profile has a smooth shape in case δ is high, while has
a steep profile in case δ is low, as it is possible to note for
example at the minute 22 in both figures, as expected. At the
same time, a high level of δ does not encourage the system
to vary the contribution of the grid which remains constant
as much as possible. For this reason, by comparing the two
situations, P g is greater when δ is high.
E. Effect of time dependent component on EV against ESS
operation priority
In this subsection another implication of the presence of
the temporal component is analyzed, taking as reference
the stand alone plant. In particular, the following case is
represented and depicted in fig.9 and fig.10: an EV fully
discharged arrives at the FCS and connects to the 50 kW
plug when the ESS state of charge is equal to zero. In the

Fig. 9. Stand alone system in time independent case with storage initially
fully discharged: (a) ESS’s state of charge and reference, (b) FCS, PV power
and EV power reference, (c) EV power reference and actual charging power.

Fig. 10. Stand alone system in time dependent case with storage initially
fully discharged: (a) ESS’s state of charge and reference, (b) FCS, PV power
and EV power reference, (c) EV power reference and actual charging power.

time independent case, the power provided by the PV is
mainly used to recharge the storage, extending EV charging
time over acceptable limits. When the time component is
considered, its presence contributes to shift the weight on
the EVs charging term. Since each EV needs a minimum
power to be recharged (P̌m ), as soon as the ESS stores the
minimum level of charge to release P̌m , this minimum power
level is fully used to recharge the EV. In this way, the risk
of power fluctuations is high, as in the time period between

minutes 22 and 25, and this intermittent behavior could
cause component damage and malfunctions on the charging
process. By comparing the two situations, it is possible to
note that the time component does not affect only the strategy
of charging in presence of several EVs: even when there is
only one vehicle, the growth of the term (t − tarr )e during
charging has an effect, forcing the system to encourage the
charging of the vehicle at the expense of the storage.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS
In this paper a time driven MPC approach for the management of EVs fast charging in a service area equipped
with PV generation and a storage device has been presented.
Two different use cases have been considered: in the former
the charging area is disconnected from the grid, in the latter
the grid contributes to EVs charging operations. A primary
references generation problem has been analyzed in order to
satisfy the constraint related to the maximum power delivered
by the FCS, followed by a redefinition of set points depending on ESS’s state of charge (only in stand alone case).
Temporal dependancy has been introduced in the control
strategy and its implications discussed, both in reference
generation and charging operations tasks. Simulations have
been performed for both use cases considering simultaneous charging sessions, which show the effectiveness of the
proposed approach in integrating the ESS in fast charging
applications. Also a special case placed in the stand alone
plant has been discussed, in which a single EV has been
considered in order to assess how the temporal component
affects the priority in ESS and EVs charging operations.
Future works consider the optimal sizing of each involved
element and the integration of controllable RES in the control
strategy. On one hand the sizing of grid connection represents
a critical cost item, so that an optimal assignment of values
to the parameters and a right sizing of storage capacity may
lead to a substantial decreasing of grid contribution. On the
other it is worth of investigation integrating the proposed
EVs charging strategy with wind power control [16] or with
residential energy aware networks [17] [18]. Also an interesting direction for research considers reliable integration of
distributed FCSs in virtual areas, taking advantage of practical and theoretical results related to critical infrastructure
protection [19][20][21][22] and distributed control [23][24].
R EFERENCES
[1] EU-Funded Fast-Charge Network opens up Pan-European
travel for EV drivers. http://www.cegc-project.eu/images/TENT Closing event press release.pdf
[2] Saber, A.Y.; Venayagamoorthy, G.K., ”Plug-in Vehicles and Renewable Energy Sources for Cost and Emission Reductions,” in Industrial
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.58, no.4, pp.1229-1238, April
2011 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2010.2047828
[3] Andreas Schroeder, Thure Traber, The economics of fast
charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, Energy Policy,
Volume 43, April 2012, Pages 136-144, ISSN 0301-4215,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.041.
[4] Pea-da, B.; Dechanupaprittha, S., ”Impact of fast charging station
to voltage profile in distribution system,” in Electrical Engineering
Congress (iEECON), 2014 International , vol., no., pp.1-4, 19-21
March 2014 doi: 10.1109/iEECON.2014.6925934
[5] Yunus, K.; De La Parra, H.Z.; Reza, M., ”Distribution grid impact
of Plug-In Electric Vehicles charging at fast charging stations using
stochastic charging model,” in Power Electronics and Applications
(EPE 2011), Proceedings of the 2011-14th European Conference on ,
vol., no., pp.1-11, Aug. 30 2011-Sept. 1 2011

