The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. ELECTRIC VEHICLES

There is growing interest in electric vehicle (EV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
(PHEV) technologies because of their reduced fuel usage and greenhouse emissions plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles have the advantage of long driving range since fuel provides a secondary
resource. Government of India and the Society of Automotive Engineers has taken many
initiatives with IEEE, SAE, IWC but EVs have yet to gain wide acceptance. Three important
barriers include the high cost and cycle life of batteries, complications of chargers, and the lack of
charging infrastructure, another drawback is that battery chargers will produce deleterious
harmonic effects on the electric utility distribution systems Most EV charging can take place at
home although chargers with an active rectifier front end can mitigate this impact.

1.2 CHALLENGES

 Electricity
 Production
 Domestic Battery Supply
 Incentives
 Infrastructure

1.3 TRENDS

 Fast chargers to forge ahead

 Regulations for charger quality
 Subsidies to step down a gear
 Smaller EV battery

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 1

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 INTRODUCTION

Many Researchers has presented several optimization methods, such as mixed-integer

linear programming (MILP), model predictive control (MPC) approach, rolling horizon strategy,
and game theory, for creating efficient operational schedules or making good consumption and
production decisions to smart home energy management. The operation of a smart household that
owned a PV, an energy storage system that consisted of a battery bank and also an EV with
vehicle to home (V2H) option. A distributed small-scale renewable energy generation system, the
V2H capability of an EV together with two-way energy trading of EV (using V2G option) and
energy storage system (ESS). An optimal smart household appliances scheduling was established
under hourly pricing and peak power-limiting (hard and soft power limitation) based demand
response strategies, where thermostatically and non-thermostatically controllable loads were
explicitly modeled. The optimal operation of a neighborhood of smart households in terms of
minimizing the total energy procurement cost was analyzed by considering bi-directional power
flow both at household and neighborhood level.

2.2 REVIEW OF ELECTRIC AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY

Renewable integration has derived optimal EV charging schedules based on predicted PV

output and electricity consumption. A nonlinear predictive energy management method for
buildings with PV system and battery storage has forecasted house load demand via artificial
neural networks. A novel energy management system based on a rolling horizon strategy for a
renewables-based micro grid was proposed and implemented, composed of PV panels, two wind
turbines, a diesel generator and an energy storage system. The impacts of the response capability
levels of consumers on the economic integration of distributed PV power in smart homes, and the
impacts of PV capacities and battery capacities on consumers power expenses were analyzed
using non-cooperation game theoretical power market complementarity model. Most of the
related literature pursues a smart home technology potential evaluation objective. Few seek a real-
time control system that optimizes energy management with an explicit consideration for
stochastic home loads, PV generation, and EV mobility patterns. The main challenge of smart

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 2

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

home energy management arises from multiple sources of randomness, i.e., PEV mobility,
customer power demand, and renewable power generation.

To promote user demand response through optimizing the utilization of wind power
generation, the coordinated wind PEV dispatch problem was also studied in a stochastic
framework capturing the uncertainties of wind power generation and statistical PEV driving
patterns.

However, all the foregoing articles focus on the microgrid energy management problem
using stochastic optimization, given one and only one random factor: either electric price or PEV
mobility, either renewable energy generation or home load. The interactions among various
random variables were constantly overlooked. A probability distribution model combining
household power consumption, EV home-charging and PV power production was developed
using a convolution approach to merge three separate existing probability distribution models.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 3

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

CHAPTER 3
PRESENT SCENARIO
3.1 CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE

The commercial success of the electric vehicle will require the development of a charging
infrastructure that is accessible, easy to use, and relatively inexpensive. There should be a good
charging infrastructure and its technology if electric vehicles are to compete with gasoline-fueled
cars.

