1

Multi-objective Optimal Sizing and Energy
Management of Hybrid Energy Storage System for
Electric Vehicles

arXiv:1801.07183v1 [cs.SY] 19 Jan 2018

Huilong Yu, Member, IEEE, Federico Cheli, Francesco Castelli-Dezza, Member, IEEE, Dongpu
Cao, Member, IEEE, and Fei-Yue Wang, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—Hybrid energy storage system (HESS) composed of
lithium-ion battery and supercapacitors has been recognized as
one of the most promising solutions to face against the high
cost, low power density and short cycle life of the battery-only
energy storage system, which is the major headache hindering the
further penetration of electric vehicles. In this work, the HESS
sizing and energy management problem of an electric race car
is investigated as a case study to improve the driving mileage
and battery cycle life performance. Compared with the existing
research, the distinctive features of this work are: (1) A dynamic
model and a degradation model of the battery are employed to
describe the dynamic behavior and to predict the cycle life of the
battery more precisely; (2) Considering the fact that the design
and control problems are coupled in most cases, in order to
achieve a global optimal design solution and an implementable
real-time energy management system, a Bi-level multi-objective
sizing and control framework based on non-dominated sorting
genetic algorithm-II and fuzzy logic control (FLC) is proposed
to size the HESS and to optimize the membership functions of a
FLC based EMS at the same time; (3) In order to improve the
optimization efficiency, a vectorized fuzzy inference system which
allows large scale of fuzzy logic controllers operating in parallel is
devised. At last, the Pareto optimal solutions of different HESSs
are obtained and compared to show the achieved enhancements
of the proposed Bi-level optimal sizing and energy management
framework.
Index Terms—Hybrid energy storage system, multi-objective
optimization, vectorized fuzzy interface, real-time energy management, electric vehicles.

I. I NTRODUCTION

I

N recent years, to face the challenge of air pollution, fossil
oil crisis, and greenhouse gas emissions, Electric vehicles (EVs) have gained unprecedented amount of attentions
from the governments, academia and industries all over the
world. After intensively developing over the last decades, the
worldwide promotion and application of EVs have reached
a considerable scale. However, the dynamic performance,
H. Yu was with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico
di Milano, 20156, Milano, Italy. He is now with the Mechanical and
Mechatronics Engineering Department, University of Waterloo, N2L 3G1,
Waterloo, Canada (e-mail: huilong.yu@ieee.org).
F. Cheli and F. Castelli Dezza are with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20156, Milano, Italy (e-mail: federico.cheli@polimi.it;francesco.castellidezza@polimi.it).
D. Cao is with the Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering Department, University of Waterloo, N2L 3G1, Waterloo, Canada (e-mail:
dongp ca@yahoo.com).
FY. Wang is with the State Key Lab for Management and Control of
Complex Systems Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
100190, Beijing, China (e-mail: feiyue@ieee.org).

cost, durability of an EV are still significantly influenced
by the design, integration, and control of its energy storage
system (ESS) [1]. It is generally known that the batteryonly ESS with high cost and short cycle life has become
one of the biggest obstacles hindering further penetrations
of the EVs. Lithium-ion batteries with high energy density
and relatively good power density dominate the most recent
group of EVs in development, however, its degradation can
be accelerated when there is high peak discharging/charging
power demand during the acceleration/ deceleration process
[2]–[4]. Alternatively, supercapacitors (SCs) can tolerate much
more charging/discharging cycles and exhibit superior ability
to cope with high peak power, due to their specific energy
storage mechanism, but the low energy density hampers their
large scale application on EVs [5], [6]. A hybrid energy storage
system (HESS) composed by lithium-ion batteries and SCs
which can bridge the gap between them is considered as
one of the most promising solutions to solve the forgoing
problems entrenched in battery-only/SC-only energy [7]–[10].
The configuration of a HESS vary with different connections
of the battery, supercapacitor and DC/DC converter. The
employed HESS in this work is the most studied configuration
that using a bidirectional DC/DC converter to interface the
supercapacitor to the DC link of the battery in parallel,
where the voltage of supercapacitor can be used in a wide
range [8]. Existing research has demonstrated that HESS can
dramatically improve braking energy recuperation efficiency,
eliminate the need for battery over-sizing, and reduce the
weight and cost of the entire system [11]. However, the
HESS introduces complicated sizing, energy management and
integration problems [12].
The sizing problem of HESS aims to find the appropriate number of supercapacitor banks and battery cells that
minimizing the cost, mass and efficiency of the HESS or
maximize the battery cycle life. A multi-objective optimization
problem was formulated to minimize the overall HESS size
and maximize the battery cycle life, the formulated problem
was solved with the sample-based global search oriented
DIviding RECTangles (DIRECT) algorithm [13]. Ref. [14]
proposed a multi-objective sizing approach based on nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) for a semiactive HESS and obtained the Pareto frontier with battery
capacity loss and total cost of supercapacitors as objectives.
Convex optimization was introduced to solve the formulated
sizing and energy management problems of different kinds of

2

HESSs with weighted cost as objective [1], [15].
For the energy management strategy (EMS) of HESS, both
rule based approach and the optimization based approach are
widely investigated [16]. A time efficient utility functionbased control of a battery semi-active HESS was proposed
and carried out in [17] by formulating a weighted multiobjective optimization problem, then the formulated problem
is solved using the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions.
Ref. [18] proposed an energy management strategy for a HESS
based on fuzzy logic supervisory wavelet-transform frequency
decoupling approach, which aims to maintain the state of the
energy (SOE) of the supercapacitor at an optimal value, to
increase the power density of the ESS and to prolong the
battery lifetime. An explicit model predictive control (EMPC)
system for a HESS was proposed and validated in [19] to
make the HESS operating within specified constraints while
allocating high and low frequency current changes to the
supercapacitor and battery respectively. Ref. [20] developed
a real-time predictive power management control strategy
based on neural network and particle swarm optimization
algorithm to minimize the total cost including battery degradation and system energy. A variable charging/discharging
threshold method and an adaptive intelligence technique based
on historical data was proposed in [21] to improve the power
management efficiency and smooth the load of a HESS.
Two real-time energy management strategies based on KKT
conditions and neural network were investigated and validated
with experimental work in [22] to improve the battery state of
health performance of a HESS effectively.
The continuous previous efforts have improved the overall
performance of HESS considerably. However, most of the
aforementioned literature investigated the sizing and energy
management problems separately which can not obtain the
global optimal performance of the HESS since the design and
control problems of it are actually coupled in practice [23].
We can only obtain the sub-optimal solution when we try to
optimize one and fix the other. Some of the existing approach
in literature are off-line optimization methods which are quite
useful as the reference in designing real-time EMS but not
appropriate for real implementation, and most of the real-time
implementable EMSs are not able to achieve optimal performances. Besides, few existing work has considered the fact
that the total available amount of energy could be extracted
from the battery cells will vary when uses different discharging
C-rates in practical cases. This dynamic situation should be
considered during the optimization research especially when
the HESS is operating at limit conditions. Thus, it is necessary
to explore a framework that can achieve the global optimal
performance by incorporating both the sizing and real-time
feedback control problems of the HESS taking into account
the battery dynamics.
In order to force against the drawbacks of the state-of-theart methods, this work will explore the sizing and real-time
energy management problem of HESS as a coupled problem.
In particular, the HESS of an electric race car is investigated
as a case study. Although win the race is the only ultimate
goal on a circuit, we should try to minimize the cost for
a racing team and the environmental impact caused by the

