Research Papers

Adaptive Partial Differential Equation Observer for Battery State-of-Charge/State-of-Health Estimation Via an Electrochemical Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Scott J. Moura

UC President's Postdoctoral Fellow
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of California, San Diego,
San Diego, CA 92093
e-mail: smoura@ucsd.edu

Nalin A. Chaturvedi

Senior Research Engineer
Research and Technology Center,
Robert Bosch LLC,
Palo Alto, CA 94304
e-mail: nalin.chaturvedi@us.bosch.com

Miroslav Krstić

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of California, San Diego,
San Diego, CA 92093
e-mail: krstic@ucsd.edu

To be technically correct, the cathode concentration should depend on the anode concentration summed over the spherical volume: css+(t)=(1/ɛs+L+A)[nLi-(3ɛs-L-A/4πRs-3)0Rs-4πr2cs-(r,t)dr]. However, this results in a nonlinear output equation which depends on the in-domain states, as well as the boundary state. This would create additional complexity to the backstepping approach we employ in this paper.

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control. Manuscript received July 18, 2012; final manuscript received June 8, 2013; published online October 15, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Yang Shi.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 136(1), 011015 (Oct 15, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: DS-12-1228; doi: 10.1115/1.4024801 History: Received July 18, 2012; Revised June 08, 2013

This paper develops an adaptive partial differential equation (PDE) observer for battery state-of-charge (SOC) and state-of-health (SOH) estimation. Real-time state and parameter information enables operation near physical limits without compromising durability, thereby unlocking the full potential of battery energy storage. SOC/SOH estimation is technically challenging because battery dynamics are governed by electrochemical principles, mathematically modeled by PDEs. We cast this problem as a simultaneous state (SOC) and parameter (SOH) estimation design for a linear PDE with a nonlinear output mapping. Several new theoretical ideas are developed, integrated together, and tested. These include a backstepping PDE state estimator, a Padé-based parameter identifier, nonlinear parameter sensitivity analysis, and adaptive inversion of nonlinear output functions. The key novelty of this design is a combined SOC/SOH battery estimation algorithm that identifies physical system variables, from measurements of voltage and current only.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Chaturvedi, N. A., Klein, R., Christensen, J., Ahmed, J., and Kojic, A., 2010, “Algorithms for Advanced Battery-Management Systems,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 30(3), pp. 49–68. [CrossRef]
Moura, S., Fathy, H., Callaway, D., and Stein, J., 2011, “A Stochastic Optimal Control Approach for Power Management in Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 19(3), pp. 545–555. [CrossRef]
Siegel, J. B., Lin, X., Stefanopoulou, A. G., Hussey, D. S., Jacobson, D. L., and Gorsich, D., 2011, “Neutron Imaging of Lithium Concentration in LFP Pouch Cell Battery,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 158(5), pp. A523–A529. [CrossRef]
Liu, P., Wang, J., Hicks-Garner, J., Sherman, E., Soukiazian, S., Verbrugge, M., Tataria, H., Musser, J., and Finamore, P., 2010, “Aging Mechanisms of LiFePO4 Batteries Deduced by Electrochemical and Structural Analyses,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 157(4), pp. A499–A507. [CrossRef]
Thomas, K., Newman, J., and Darling, R., 2002, Advances in Lithium-Ion Batteries, Mathematical Modeling of Lithium Batteries, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, Chap. XII, pp. 345–392.
Plett, G. L., 2004, “Extended Kalman Filtering for Battery Management Systems of LiPB-Based HEV Battery Packs. Part 3. State and Parameter Estimation,” J. Power Sources, 134(2), pp. 277–292. [CrossRef]
Verbrugge, M., and Tate, E., 2004, “Adaptive State of Charge Algorithm for Nickel Metal Hydride Batteries Including Hysteresis Phenomena,” J. Power Sources, 126(1–2), pp. 236–249. [CrossRef]
Verbrugge, M., 2007, “Adaptive, Multi-Parameter Battery State Estimator With Optimized Time-Weighting Factors,” J. Appl. Electrochem., 37(5), pp. 605–616. [CrossRef]
Hu, Y., and Yurkovich, S., 2012, “Battery Cell State-of-Charge Estimation Using Linear Parameter Varying System Techniques,” J. Power Sources, 198, pp. 338–350. [CrossRef]
Santhanagopalan, S., and White, R. E., 2006, “Online Estimation of the State of Charge of a Lithium Ion Cell,” J. Power Sources, 161(2), pp. 1346–1355. [CrossRef]
Domenico, D. D., Stefanopoulou, A., and Fiengo, G., 2010, “Lithium-Ion Battery State of Charge and Critical Surface Charge Estimation Using an Electrochemical Model-Based Extended Kalman Filter,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 132(6), p. 061302. [CrossRef]
Smith, K. A., Rahn, C. D., and Wang, C.-Y., 2008, “Model-Based Electrochemical Estimation of Lithium-Ion Batteries,” 2008 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, pp. 714–719.
Klein, R., Chaturvedi, N. A., Christensen, J., Ahmed, J., Findeisen, R., and Kojic, A., 2012, “Electrochemical Model Based Observer Design for a Lithium-Ion Battery,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., pp. 1–13.
Moura, S. J., Chaturvedi, N., and Krstic, M., 2012, “PDE Estimation Techniques for Advanced Battery Management Systems—Part I: SOC Estimation,” Proceedings of the 2012 American Control Conference.
Moura, S. J., Chaturvedi, N., and Krstic, M., 2012, “PDE Estimation Techniques for Advanced Battery Management Systems—Part II: SOH Identification,” Proceedings of the 2012 American Control Conference.
Moura, S. J., Chaturvedi, N., and Krstic, M., 2012, “Adaptive PDE Observer for Battery SOC/SOH Estimation,” 2012 ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference.
Santhanagopalan, S., Guo, Q., Ramadass, P., and White, R. E., 2006, “Review of Models for Predicting the Cycling Performance of Lithium Ion Batteries,” J. Power Sources, 156(2), pp. 620–628. [CrossRef]
Newman, J., 2008, Fortran Programs for the Simulation of Electrochemical Systems, University of California, Berkley, CA.
Chen, C., 1998, Linear System Theory and Design, Oxford University Press, Inc., Oxford, UK.
Krstic, M., and Smyshlyaev, A., 2008, Boundary Control of PDEs: A Course on Backstepping Designs, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA.
Delacourt, C., Poizot, P., Levasseur, S., and Masquelier, C., 2006, “Size Effects on Carbon-Free LiFePO4 Powders,” Electrochem. Solid-State Lett., 9(7), pp. A352–A355. [CrossRef]
Derrien, G., Hassoun, J., Panero, S., and Scrosati, B., 2007, “Nanostructured Sn-C Composite as an Advanced Anode Material in High-Performance Lithium-Ion Batteries,” Adv. Mater., 19(17), pp. 2336–2340. [CrossRef]
Forman, J. C., Moura, S. J., Stein, J. L., and Fathy, H. K., 2012, “Genetic Identification and Fisher Identifiability Analysis of the Doyle-Fuller-Newman Model From Experimental Cycling of a LiFePO4 Cells,” J. Power, 210, pp. 263–275.
Khalil, H. K., 2002, Nonlinear Systems, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Ioannou, P., and Sun, J., 1996, Robust Adaptive Control, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Smyshlyaev, A., and Krstic, M., 2010, Adaptive Control of Parabolic PDEs, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.
Lund, B. F., and Foss, B. A., 2008, “Parameter Ranking by Orthogonalization—Applied to Nonlinear Mechanistic Models,” Automatica, 44(1), pp. 278–281. [CrossRef]
Moura, S. J., Stein, J. L., and Fathy, H. K., 2012, “Battery-Health Conscious Power Management in Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Via Electrochemical Modeling and Stochastic Control,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 21, pp. 679–694. [CrossRef]
Morozovska, A., Eliseev, E., Balke, N., and Kalinin, S., 2010, “Local Probing of Ionic Diffusion by Electrochemical Strain Microscopy: Spatial Resolution and Signal Formation Mechanisms,” J. Appl. Phys., 108(5), p. 053712. [CrossRef]
Fang, W., Kwon, O. J., and Wang, C.-Y., 2010, “Electrochemical-Thermal Modeling of Automotive Li-Ion Batteries and Experimental Validation Using a Three-Electrode Cell,” Int. J. Energy Res., 34(2), pp. 107–115. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Each electrode is idealized as a single porous spherical particle. This model results from assuming the electrolyte concentration is constant in space and time.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