Table3.1 Battery cost estimation across stages of production

It would take 50 hours to fully charge a 70 kWh Tesla Model S from a normal wall outlet,
and almost 11-hours with a 220-volt, 6.6 kW line. Tesla has developed a home charging system
that can triple the electric output of a 220 volt line,34 bringing recharging time down to under
four hours, but total installed costs of the charging equipment can reach $4,000-$6,000 depending
on the buyer’s specific requirements.35 If these newer BEVs are being driven long distances
between charges, home charging technology will have to improve dramatically or commercial
fast-charging stations will have to be widely deployed if electric vehicles are to compete with
gasoline-fueled cars.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 4

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

3.2 CHARGING LEVELS:

Charging equipment, henceforth denoted by “electric vehicle supply equipment” (EVSE)

comes in two basic varieties. The first, comprising “Level 1” and “Level 2” EVSE, operates using
alternating current (AC), and can draw electricity directly from the local distribution system. 37
All BEVs and PHEVs carry an on-board inverter with limited capacity, to convert AC power to
direct current (DC), which is required to charge the battery. The second variety, “Level 3” and
above, uses DC charging, which bypasses the need for an inverter by charging the battery directly
and can therefore deliver much more power. There is otherwise no relevant difference in the AC
and DC charging process. Chargers in public or commercial locations, typically Level 2 and
above, (henceforth “commercial chargers”) may be standalone devices, or stations comprised of
multiple chargers.

 Level 1 and Level 2: Alternating Current

Level 1, providing 1.4 kW of power in the U.S., is simply a conventional wall socket, and
requires no additional circuitry, aside from the adapters required to connect the EV to the socket.
In theory, Level 1 charging can be used anywhere, although in practice it takes place primarily at
the EV owners’ homes.

Level 2 charging operates on the same upgraded 220-volt outlets, required by washing machines
and clothes driers, and can easily be installed. More modern houses typically have these outlets,
while older houses may require electrical upgrades. Depending on the home’s electrical
infrastructure, this can involve upgraded circuitry, wiring extensions to reach the charging
location, or, even in rare cases, an upgraded transformer. Level 2 charging can also be provided at
workplace locations, other business locations (hotels, gas stations, private parking lots), and
public locations (on-street parking space, garages, streets, public parking lots—wherever cars are
likely to be stationary for hours at a time). Level 2 charging starts at a power rating of 6.6 kW,
increasing to 19.2 kW depending on the level of current that the supporting circuitry can sustain.
Most home Level 2 charging, and almost all commercial Level 2 charging, is limited to 6.6 kW
because (a) the onboard inverter on most existing EVs cannot handle significantly more than this
level3 and boosting the current typically requires the installation of more expensive higher-
capacity circuitry.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 5

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

 Level 3 charging is used to refer to a power delivery of 50 kW

Because direct current charging bypasses an EV’s onboard inverter to charge the battery
directly, it can deliver much higher levels of electrical power. This type of charger is commonly
referred to as a Direct Current Fast Charger (DCFC) and is typically used only in commercial
locations. While studies demonstrate that consistently high DCFC usage can accelerate
deterioration in battery capacity over time, capacity degradation for the vast majority of users is
more closely associated to overall usage than charging patterns.40 “Estimated Direct Current Fast
Charger utilization rates,” an NREL study concludes, “do not appear frequent enough to
significantly impact battery life,” suggesting that the thermal management systems of the battery
itself are a more important determinant.41 Self-reported survey data from Tesla drivers suggests
that even for the most frequent users of fast charging, battery capacity is highly unlikely to fall
below 90% of its original rating even after 150,000 miles of usage. For the purposes of this paper,
DCFC charging is classified as Level 3 charging is used to refer to a power delivery of 50 kW;

• Level 4 corresponds to 150kW;

• Level 5 (ultra-fast DCFC) corresponds to 350kW.