waste battery as much as possible during a race or for the
offline training, which can match the spirit of the electric
racing better. Our goal of this work is to introduce the HESS
with proper sizing parameters and optimized EMS to improve
the cycle life of the battery without scarifying the mileage
of the electric race car too much. A multi-objective optimal
sizing and energy management framework supported by the
employed dynamic battery model, evaluation model and the
proposed vectorized fuzzy inference system is proposed in
this work. With this framework, one can obtain the Pareto
optimal solutions of the formulated multi-objective optimal
sizing and energy management problem and achieve both the
optimal sizing parameters and the static parameters of the EMS
at the same time for each Pareto optimal solution which are
ready for further real-time implementation.
The rest of this work is organized as follows: Section
2 describes the proposed Bi-level design and energy management framework, then presents the formulation of the
sizing and energy management problem. Section 3 elaborates
the modelling of the battery and supercapacitor. Section 4
details the devised FLC based on vectorized fuzzy inference
engine. In section 5, the simulation parameters and settings
are presented in detail. Section 6 and Section 7 illustrate the
obtained results and the concluding remarks respectively.
II. B I -L EVEL O PTIMAL D ESIGN AND C ONTROL
F RAMEWORK
The proposed Bi-level optimal design and control framework is presented as Figure 1. The power demand of the
driving profile Pdem , the battery state of charge xSOC and
supercapacitor state of energy xSOE are the inputs of the
FLC based EMS, while the outputs are requested power
from the battery Preqbat and from the supercapacitor Preqsc .
The outputs of the EMS are the inputs of the battery and
supercapacitor modeled in Section III, while the evaluation
indexes can be calculated with the outputs of the battery and
supercapacitor model.

Preqbat

xSOC

Battery
model

xSOC
Vb
Ibat

xSOE
EMS

xSOE

Pdem

Preqsc

SC
model

xmf

N sc

Evaluation
model

Optimal ?

Yes

End

Vsc
Isc

No

Multi-objective
optimization

Fig. 1. Framework of the Bi-Level design and control

The working scheme of the Bi-level optimal design and
control is illustrated as follows. Firstly, the multi-objective
algorithm will generate the sizing parameter matrix and the
corresponding static tuning parameter matrix of the energy
management system, in this work, the mentioned matrices
are respectively the number of supercapacitor banks and the
parameters of the membership functions (MFs) in different

3

pages of the optimization parameters. Secondly, the FLC based
EMS constructed with the new membership functions will
control the generated new HESS to output the demand power
from the battery and supercapacitor respectively. Then, the
maximum number of laps can be obtained when both the
battery and supercapacitor arrives at the minimum state of
charge values set in the constraints, while the capacity loss
of the battery is evaluated with the average current of the
battery during the whole scenario. There are quite a lot of
existing literature to model the capacity loss of the lithiumion battery. The capacity loss model is mostly validated by
discharging the battery with constant current C rate, and we
havent find any work that can predict the battery capacity
loss dynamically with validated experimental work. Thus, we
choose to estimate the capacity loss of the battery with average
load as many previous work did. When the Pareto-frontier of
the two evaluation indexes is obtained, the above iteration will
terminate, otherwise, it will continue.
The objective of this work is to find the optimal sizing
parameter Nsc and the parameter vector xmf defining the
membership functions which are respectively the key parameters of HESS design and the real-time FLC based EMS. The
optimized EMS will output the requested control command
series u(t) = [Preqbat , Preqsc ] to maximize the number of
traveled laps Jlaps and battery cycle life Jlifebat on a given
race circuit:
max J = [Jlaps (x(t), u(t), p), Jlifebat (x(t), u(t), p)]

(1)

subject to:
the first order dynamic constraints
ẋ(t) = f [x(t), u(t), t, p],

(2)

the boundaries of the state, control and design variables
xmin ≤ x(t) ≤ xmax
umin ≤ u(t) ≤ umax

(3)

pmin ≤ p ≤ pmax ,
the algebraic path constraints
g min ≤ g[x(t), u(t), t, p] ≤ g max ,

III. M ODELLING OF THE HESS
In this section, the dynamic characteristics of the implemented Lithium-ion battery are analyzed first, and a dynamic
battery model is employed after comparison. Then, the details
of the employed battery cycle life model are presented. A
simplified supercapacitor model is illustrated at the end of this
section.
A. Dynamic Battery model
In order to obtain the optimal sizing parameters and energy
management strategy for the HESS considering the characteristics of the battery in practical conditions, it is necessary to
implement a proper dynamic battery model that can describe
the battery dynamic behavior precisely. The most existing
battery models for the simulation of battery behavior basically
include the experimental, electrochemical and electrical ones
[24]–[26]. However, the experimental and electrochemical
model are not appropriate to simulate the battery dynamics
correctly. In comparison with the experimental and electrochemical battery model, specially devised electric circuit based
model are capable to represent the battery dynamics for the
purpose of state of charge (SOC) estimation. In this work, a
modified Shepherd model is employed to depict the dynamic
characteristics of the battery during charging and discharging
process [27]. The dynamic battery model are presented as
Equation (6) and Equation (7) with the assumption that the
internal resistance is constant and the thermal behavior of the
battery is neglected.
Discharge:
Vbatt = E0 −K

Qmax
Qmax
it−K
i−Ri+Ae(−B·it)
Qmax − it
Qmax − it
(6)

Charge:
(4)

and the boundary conditions
bmin ≤ b[x(t0 ), t0 , x(tf ), tf , p] ≤ bmax ,

variables x, control variables u, design parameters p and
the boundary constraints b will be presented in the following
paragraphs.