[6] Donald McPhail, Evaluation of ground energy storage assisted electric
vehicle DC fast charger for demand charge reduction and providing demand response, Renewable Energy, Volume 67, July 2014, Pages 103108, ISSN 0960-1481, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.11.023.
[7] Payam Sadeghi-Barzani, Abbas Rajabi-Ghahnavieh, Hosein KazemiKaregar, Optimal fast charging station placing and sizing, Applied
Energy, Volume 125, 15 July 2014, Pages 289-299, ISSN 0306-2619,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.077.
[8] Phonrattanasak, P.; Leeprechanon, N., ”Optimal placement of EV
fast charging stations considering the impact on electrical distribution
and traffic condition,” in Green Energy for Sustainable Development
(ICUE), 2014 International Conference and Utility Exhibition on , vol.,
no., pp.1-6, 19-21 March 2014
[9] Paul, T.K.; Aisu, H., ”Management of quick charging of electric
vehicles using power from grid and storage batteries,” in Electric
Vehicle Conference (IEVC), 2012 IEEE International , vol., no., pp.18, 4-8 March 2012 doi: 10.1109/IEVC.2012.6183259
[10] Huajie Ding, Zechun Hu, Yonghua Song, Value of the energy storage
system in an electric bus fast charging station, Applied Energy,
Volume 157, 1 November 2015, Pages 630-639, ISSN 0306-2619,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.058.
[11] Huajie Ding; Zechun Hu; Yonghua Song; Xiaorui Hu; Yongxiang Liu,
”Coordinated control strategy of energy storage system with electric
vehicle charging station,” in Transportation Electrification Asia-Pacific
(ITEC Asia-Pacific), 2014 IEEE Conference and Expo , vol., no., pp.15, Aug. 31 2014-Sept. 3 2014 doi: 10.1109/ITEC-AP.2014.6940831
[12] Chenrui Jin; Jian Tang; Ghosh, P., ”Optimizing Electric Vehicle
Charging With Energy Storage in the Electricity Market,” in Smart
Grid, IEEE Transactions on , vol.4, no.1, pp.311-320, March 2013
doi: 10.1109/TSG.2012.2218834
[13] Dragicevic, T.; Sun Bo; Schaltz, E.; Guerrero, J.M., ”Flexible local
load controller for fast electric vehicle charging station supplemented
with flywheel energy storage system,” in Electric Vehicle Conference
(IEVC), 2014 IEEE International , vol., no., pp.1-6, 17-19 Dec. 2014
doi: 10.1109/IEVC.2014.7056133
[14] Ciccarelli, F.; Del Pizzo, A.; Iannuzzi, D., ”An ultra-fast charging
architecture based on modular multilevel converters integrated with
energy storage buffers,” in Ecological Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), 2013 8th International Conference and Exhibition on ,
vol., no., pp.1-6, 27-30 March 2013 doi: 10.1109/EVER.2013.6521617
[15] Di Giorgio A., Liberati F., Canale S., ”IEC 61851 compliant electric vehicle charging control in Smartgrids,” 21st Med.
Conf. on Control and Automation MED13, 1329-1335, 2013, DOI:
10.1109/MED.2013.6608892.
[16] Di Giorgio A., Pimpinella L., Mercurio A., (2010), “A Feedback Linearization Based Wind Turbine Control System for Ancillary Services
and Standard Steady State Operation.”, 18th Med. Conf. on Control
and Automation MED10, 1585-1590, Marrakech, 23-25 June 2010
DOI: 10.1109/MED.2010.5547821.
[17] Suraci V., Marucci A., Bedini, R. Zuccaro L., Palo A., (2013),
“Energy-aware control of home networks.”, LNCS (Part 2) pp. 299
- 311, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-39643-4 23.
[18] Suraci V., Palo A., (2011), “Green networking: Integration of Wireless
Sensor Network with Home Gigabit Access.”, Future Network & Mobile Summit 2011 Conference Proceedings. ISBN: 978-190582425 - 0.
[19] Delli Priscoli F., Isidori A., Marconi L., (2009), “A Dissipativity-based
Approach to Output Regulation of Non-Minimum-Phase Systems.”,
System and Control Letters, Elsevier, Vol. 58, 2009, pp. 584-591.
[20] Capodieci P., Setola R., Delli Priscoli F., Castrucci M., Suraci V. et al.,
(2010), “Improving Resilience of Interdependent Critical Infrasructures via on-line Alerting System.”, Complexity in Engineering Conf.
(Compeng 2010), Rome, December 2010, pp. 88-90.
[21] Canale S., Delli Priscoli F., Di Giorgio A., Lanna A., Mercurio A.,
Panfili M., Pietrabissa A., (2012), “Resilient Planning of PowerLine
Communications Networks over Medium Voltage Distribution Grids.”,
20th Med. Conf. on Control and Automation MED12, 710-715,
Barcelona, ES, July 2012, DOI: 10.1109/MED.2012.6265721.
[22] Pietrabissa A., Poli C., Ferriero D.G., Grigioni M., (2013), “Optimal
planning of sensor networks for asset tracking in hospital environments.”, Decision Support Systems, Elsevier, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 304313, April 2013, ISSN 0167-9236, DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2013.01.031.
[23] Delli Priscoli F., Isidori A., Marconi L., Pietrabissa A., (2015),
“Leader-Following Coordination of Nonlinear Agents under Timevarying Communication Topologies.”, IEEE Trans. on Control of
Network Systems (IEEE Control System Society, USA), Vol. 2, Issue:
4, December 2015, pp. 393-405, DOI: 10.1109/TCNS.2015.2426752.
[24] Di Giorgio A., Liberati F., Pietrabissa A., (2015), “On-board stochastic control of Electric Vehicle recharging.”, Decision and Control
(CDC), 2013 IEEE 52nd Annual Conference on, pp.5710-5715,
Firenze, IT, 10-13 Dec. 2013. DOI: 10.1109/CDC.2013.6760789.