Most third-party DCFC chargers are Level 3, operating at about 50kW. Tesla’s proprietary
network of Superchargers, with a typical power output of 120 kW, is designed to serve Tesla
vehicles exclusively and corresponds most closely to Level 4. Level 5 ultra-fast DCFC, which
requires heavy duty insulation equipment, has not yet been deployed on a commercial basis, and
no mass-produced EVs can currently handle this level of power. EVSE operator Charge Point
announced a 400kW charging platform in January 201743 and a consortium of OEMs (Porsche,
Ford, Daimler and Volkswagen Group) is involved in a joint venture aiming to install a 350kW
network across Europe.44

The table presents each charger type, its nominal power rating (in kW), the time taken to replenish
the expected average daily usage of 13.65 kWh described above, the time taken to replenish 100
miles of charge (i.e. 37 kWh, just under half of a 75 kWh battery), and the miles of range added
per minute of charging. Charging time is assumed to depend entirely of the power rating of the
charger, although in practice, technical limitations on the battery, electrical supply, and inverter
capacity (for AC charging) can add time to the process. It is assumed that the rate of charging is
linear (i.e. does not slow down significantly over the course of the session). This is a reasonable

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 6

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

simplifying assumption, since the rate of charging does not diminish significantly until the battery
reaches approximately 90% of capacity, and most public charging sessions are used to partially
recharge batteries rather than fully recharge them. Users of EVGo’s Level 3 network in
California, for instance, average just 5-12 kWh per session (or enough to drive an additional 15-
36 miles).The reference battery size of 75 kWh reflects a reasonable expectation of average
battery size of BEVs over the next five years—larger than the current Chevrolet Bolt (60kW) and
smaller than the top-end Tesla Models S and X (90-100 kWh). Refueling a gasoline car is so
quick and easy, that almost any other option is ess convenient. Journeys over 300 miles will
require at least one charging stop. Adding just 100 miles of range with a Level 4 charger—the
fastest charging option currently in service—would take at least fifteen minutes. Refueling
completely (about 300 miles) would take about 45 minutes. Further, the flow of vehicles through
gasoline stations is much greater, owing to the rapidity of refueling. In areas with charging station
congestion or stations where customers typically leave their car to charge while they do
something else (shopping, for example), there may be an additional delay waiting for a space to
open up, extending the wait for a 100 mile recharge to 30 minutes or more.

Table3.2: fixed cost estimates for each type of EV charger

3.3 On-board chargers

When a Wall Connector plugs into the charge port it provides AC power, to your car. The
onboard charger, which is built in your car, handles this by converting the AC power into DC

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 7

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

energy so that it can be stored in the battery. Although direct current has low losses but alternating
current is cheaper and easy to step up and step down So by upgrading onboard chargers we can
minimize the charging costs

Fig: onboard charger

3.5 Onboard charger schematics

Fig: TIDA experimental setup

3.5.1 DESCRIPTION

(TTPL) bridgeless power factor correction (PFC) solution for Onboard Charger. The
power stage implements silicon carbide (SiC) MOSFETs driven by a C2000™ microcontroller
(MCU) with SiC-isolated gate drivers. The design implements three-phase interleaving and
operates in continuous conduction mode (CCM) to achieve a 98.60% efficiency at a 240- V input

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 8

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

voltage and 6.6-kW full power. The C2000 controller enables phase shedding and adaptive dead
time control to improve the power factor at light load. The gate driver board (see TIDA-01605)
implements reinforced isolation and can withstand more than 100-V/s common-mode transient
immunity (CMTI). The gate driver board also contains the two-level turnoff circuit, which
protects the MOSFET from voltage overshoot during the short-circuit scenario.

3.5.2 Features

• High-power-density, high-efficiency PFC design to power systems up to 6.6 kW

• SiC MOSFETs with TI drivers offers higher integration for customers

• Half-bridge- and compact isolated gate driver with reinforced isolation and two-level
turnoff protection

• Full digital control with high-performance C2000™ controller to enable advanced

control scheme

• 98.86% peak efficiency, greater than 0.99 power factor and less than 2% total harmonic
distortion (THD)

• Three-phase interleaved operation with phase shedding control

• Programmable output voltage of 400 V to 600 V Applications

• HEV/EV Traction Inverter

• HEV/EV Onboard Charger

• Electronic Control Units

• HEV/EV DC/DC Converters

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 9

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

Fig:3.1 Reference design for onboard charger

Figure shows the system block diagram of the TIDA-01604 reference design, which includes the
following elements.