(5)

where ẋ is the first order derivative of the state variables, f is
the dynamic model, x, u, p are respectively the state, control
and design vector with their lower and upper bounds: xmin ,
umin , pmin and xmax , umax , pmax . While g and b are the
path and boundary equations respectively with their lower and
upper bounds g min , bmin and g max , bmax . The dimensions
of the input and output variables in Equations (2), (4) and (5)
are separately given as:
f : Rnx × Rnu × R × Rnp → Rnx
g : Rnx × Rnu × R × Rnp → Rng
b : Rnx × R × Rnx × R × Rnp → Rnb
In this work, the algebraic path constraint g is eliminated
by introducing a simple relaxation in Equation (16), the state

Qmax
Qmax
it−K
i−Ri+Ae(−B·it)
Qmax − it
it − 0.1Qmax
(7)
where Vbatt is the battery voltage (V ), E0 is the voltage
constant (V ), K is the polarization constant or polarization
resistance, Qmax is the total capacity, i is the battery current,
R is the internal resistance. The battery discharge (i > 0) or
charge (i < 0 ) it is denoted as
Z
it = idt.
(8)
Vbatt = E0 −K

The voltage amplitude A (V ), time constant inverse B
(Ah−1 ) of the exponential zone, the polarization resistance
K (Ω) and the voltage constant E0 (V) in Equations (6) and
(7) are calculated as follows [28]:
A = VF ull − Vexp
B=

3
Qexp

(9)
(10)

4

K=

(Vf ull − Vnom + A(exp(−BQnom ) − 1))(Q − Qnom )
Qnom
(11)
E0 = VF ull + K + R · i − A.
(12)

The typical discharge process of the lithium-ion battery is
divided into three stages as demonstrated in Figure 2. In the
initial stage, the battery voltage drops exponentially from the
fully charged voltage Vf ull , the voltage and extracted charge
at the end of this stage are Vexp and Qexp , respectively. The
voltage continues to decline slowly before reaching the nominal voltage Vnom and the corresponding discharge increases
to Qnom in the second stage. In the final stage, the battery
voltage drops abruptly to the minimum value and the discharge
reaches the maximum value Qmax .

in problems that are time-consuming and difficult to solve.
There should be more efforts put in improving the optimization
efficiency.
B. Battery Cycle Life Model
In recent years, substantial efforts have been made by both
the researchers and industries to develop models that can
predict the degradation of the lithium-ion batteries accurately
[29]–[31]. A revised semi-empirical model based on Arrhenius
equation is widely researched with large scale experiments,
and this model is mostly applied in optimization and control
problems related with batteries [29]. As presented from Equation (17) to Equation (20), the capacity loss of this model is
expressed as a function of the discharge current rate Crate ,
temperature T and ampere-hour throughout Ah .
−Ea
)(Ah )z
(17)
RT
where Qloss represents the battery capacity loss, A the preexponential factor, Ea the activation energy from Arrhenius
law (J), R is the gas constant of 8.314 , T is the absolute
temperature (K), Ah is the Ah-throughput, which represents
the amount of charge delivered by the battery during cycling.
The pre-exponential factor A in Equation (17) is proved
to be sensitive to the discharge current rate Crate with large
scale experiments in [32] , and it is fitted with the format as
Equation (18) in [33].
Qloss = A exp(

ln A = a · exp(−b · Crate ) + c

The activation energy can be fitted as a linear function of
discharge current rate Ref. [32],

Typical discharge curve
Fig. 2. Typical discharge curve of lithium-ion battery.

The state of charge of the battery xsoc and its derivative ẋsoc
is denoted as Equation (13) and Equation (14) respectively.
Z tf
1
xsoc = 100(1 −
idt)
(13)
3600Qmax 0
ẋsoc

1
=−
i
36Qmax

(14)

The charging/discharging i is denoted as

Preqbat


 N V η , Preqbat ≥ 0
bat bat AD
(15)
i=

Preqbat ηAD


,
Preqbat < 0
Nbat Vbat
where ηAD is the efficiency of the DC/AC converter taking
into account of the motor efficiency as a constant value. In
this work, the number of battery cells Nbat are determined by
the available total mass of the HESS mHESS and the number of
the supercapacitor banks Nsc , as shown in Equation (16). The
total mass of the HESS is fixed in this work considering the
fact that the mass of a race car is strictly limited in general.
Nbat = b(mHESS − Nsc mbank )/mcell c

(18)

(16)

Although the modified Shepherd model can represent the
dynamic characteristics of the battery, it has not been employed so much in the existing literature related with the HESS
design and control due to its complicity, which usually results

Ea = d + e · Crate

(19)

where a, b, c, d, e are the correction parameters of the battery
cycle life model.
The Ah-throughput can be expressed as
Ztf
Ah =

i
dt
3600

(20)

0

where i is the discharge current, tf is the end time of the
current profile.
C. Supercapacitor Model
In this work, the capacity fading of the supercapacitor
is neglected considering the fact that it has much longer
cycle life than lithium-ion batteries. The supercapacitor model
is simplified to a series connection of a resistance and a
supercapacitor bank [6]. Also, the efficiency of the DC/DC
converter between the supercapacitor and the bus is assumed
to be a constant value of 0.95. The recursive supercapacitor
model is deduced as

p
Vct − Vct2 − 4Rsct Preqsc /(ηAD ηdc )



Preqsc ≥ 0
−
2Csct Rsct
V̇ct =
p


V − Vct2 − 4Rsct Preqsc ηAD ηdc

− ct
Preqsc < 0
2Csct Rsct
(21)

5

xSOE =

Vct 2
2
Vctmax

(22)

ẋSOE =

2Vct V̇ct
2
Vctmax

(23)

and big respectively. The basic idea of the fuzzy rule is to
utilize the the supercapacitor as a buffer to reduce the high
peak power impact on battery and absorb more regenerative
braking power.