DFN predictions of the solid and electrolyte concentrations as functions of space. The DFN model retains electrolyte and spatial dynamics. State values are depicted after 50 s of 5 C discharge. Symbol cavg is the solid concentration averaged over a spherical particle and css is the surface concentration. Note the non-negligible concentration gradients in the electrolyte.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Voltage response for several discharge rates, for the SPM and DFN model. The SPM exhibits increasing error as C-rate increases, but identical discharge capacities.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Block diagram of the adaptive observer. It is composed of the backstepping state estimator (blue), PDE parameter identifier (green), output function parameter identifier (red), and adaptive output function inversion (orange). The observer furnishes estimates of SOC (i.e., c∧s-(r,t)) and SOH (i.e., ɛ∧,q∧,θ∧h) given measurements of I(t) and V(t), only.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Bode plots of the transcendental transfer function (42) and Padé approximates in Table 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Evolution of state and parameter estimates for UDDSx2 charge/discharge cycle. Zero mean Gaussian noise with a 10 mV variance was added to the voltage measurement. The DFN model provides the “measured” plant data. State and parameter estimates were initialized with incorrect values.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Evolution of state and parameter estimates for a 20 min 1 C discharge and 10 min relaxation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Evolution of state estimates for UDDSx2 charge/discharge cycle with no parameter adaptation. Accurate parameter values and/or online adaptation are critical for unbiased estimates.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Relationship between c∧(r,t) (i.e., SOC∧) and n∧Li, for varying Ph011 and λ = -1. An improper selection between these two gains results in biased estimates.




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In