• Power switches G1-G6 are high-frequency SiC MOSFETs, for which there is a 120°
phase shift between each two half bridge legs. G7 and G8 forms a low-frequency (45- to
60-Hz) synchronous rectifier bridge which virtually has no switching loss; a low
conduction loss feature is desirable for these two devices.

• TMS320F280049M C2000 Piccolo controller functions as the controller, which has all
the voltage and current sensor inputs and generates the correct PWM signals for G1-G8.
The controller also reads any fault signal from the gate driver boards and shuts down the
system if a fault occurs. The reset function is used during start-up or when a fault clears.

• TIDA-01605 daughter boards are used to drive SiC switches G1-G8. The driver board is
based on isolated, dual-channel gate driver devices, features reinforced isolation, and
provides more than 100 V/ns CMTI. The driver board provides the two-level turnoff
protection during the short-circuit scenario.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 10

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

• Hall sensors are used to sense the total input current and current for each channel.
Voltage dividers are used to sense the input line and neutral voltages as well as output DC
bus voltages.

• The SN6501-Q1-based push-pull isolated converter provides +15 V/ –4 V for each gate
driver. The TLV71333-Q1 low-dropout (LDO) linear regulator provides accurate
reference for the sensing circuits connected to the controller.

Fig:3.2 onboard charger views

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 11

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

Fig: 3.3 Test results for different power results

Fig:3.4 Efficiency comparison with and without phase shedding

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 12

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

Fig: 3.5 steady state waveforms at 1.65kw

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 13

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

CHAPTER 3

PROPOSED WORK

4.1 Proposed MODEL SYSTEM

There has been much previous work aiming to achieve efficient power transfer to both stationary
(Delphi, HaloIPT, Evantran, WAVE, Waseda WEB) and moving vehicles some dating back over
twenty years. The majority of these studies used the inductive power transfer schemes. However,
it is well documented that there are substantial limitations to an inductive power transfer scheme.
The transfer distances are typically below 20cm.

Fig: 4.1 Electromagnetic induction transfer of power

This has become a substantial issue. For safety reasons, and in order to ensure that the road can
still be used for other kinds of vehicles, the source needs to be buried below the pavement. Thus
the transfer distance in the inductive power transfer scheme is in fact not sufficient. The lateral
tolerance of these schemes is also quite stringent, typically on the order of 10cm. Such a stringent
lateral tolerance may become a limiting factor for power transfer to a moving vehicle. In contrast
to the more conventional inductive power transfer scheme, our approach here is closely associated
with a resonant power transfer scheme. Similar to inductive power transfer scheme, resonant
power transfer occurs through magnetic field coupling. However, in resonant power transfer
scheme, both the source and the receiver sides consist of resonant circuits. Efficient power

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 14

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

transfer occurs when the two circuits have the same resonant frequency, and when the coupling
constant of the two resonances, (which is related to the mutual inductance between the inductors),
dominates over the intrinsic loss rates of the resonators.

Fig: 4.2 Ideology of proposed system

Using this scheme, a recent experiment, which was conducted at MIT , has demonstrated highly
efficient power transfer over a distance of approximately 1m. There are also indications that the
resonant power transfer scheme can be far more robust in lateral tolerance compared with the
inductive power transfer scheme. However, the MIT experiments were carried out in free space,
whereas to achieve wireless power transfer to a moving vehicle, more complex electromagnetic
environment has to be taken into account. In particular, the body of the car is typically metallic
that may significantly influence the power transfer characteristics. This scheme with Industry 4.0
will work good.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 15