Vct = Vc Nsc

(24)

B. Membership functions

Csct =Cbank /Nsc

(25)

Rst = Nsc Rs

(26)

where Vct is the total open circuit voltage of the supercapacitor
pack assuming that all banks have a uniform behavior, tk+1
is the time at step k + 1, Rst is the total equivalent series
resistance, Preqsc is the demand power from the supercapacitor, ηdc is the efficiency of the DC/DC converter, Csct is
the total capacity, SOE is the state of energy, Vctmax is the
initial open circuit voltage, Vc is the open circuit voltage of
one supercapacitor, Nsc is the total number of the banks, Rs
is the series resistance of one supercapacitor.
The actual total output power of the supercapacitor is
represented as
p
Vct − Vct2 − 4Rst Preqsc /ηAD ηdc
.
(27)
Psc = Vct ·
2Rst
IV. FLC BASED ON V ECTORIZED F UZZY I NFERENCE
E NGINE
In this work, the EMS is developed based on fuzzy logic
control (FLC), which has the features of real-time, adaptive
and intelligent. It allows different operators to merge nonlinearities and uncertainties in the best way and incorporate
heuristic control in the form of if-then rules. The developed
FLC in this section are composed of the if-then fuzzy rules,
fuzzification, fuzzy inference engine and defuzzification modules. To speed up the optimization and take the advantage
of the powerful matrix processing capability of MATLAB, a
vectorized fuzzy inference system (VFIS) presented in Figure
3 is developed for the first time according to the state-ofthe-art literature. The developed VFIS is capable to handle
Np × Ninp dimensional inputs with Np pages of membership
functions each time. This means that Np fuzzy controllers
(can be hundreds of thousands depends on the performance
of the utilized CPU) can work at the same time with the
same page number of inputs and outputs. The following
paragraph will present the detail of fuzzy rules, membership
functions, vectorized fuzzification, fuzzy inference engine, and
defuzzification operations of the developed vectorized FLC.

The concept of membership functions was introduced by
Zadeh in the first paper on fuzzy sets [34]. A membership
function is a curve or a function that defines how each point
of the input variables is mapped to a membership value
between 0 and 1. It is quite challenging to design the optimal
MFs for each HESS manually according to the engineering
experiences. Besides, considering that the performance of the
FLCs are sensitive to their MFs, different MFs of the FLCs
with the same fuzzy rules should be devised for different sizes
of HESS. Based on these considerations, the parameters of the
MFs are selected as parts of the parameters to be optimized
in this work.
The trapezoidal-shaped membership function is selected for
the fuzzy inference engine based on the considerations that it
has high flexibility, e.g., as shown in Figure 5, when a = b,
the trapezoid MF will change its shape to triangle [12].
C. Vectorized Fuzzification
During the fuzzification stage, the input variables are identified to the fuzzy sets (membership functions) they belong
to and the respective degree of membership to each relevance
will be assigned. For a FIS with trapezoidal shaped MFs and a
number of Ninp inputs, the fuzzy sets of each can be described
with a matrix S k = [ak , bk , ck , dk ] ∈ RNp ×Nti,k ×4 . Np is
the total page number of the inputs; Nti,k is the number of
fuzzy linguistic sets of state input k, k ∈ {1, 2, ..., Ninp } and
a, b, c, d are the variables that define one trapezoid in Figure
5. The input matrix is denoted as xk ∈ RNp , for Xk , its
membership matrix µk ∈ RNp ×Nti,k can be denoted as:

Xk − ak


 µk (ak ≤ Xk < bk ) = b − a

k
k

µk (bk ≤ Xk ≤ ck ) = I
(28)



d
−
X
k

 µk (ck < Xk ≤ dk ) = k
d k − ck
where ak , bk , ck , dk , I belong to RNp ×Nti,k , and Xk is denoted as:
Xk = [xk , xk , ..., xk ] ∈ RNp ×Nti,k
|
{z
}

(29)

Nti,k

A. Fuzzy rules
Fuzzy rules are a set of if-then linguistic rules used to
formulate the conditional relationships that comprise a fuzzy
logic controller, for instance, a fuzzy rule can be: if SOC is
Small and SOE is Big and Preq is Positive big then Psc is
Positive big. It is reasonable to devise the same if-then rules
for the control of different sizes of HESSs since the control
objectives of all the HESSs are the same in this work. The
developed fuzzy rules are demonstrated as Figure 4, where the
labels N, P, S, M, B means negative, positive, small, medium

The membership array U for input X can be constructed as:
U = {µ1 , ..., µk , ..., µNinp } ∈ RNp ×Nti,k ×Ninp

(30)

D. Vectorized Fuzzy Inference Engine
Fuzzy inference is the way of mapping an input space to an
output space using fuzzy logic. A FIS tries to formalize the
reasoning process of human language by means of fuzzy logic
(the built fuzzy If-Then rules). The process of fuzzy inference
involves all of the MFs, If-Then rules, linguistic variables of

6

Page 1
Page 2

Membership function optimization algorithm

c(Nto,Np)

d(Nto,Np)

Page Ns

b(1,Np,1) c(1,Np,1) b(2,Np,1) c(2,Np,1) b(Nti,k,Np,1) c(Nti,k,Np,1)

d(Nti,k,Np,2)

a(Nti,k,Np,2)

……

……

x

d(1,Np,Ninp) a(2,Np,Ninp) d(2,Np,Ninp) a(Nti,k,Np,Ninp)
Np×Ninp

(Np,Ninp)

Inputs

UoNto×Np (1, Np)

……

a(1,Np,Ninp)

……

b(1,Np)

b(1,Np,Ninp)c(1,Np,Ninp)b(2,Np,Ninp)c(2,Np,Ninp) b(Nti,k,Np,Ninp) c(Nti,k,Np,Ninp)

xNp×Ninp(Np,Ninp)

d(1,Np) a(2,Np) d(2,Np)
Output fuzzy
set of page Np

d(1,Np,1) a(2,Np,2) d(2,Np,2)

xNp×Ninp(Np,2)

d(Nti,k,Np,Ninp)

Input fuzzy sets of page Np

Fuzzification

Fuzzy Rules

xNp×Ninp(Np)

a(1,Np)

a(1,Np,1)

c(2,Np)

c(Nti,k,Np,2)

……

b(2,Np)

b((1,Np,1) c(1,Np,1) b(2,Np,2) c(2,Np,2) b(Nti,k,Np,2)

xNp×Ninp(Np,2)

b(Nto,Np)

d(Nti,k,Np,1)

c(1,Np)

a(Nti,k,Np,1)

xNp×Ninp(Np,1)

UoNto×Np (2, Np)
UoNto×Np (Nto, Np )

a(1,Np,1) d(1,Np,1) a(2,Np,1) d(2,Np,1)

Fuzzy Inference Engine

xNp×Ninp(Np,1)

a(Nto,Np)

……

Defuzzification

Outputs

Fig. 3. Framework of the vectorized FLC

a=b

c d

a=b=c

d

PB
PM
PS
NS
NM
NB
B

B

Change a,b,c,d
M

M
S

S

a

b

c

a b

d

c=d

Trapezoidal MF
NB

NM

NS

PS

PM

PB

a b=c d
Fig. 4. Fuzzy rules for the EMS of the HESS

the inputs and outputs. Mamdani’s fuzzy inference method is
the most commonly seen fuzzy methodology. The search-able
fuzzy inference engine is able to map only one page of the
inputs to one page of the outputs. This section will give an
elaborate description of the developed powerful VFIS which
allows a large number of FLCs operating in parallel based on
Mamdani’s fuzzy inference method.
The linguistic variables are programmed with their integer
indexes from the smallest to the biggest in turn in this work.
For instance, the fuzzy sets {NB, NM, NS, PS, PM, PB} of
the third input in Figure 4 are correspondingly mapped to
{1, 2, ..., Nti,k }, here Nti,k = 6, k = 3. The fuzzy rule matrix
< ∈ RNr ×(Ninp +No ) is constructed with the mapped integer

a b=c=d
Fig. 5. Flexible trapezoidal-shaped membership function

indexes, Nr is the number of fuzzy rules and No is the number
of outputs. For instance:
Rule : xSOC
<(Nr ) :
1

xSOE
3

Preq
6

Psc
6

(31)

where <(Nr ) denotes the fuzzy rule Nr , it means the rule
like: if SOC is Small and SOE is Big and Preq is Positive big

7

then Psc is Positive big. The working scheme of the VFIS is
illustrated as follows:
1) Repeatedly copy the membership matrix µk into Nr blocks,
and we can obtain:
µtemp
= [µk ; µk ; ...; µk ], µtemp
∈ RNp ×Nti,k ×Nr
k
k
|
{z
}

Lin

2
2
..
.

···
...
..
.

Nti,k
Nti,k
..
.

1

2

···

Nti,k









,···



1
1
..
.

2
2
..
.

···
...
..
.

Nti,k
Nti,k
..
.

1

2

···

Nti,k

{z

Np









N


 r




}

(33)
3) Repeatedly copy the kth column of the rule matrix < ∈
RNr ×(Ninp +No ) into Np × Nti,k block arrangement <temp ∈
RNp ×Nti,k ×Nr , k ∈ {1, 2, . . . , Ninp }:


<k , <k , . . . , <k 


 <k , <k , . . . , <k 


<temp =  .
Np
(34)

.
.
..,
.. 
 ..,
...,



<k , <k , . . . , <k
|
{z
}
Nti,k

4) Get the effective membership matrix µeff,k for input k ∈
{1, 2, . . . , Ninp }:
µeff,k = µk (Lin == <temp ), µeff,k ∈ RNp ×Nti,k ×Nr

Ueff,o = Uo,temp (Lo == <otemp ), Ueff,o ∈ RNp ×Nr ×Nto
(41)
11) Merge the membership matrix of the output fuzzy sets in
all the fuzzy rules
Uo,final =

E. Vectorized Defuzzification
The purpose of defuzzification process is to produce a
quantifiable result in crisp logic based on the given fuzzy sets
and corresponding membership degrees. The defuzzification
process based on center of gravity method is demonstrated as
Figure 6.

UoNto×Np (1, Np)

a(1,Np)
b(1,Np)

k=1

2
2
..
.

···
...
..
.

Nto
Nto
..
.

1

2

···

Nto







,···


{z

Np

1
1
..
.

2
2
..
.

···
...
..
.

Nto
Nto
..
.

1

2

···

Nto









Nr







}

(38)
8) Repeatedly copy the column of output fuzzy sets in the
rule matrix < ∈ RNr ×(Ninp +No ) into a Np × Nto block
arrangement <otemp ∈ RNp ×Nr ×Nto , Nto is the number of
fuzzy linguistic sets of output :


<No , <No , . . . , <No 

 <No , <No , . . . , <No 



<otemp =  .
Np
(39)

.
.
..,
.. 
 ..,
...,



<No , <No , . . . , <No
|
{z
}
Nto

c(1,Np)

b(2,Np)

c(2,Np)

d(1,Np)
c(1,Np)

a(2,Np)

b(Nto,Np)

b(2,Np)

d(2,Np)

a(Nto,Np)

c(2,Np)

b(Nto,Np)

Np)

c(Nto,Np)

d(Nto,Np)
c(Nto,Np)

……

a(1,Np)
b(1,Np)

7) Create index matrix Lo ∈ RNp ×Nr ×Nto for output the fuzzy
sets:
1
1
..
.

UoNto×Np (2,

……

6) Get the mapped membership matrix Uo for the output fuzzy
sets:
Ninp
Uo = ∩ Uin (k), Uo ∈ RNp ×Nr
(37)

b(1,Np)

……

Ninp



(42)

By the above calculation, the membership of each trapezoid
of the output fuzzy set is obtained as Uo,final , and the next step
is the defuzzification.

Uin = { ∪ µeff,k (j), ∪ µeff,k (j), ..., ∪ µeff,k (j)} (36)
j=1
j=1
j=1
|
{z
}







Lo = 





|

Uo,eff (i), Uo,final ∈ RNp ×Nto

i=1

Nti,k

Nti,k

Nr
[

(35)

5) Combine and get the final membership matrix Uin ∈
RNp ×Nr ×Ninp for all the input X:
Nti,k

Nto

10) Get the effective membership matrix Ueff,o of all the output
fuzzy sets:

2) Create index matrix Lin ∈ RNp ×Nti,k ×Nr for input k:
1
1
..
.