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

Fig:4.3 proposed roadway technology for charging EVs

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 16

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

4.2 CONCLUSIONS

The literature survey makes some conclusions on and recommendations on electric

vehicles project could and should investigate. It finds that there is a potential for greener
transportation with high efficiencies electric vehicles, but there is a great deal of uncertainty about
how large the potential is. If it is desired to be able to predict a reduction in harmonics level in a
charger then it is necessary to know what types of charging’sare present in the city. A harmonics
can mean that the charger harmonics is dominant at during charging than it would be on low
charging stations and there can therefore be a difference in how great a harmonics reduction can
be obtained. And the same problem can be obtained by the choice of charger. Thus more
knowledge is needed about the charger used on electric cars. Do they have other dimensions or
higher efficiencies? This would indicate whether the harmonics would be the same when charging
electric. Thus it is relevant to examine what types of chargers are generally used on electric cars.
The literature survey also recommends that use of industry 4.0 and my integrating the
newly proposed separate pavements with the help of on-board chargers will increase the
efficiency, charging infrastructure, and range of driving of Evs.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 17

The New Gen Charger for PIE Vehicles

4.3 REFERENCES

[1]The COMPETT project homepage, COMPETT.org.5

[2] The ELEKTROMOBILITY+ homepage, http://transport-era.net/electromobility.html.
[3]The homepage of the TRID database, http://trid.trb.org/.
[4]Gerd Marbjerg, “Noise from electric vehicles –a literature survey”,WP 3 Report 1,
http://compett.org/results.html.
[5]J. e. a. Kragh, “DELTA report AV1171/06, User’s Guide Nord2000 Road,” Hørsholm, 2006.
[6] J. Lelong and R. Michelet, “Passenger cars. Power unit and tyre-road noise, driving behaviour: what are the
stakes?,” in Inter.noise, The Hague, 2001.
[7]Sakamoto, T. Tanaka, M. Sekine, K. Morita, M. Shima, T. Korenori and A. Yoshiike, “Reviews on
countermeasure to saftety risk associated with quietness of hybrid or electric vehicles in Japan,” in Inter.noise,
Lisbon, 2010.
[8]I. Sakamoto, H. Houzu, T. Tanaka, M. Sekine, K. Morita, Y. Nagai and K. Suehiro, “Report on basic
research for standardization of measures for quiet vehicles in Japan (Intermit report),” in Inter.noise, New York,
2012.
[9] K. Kaliski, I. Old and L. Blomberg, “Sound emissions from a plug-in electric vehicle,” in Inter.noise, New
York, 2012.
[10] L. Garay-Vega, A. Hastings, J. K. Pollard, M. Zuschlag and M. D. Stearns, “Quieter Cars and the Safety of
Blind Pedestrians: Phase I, Report DOT HS 811 304,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, April 2010.
[11] D. W. Wachter, “Schallpegelmessungen an Elektrofahrzeugen („VLOTTE“),” Amt der Voralberger
Landesregierung, Bregenz, 2009.
[12] E. d. Graaff and G. v. Blokland, “Stimulation of low noise road vehicles in the Netherlands,” in Inter.noise,
Osaka, 2011.
[13] J. Jabben, E. Verheijen and C. Potma, “Noise reduction by electric vehicles in the Netherlands,” in
Inter.noise, New York, 2012.
[14]J. -W. Biermann and S. Ruschmeyer, "Sustainable noise reduction and enhanced passenger comfort using
hybrid diesel-electric urban buses," in Inter.noise, New York, 2012.
[15] M.-A. Pallas, R. Chatagnon and J. Lelong, “Acoustic assessment of a passing-by hybrid distribution truck,”
in Inter.noise, New York, 2012.
[16] K. Yamauchi, Y. Sakabe, K. Ito, S. Inoue and S.-i. Iwamiya, “Questionnaire survey on the sound of quiet
vehicles,” in Inter.noise, New York, 2012.
[17] K. Dudenhöffer and L. Hause, “Sound perceptions of electric vehicles,” ATZ worldwide eMagazines, no.
114, pp. 46-50, 2012.
[18] E. Verheijen and J. Jabben, “Effect of electric cars on traffic noise and safety”, RIVM letter report
680300009,” National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, 2010.

DEPT. of EEE, SSCE, Bengaluru || 18