Uo,temp = {Uo , Uo , ..., Uo }, Uo,temp ∈ RNp ×Nr ×Nto (40)
|
{z
}

(32)

Nr







= 




|

9) Repeatedly copy the membership matrix of the output fuzzy
sets Uo ∈ RNp ×Nr into Nto blocks Uo,temp :

d(1,Np)
c(1,Np)

a(2,Np)
b(2,Np)

d(2,Np)

a(Nto,Np)

c(2,Np)

b(Nto,Np)

d(Nto,Np)
c(Nto,Np)

……
UoNto×Np (Nto, Np )
a(1,Np)

d(1,Np)

a(2,Np)

d(2,Np)

a(Nto,Np)

d(Nto,Np)

Output fuzzy set of page Np

∑
Fig. 6. Defuzzification process based on center of gravity method

The procedure of the vectorized defuzzification is elaborated
as followings:
1) Discrete the output fuzzy sets into Ndis parts xo ∈ RNdis
from its minimum value xo,min to the maximum one xo,max ,
xo = [xo,min : (xo,max − xo,min )/(Ndis − 1) : xo,max ]
(43)

8

where the value of Ndis affects the accuracy of the crisp
output, for instance, the increasing of Ndis will improve the
precision but will increase the computational burden.
2) Repeatedly copy xo ∈ RNdis and output fuzzy set
S o = [ao , bo , co , do ] ∈ RNto ×Np ×4 , we can obtain xo,temp ∈
RNto ×Np ×Ndis and S o,temp ∈ RNto ×Np ×Ndis respectively:


xo , xo , . . . , xo 


 xo , xo , . . . , xo 


xo,temp =  .
Np
(44)

..
.
 ..,
., . . . , .. 



xo , xo , . . . , xo
|
{z
}

vector is p = {Nsc , xmf }. As demonstrated in Figure 7, there
are 28 parameters of the devised membership functions plus
one design parameter of the HESS in one page of parameters
to be optimized. The design vector p is constrained by defining
pmin and pmax .
1
S

M

B

0.5

0
0

100

1
S

Nto

M

B

0.5

S o,temp = [S o , S o , ..., S o ]
|
{z
}

(45)
0

Ndis

0

3) Calculate the membership matrix of xo,temp
based on the output fuzzy set S o,temp
=
[ao,temp , bo,temp , co,temp , do,temp ] ∈ RNto ×Np ×Ndis ×4 :

xo,temp − ao,temp

 µo (ao,temp ≤ xo,temp < bo,temp ) =

bo,temp − ao,temp


µo,temp (bo,temp ≤ xo,temp ≤ co,temp ) = I



d
− xo,temp

 µo (co,temp < xo,temp ≤ do,temp ) = o,temp
do,temp − co,temp
(46)
4) Repeatedly copy the membership matrix Uo,f inal in to Ndis
blocks Uo,temp ∈ RNto ×Np ×Ndis :
Uo,temp = [Uo,f inal , Uo,f inal , ..., Uo,f inal ]
|
{z
}

(47)

Ndis

5) Find the effective membership matrix:
\
Ueff,o = Uo,temp µo , Ueff,o ∈ RNto ×Np ×Ndis

(48)

6) Merge the membership matrix obtained in last step:
Nr
[

Uo,x =

Ueff,o (i), Uo,x ∈ RNp ×Ndis

(49)

i=1

7) Calculate the crisp output matrix for all the input matrices:
NP
dis

y=

xo (i) ◦ Uo,x (xo (i))

i=1
NP
dis

, y ∈ RNp

(50)

Uo,x (xo (i))

i=1

In order to design the fuzzy rules and membership functions
conveniently, the devised vectorized FLC modules illustrated
above are developed in MATLAB with standard and user
friendly interfaces.
V. S IMULATION PARAMETERS AND S ETTINGS
The state variables includes the battery state of charge
xSOC and state of energy of the supercapacitor xSOE , x =
[xSOC , xSOE ]. The control variable output by the FLC in
this work is the requested power from the supercapacitor
u = Preqsc , the demand power from the battery can be
calculated by Preqbat = Pdem − Preqsc . The design parameter

100

1

0.5

0
-200

200

1

0.5

0
-200

Fig. 7. The design parameters of the MFs for the EMS

The operating profile of an electric race car is of great
difference with the one of conventional electric vehicle running
on a city road. Thus, standard driving cycles are not suitable
for the research on electric race car. The real driving cycle of
a race car in Nurburgring circuit is chosen as the test scenario.
The demand driving/braking power is calculated by Equation
(51). The corresponding velocity profile, acceleration profile
and demand power are demonstrated as Figure 8.
1
Pdem = ( ρCd Av 2 + f mv g + mv a)v
2

(51)

The detail simulation parameters of the race car, 53 Ah high
energy lithium-ion battery, 2.85V/3400F high performance
supercapacitor and the converters are illustrated in Table I.
In the FLC based EMS, the SOE and current of the
supercapacitor are constrained between 0.1 and 0.99, -2000
A and 2000A respectively. While the SOC of the lithiumion battery is constrained between 0.2 and 0.9, the current is
regulated by adjusting the requested power from the battery.
When the lithium-ion battery is exhausted, the simulation of
one iteration will be terminated and the objective functions will
be correspondingly evaluated. The temperature is for sure very
important in any kind of vehicle equipped with batteries since
it can affect the performance of the batteries directly. However,
it is very difficult to model the heat generation, dispassion and
the thermal control system of the energy storage system on an

9

300
200
100
0
10

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0
-10
-20
200
0
-200
-400

Fig. 8. Power demand in Nurburgring circuit
TABLE I
PARAMETER VALUES OF THE SIMULATION
Parameters
Vehicle mass (kg)
Aerodynamics coefficient (h2 N/km2 )
Rolling resistance coefficient
Mass of the battery cell (kg)
Voltage constant of the battery cell (V )
Total capacity of the battery cell(Ah)
Polarization resistance of the battery cell (Ω)
Internal resistance of the battery cell (Ω)
Voltage amplitude of the battery cell (V )
Time constant inverse of the battery cell (Ah−1 )
Fitting parameter of pre-exponential factor
Fitting parameter of pre-exponential factor
Fitting parameter of pre-exponential factor
Fitting parameter of activation energy
Fitting parameter of activation energy
Mass of the supercapacitor bank (kg)
Supercapacitor bank capacity(F )
Supercapacitor equivalent series resistance (Ω)
DC/DC converter efficiency
DC/AC converter efficiency

Symbol
mv
ρCd A
f
mcell
E0
Qmax
K
R
A
B
a
b
c
d
e
mbank
Cbank
Rs
ηdc
ηAD

From the sizing point of view, using different number of
supercapacitors means different compromises between high
power density and high energy density. As it is demonstrated
in Figure 9, utilizing more supercapacitors can assist to
reduce the average current of the Lithium-ion battery which is
beneficial for longer cycle life of the battery, but cut down the
energy density of the HESS which results in shorter driving
mileage. When less supercapacitors are used, the results will
be opposite. It is also observed from Figure 9 that HESS with
the same design solutions (makers filled with the same color)
may achieve different values of both objective functions, which
means that for the same HESS with uniform fuzzy rules,
the parameters of the membership functions will determine
whether we can achieve the Pareto optimal solutions. Thanks
to the proposed Bi-level optimal sizing and control framework,
the corresponding sizing parameter Nsc of each HESS and the
membership function parameters xmf of the related EMS are
coupled and obtained at the same time for all the solutions
including those on the Pareto frontier.

Value
570
0.075
0.016
1.15
3.43
55
8.85×10−5
1.33×10−3
0.761
0.040
1.345
0.2563
9.179
46868
-470.3
0.52
3400
2.2×10−4
0.95
0.96

Fig. 9. Multi-objective sizing and control solutions when mHESS = 320kg

electric vehicle precisely. Actually, it is reasonable to assume
that the temperature is controlled at a constant value (23 o C)
by adjusting the thermal control system [1], [35].
In this work, a controlled elitist NSGA which is a variant of
NSGA-II [36] is implemented to solve the multi-objective optimization problem. Instead of only choosing the top-ranking
nondominated fronts, the controlled elitist GA also favors
individuals that can assist to improve the diversity of the
population even if their fitness values are relatively lower.
VI. R ESULTS
In this section, the results of the multi-objective optimal
sizing and control of the HESS are presented and analyzed in
detail. Figure 9 presented the achieved results when the total
mass of the HESS is limited at 320 kg. The population size
is set as 500 in the NSGA-II optimization algorithm, and the
optimization is terminated after about 13 hours in a ThinkPad
T470P laptop with Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7300HQ CPU @2.50
GHz CPU and 16GB RAM, the number of total iterations is
1839.

Moreover, this work has investigated the optimal sizing and
control results of HESSs with different total mass. From Figure
10, we can drawn the following basic conclusions: 1) HESSs
with smaller total mass will cover fewer number of available
laps, but the available cycle life of the battery are longer due
to their shorter operating mileage; 2) We can achieve a pretty
decent compromised solution that can enhance both objective
functions with only about 40 supercapacitor banks and the
optimized membership functions.
In order to analyze the reason of the exhibited advantages of
the proposed Bi-level optimal sizing and control framework,
one solution from the Pareto frontier in Figure 9 (Nsc = 32) is
compared with the solution with same sizing parameter but the
initial devised membership functions. Figure 11 demonstrates
the initial and optimized membership functions with the dotted
lines and solid lines respectively.
The achieved available number of laps of the initial and
optimized solutions are very similar which are respectively
17.88 and 17.98. This is mostly due to the fact that the two
cases are implemented with the same HESS and the available

10

140

5800

120

6000
100

6200
80

6400
60

6600
40

supercapacitors very fast at a few seconds after starting the
operation and the average SOE is under 20% during the
simulation which is not capable to provide long-time high peak
power to protect the battery. While EMS with the optimized
membership functions tends to maintain the SOE of the
supercapacitors above 50%, which helps to play the role of
shaving the peak and filling the valley very well during the
whole driving profile. For instance, the curves in the dotted
box in Figure 12 (c) demonstrate that the requested power from
the battery is less after optimizing the MFs since the SOE is
maintained at a relatively high level due to the optimized EMS.

6800
20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

200
150
100

Fig. 10. Pareto optimal solutions for HESS with different mass mHESS
50
1

0
M

S

B
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0.5
100
50

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
0

1

-50
S

M

B
-100

0.5
-150
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1

100
80

NB

NM

NS

PS

PM

PB
60

0.5
40
0
-200

20
-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200
0

1
NB

NM NS

PS

PM

PB

0.5

Fig. 12. Pareto optimal solutions for HESS with different sizes
0
-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

VII. C ONCLUSIONS
Fig. 11. The initial and optimized membership functions when Nsc = 32

mileage is mainly determined by the sizing parameters rather
than the control parameters. However, the available cycle life
of the battery are different which are respectively 6082 and
6463. This means that HESS with the optimized membership
functions improved the battery cycle life by 6.3%. Figure
12 presents the interested variables between 0-200s, as it
is illustrated in Figure 12 (a) and Figure 12 (b), the EMS
with initial devised membership functions tends to request
more high peak power from the battery and less from the
supercapacitors which will accelerate the degradation of the
battery. This phenomenon can be explained with the curve
of SOE in Figure 12 (c). We can see that EMS with the
initial devised membership functions tends to exhaust the

More supercapacitors do not always guarantee a better
overall performance especially when the total mass of the
HESS is limited. However, we are able to obtain a pretty
good balanced performance with less supercapatitors and the
optimized EMS by the proposed optimization framework. The
proposed Bi-level optimal sizing and control framework in this
work makes it possible to obtain the global optimal solutions
since it enables the optimization algorithm to search both the
design and control parameters simultaneously. The user could
choose the favored sizing solution from the obtained Pareto
frontier packaged with the optimal membership functions
based on a preferred compromise between the two objectives.
The obtained global optimal sizing parameters and optimal
parameters of the real-time controller on the Pareto frontier
can be put into real-time implementations. In addition to the
Bi-level optimal sizing and control framework, the devised

11

vectorized fuzzy logic controller with standard interfaces can
be used in other kinds of real time feedback control problems,
in particular, it can assist to dramatically improve the computational efficiency when need to optimize the parameters of
fuzzy logic controller.
R EFERENCES AND F OOTNOTES
R EFERENCES
[1] X. Hu, L. Johannesson, N. Murgovski, and B. Egardt, “Longevityconscious dimensioning and power management of the hybrid energy
storage system in a fuel cell hybrid electric bus,” Applied Energy, vol.
137, pp. 913–924, 2015.
[2] G. Suri and S. Onori, “A control-oriented cycle-life model for hybrid
electric vehicle lithium-ion batteries,” Energy, vol. 96, pp. 644–653,
2016.
[3] F. Sun, X. Hu, Y. Zou, and S. Li, “Adaptive unscented Kalman filtering
for state of charge estimation of a lithium-ion battery for electric
vehicles,” Energy, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 3531–3540, 2011.
[4] Y. Zou, X. Hu, H. Ma, and S. E. Li, “Combined state of charge and
state of health estimation over lithium-ion battery cell cycle lifespan for
electric vehicles,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 273, no. Supplement
C, pp. 793 – 803, 2015.
[5] A. Burke, “Ultracapacitors: why, how, and where is the technology,”
Journal of power sources, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 37–50, 2000.
[6] L. Zhang, X. Hu, Z. Wang, F. Sun, and D. G. Dorrell, “A review of supercapacitor modeling, estimation, and applications: A control/management
perspective,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 81, pp.
1868 – 1878, 2018.
[7] S. M. Lukic, S. G. Wirasingha, F. Rodriguez, J. Cao, and A. Emadi,
“Power management of an ultracapacitor/battery hybrid energy storage
system in an hev,” in 2006 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Sept 2006, pp. 1–6.
[8] J. Cao and A. Emadi, “A new battery/ultracapacitor hybrid energy
storage system for electric, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,”
IEEE Transactions on power electronics, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 122–132,
2012.
[9] T. Ma, H. Yang, and L. Lu, “Development of hybrid batterysupercapacitor energy storage for remote area renewable energy systems,” Applied
Energy, vol. 153, pp. 56–62, 2015.
[10] O. Ahmed and J. Bleijs, “An overview of dcdc converter topologies
for fuel cell-ultracapacitor hybrid distribution system,” Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 42, no. Supplement C, pp. 609 – 626,
2015.
[11] C. G. Hochgraf, J. K. Basco, T. P. Bohn, and I. Bloom, “Effect of
ultracapacitor-modified PHEV protocol on performance degradation in
lithium-ion cells,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 246, pp. 965–969,
2014.
[12] H. Yu, D. Tarsitano, X. Hu, and F. Cheli, “Real time energy management
strategy for a fast charging electric urban bus powered by hybrid energy
storage system,” Energy, vol. 112, pp. 322–331, 2016.
[13] J. Shen, S. Dusmez, and A. Khaligh, “Optimization of sizing and battery
cycle life in battery/ultracapacitor hybrid energy storage systems for
electric vehicle applications,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2112–2121, 2014.
[14] Z. Song, J. Li, X. Han, L. Xu, L. Lu, M. Ouyang, and H. Hofmann,
“Multi-objective optimization of a semi-active battery/supercapacitor
energy storage system for electric vehicles,” Applied Energy, vol. 135,
no. 0, pp. 212–224, 2014.
[15] X. Hu, N. Murgovski, L. M. Johannesson, and B. Egardt, “Comparison
of three electrochemical energy buffers applied to a hybrid bus powertrain with simultaneous optimal sizing and energy management,” IEEE
Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 15, no. 3, pp.
1193–1205, 2014.
[16] S. F. Tie and C. W. Tan, “A review of energy sources and energy
management system in electric vehicles,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 20, pp. 82 – 102, 2013.
[17] H. Yin, C. Zhao, M. Li, and C. Ma, “Utility Function-Based RealTime Control of A Battery Ultracapacitor Hybrid Energy System,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 220–231,
2015.
[18] S. Dusmez and A. Khaligh, “A supervisory power splitting approach
for a new ultracapacitor battery vehicle deploying two propulsion
machines,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 10, no. 3,
pp. 1960–1971, 2014.

[19] B. Hredzak, V. G. Agelidis, and G. Demetriades, “Application of
explicit model predictive control to a hybrid battery-ultracapacitor power
source,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 277, pp. 84–94, 2015.
[20] Q. Zhang, W. Deng, and G. Li, “Stochastic Control of Predictive Power
Management for Battery/Supercapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage Systems
of Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, pp.
1–1, 2017.
[21] K. Jia, Y. Chen, T. Bi, Y. Lin, D. Thomas, and M. Sumner, “HistoricalData-Based Energy Management in a Microgrid With a Hybrid Energy
Storage System,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13,
no. 5, pp. 2597–2605, 2017.
[22] J. Shen and A. Khaligh, “Design and real-time controller implementation for a battery-ultracapacitor hybrid energy storage system,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1910–1918,
2016.
[23] H. Yu, F. Castelli-Dezza, and F. Cheli, “Optimal powertrain design and
control of a 2-iwd electric race car,” in 2017 International Conference
of Electrical and Electronic Technologies for Automotive, June 2017,
pp. 1–7.
[24] Y. Cao, R. C. Kroeze, and P. T. Krein, “Multi-timescale parametric
electrical battery model for use in dynamic electric vehicle simulations,”
IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, vol. 2, no. 4, pp.
432–442, 2016.
[25] S. J. Moura, F. B. Argomedo, R. Klein, A. Mirtabatabaei, and M. Krstic,
“Battery state estimation for a single particle model with electrolyte
dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 25,
no. 2, pp. 453–468, 2017.
[26] H. Chaoui and C. C. Ibe-Ekeocha, “State of charge and state of health
estimation for lithium batteries using recurrent neural networks,” IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 8773–8783,
2017.
[27] O. Tremblay, “Experimental validation of a battery dynamic model for
ev applications experimental validation of a battery dynamic model for
ev applications,” in 24th International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell
Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition 2009, EVS 24, vol. 2, 2009,
pp. 930–939.
[28] O. Tremblay, L.-a. Dessaint, and a. I. Dekkiche, “A Generic Battery
Model for the Dynamic Simulation of Hybrid Electric Vehicles,” 2007
IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, no. V, pp. 284–289,
2007.
[29] J. Wang, P. Liu, J. Hicks-Garner, E. Sherman, S. Soukiazian, M. Verbrugge, H. Tataria, J. Musser, and P. Finamore, “Cycle-life model for
graphite-LiFePO4 cells,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 196, no. 8, pp.
3942–3948, 2011.
[30] A. Cordoba-Arenas, S. Onori, Y. Guezennec, and G. Rizzoni, “Capacity
and power fade cycle-life model for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
lithium-ion battery cells containing blended spinel and layered-oxide
positive electrodes,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 278, pp. 473–483,
2015.
[31] R. Deshpande, M. Verbrugge, Y.-T. Cheng, J. Wang, and P. Liu, “Battery
Cycle Life Prediction with Coupled Chemical Degradation and Fatigue
Mechanics,” Journal of the Electrochemical Society, vol. 159, no. 10,
pp. A1730–A1738, aug 2012.
[32] R. Wang, Y. Chen, D. Feng, X. Huang, and J. Wang, “Development
and performance characterization of an electric ground vehicle with
independently actuated in-wheel motors,” Journal of Power Sources, vol.
196, no. 8, pp. 3962–3971, 2011.
[33] J. Shen, A. Hasanzadeh, and A. Khaligh, “Optimal power split and sizing
of hybrid energy storage system for electric vehicles,” in 2014 IEEE
Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC), 2014, pp.
1–6.
[34] L. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Control, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 338
– 353, 1965.
[35] S. Ebbesen, P. Elbert, and L. Guzzella, “Battery state-of-health perceptive energy management for hybrid electric vehicles,” IEEE Transactions
on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 2893–2900, Sept 2012.
[36] K. Deb, “Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms:
an introduction,” Multi-objective evolutionary optimisation for product
design and manufacturing, pp. 1–24, 2011.

