See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328146917

Battery Degradation Temporal Modeling Using LSTM Networks

Conference Paper · October 2018

CITATIONS READS
0 23

4 authors, including:

Mehdi Assefi A. Hooshmand

University of Georgia NEC Laboratories America, Cupertino, CA
14 PUBLICATIONS   103 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   140 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

AIUM, Artificial Intelligence Usability Measurement. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehdi Assefi on 16 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Battery Degradation Temporal Modeling
Using LSTM Networks
Mehdi Assefi, Ali Hooshmand, Hossein Hosseini and Ratnesh Sharma
NEC Laboratories America
{massefi, ahooshmand, hhosseini, ratnesh}@nec-labs.com
Abstract—Accurate modeling of battery capacity degradation
is an important component for both battery manufacturers and
energy management systems. In this paper, we develop a battery
degradation model using deep learning algorithms. The model is
trained with the real data collected from battery storage solutions
installed and operated for behind-the-meter customers. In the
dataset, battery operation data are recorded at a small scale
(five minutes) and battery capacity is measured at every six
months. In order to improve the training performance, we apply
two preprocessing techniques, namely subsampling and feature
extraction on operation data, and also interpolating between
capacity measurements at times for which battery operation fea-
tures are available. We integrate both cyclic and calendar aging
processes in a unified framework by extracting the corresponding
features from operation data. The proposed model uses LSTM
units followed by a fully-connected network to process weekly
battery operation features and predicts the capacity degradation.
The experimental results show that our method can accurately
predict the capacity fading and significantly outperforms baseline
models including persistence and autoregressive (AR) models.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Battery technologies are an essential constituent for future
energy needs and have gained a lot of attention from power
system community [1]–[3]. Due to the unprecedented growth
in capacities, batteries are proved to be a vital component
for a wide range of applications including integration with
renewable generations, electric vehicles, frequency regulation
systems, voltage support, behind and front the meter services,
microgrids, etc [4]–[11].
Operating the battery, however, will age the device and
gradually reduce its capacity depending on the operation
conditions and during of usage. When the battery capacity
reaches the certain percentage of its rated capacity (e.g., 60%),
it needs to be replaced, which incurs a cost to the owner and/or
battery manufacturer based on the operating conditions and
warranty terms. Deploying batteries in nonoptimal conditions
could cause expedited aging and thus result in shorter battery
life-time. Considering the fact that batteries are one of the
most expensive devices in power systems, capacity fading and
power capability degradation are important concerns which
must be addressed for efficient and economic utilization of
such devices in different applications.
Battery operations are controlled by an Energy Manage-
ment Systems (EMS) [12], [13]. In order to monitor and
manage the battery conditions, we designed an architecture
to enhance EMS functionalities with a battery health-aware
module, which includes a battery fading model and a health
Battery Health Management Module
Energy Management System
Health Management
Inverter Controller Capacity
Reference
DC Measurements Capacity
Fading Model
AC
Fig. 1: Battery health-aware EMS architecture. In this paper,
we develop a capacity fading model using real data collected
from battery storage solutions.
management unit, Fig. 1. In this architecture, battery operation
parameters are measured by a monitoring system and passed to
a capacity fading model to estimate the degradation in capacity
to be utilized in the next iteration of operation.
In this paper, we focus on developing the Capacity Fading
Model highlighted in Fig. 1 using deep learning algorithms.
The model is trained with real time-series data obtained during
three years of operation of different battery installations.
During operation, data of date and time, battery charge and
discharge power, ambient temperature, and state of charge
(SoC) are recorded every five minutes. The battery capacity is
also measured at about every six months.
Since a battery installation usually experiences a complete
operation cycle on a weekly basis, we process operation data
of each week separately to extract the features associated
with cyclic and calendar aging. The subsampling and feature
extraction helps to keep the model complexity to be low and
also to preserve the information in data. Also, since there
are very few battery capacity measurements provided at a
much larger time scale compared to battery operation features,
the machine learning model has relatively few data points to
train with. In order to improve the training performance, we
propose an iterative interpolation algorithm for the capacity
measurement data at times for which battery operation features
are available.
The proposed model uses LSTM units followed by a fully-
connected network to process weekly battery operation fea-
tures and predict the capacity degradation. The experimental
results show that our method can accurately predict the ca-
 Energy Management System Industrial
Unit
Inverter Controller
PV
DC
AC
Meter
Battery Storage Solution
Fig. 2: A behind-the-meter (BTM) architecture utilizing PV
and storage solutions.
pacity fading and significantly outperforms baseline models,
including persistence and autoregressive (AR) models.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II
provides a background on use cases of capacity devices in
power system, and Section III reviews the related works.
Section IV describes the battery operation data used to develop
the model and provides the preprocessing techniques applied
on the data. In section V, we propose the deep learning-based
method for modeling the capacity fading. Section VI provides
the experimental results, and Section VII concludes the paper.
II. BACKGROUND
EMS managed storage devices are commonly deployed
by behind-the-meter (BTM) commercial and industrial (C&I)
customers for the two purposes of increasing renewable uti-
lization and reducing their demand charge, as depicted in
Fig. 2. For the first case, storage device helps C&I customers
to maximize the local consumption of their uncontrollable
renewable generation (mostly solar generations) to reduce
electricity bill charges. For the second use case, storage device
helps to reduce the electricity bills by shaving peak electrical
demand, as explained in the following.
A C&I type electricity bill includes two main components,
namely energy and demand charges [14]. The energy compo-
nent shows the amount of energy (kilo Watt hour) consumed
by the customer during a billing period that is typically a
month. The demand charge (DC) is calculated based on the
highest power demand (kilo Watt), which is measured at the
meter (point of connection to the power grid) during the same
billing period. The demand charge is a significant portion of
the bill (up to half of the total monthly charges [15]).
Battery device helps to minimize the DC by supplying the
electrical demand during the peak hours [16], [17]. Fig. 3
shows an example daily demand and the battery operation. The
figure shows that a storage solution is employed from 9:00 to
14:00 when the customer experiences its peak demand. Using
the storage reduces the peak demand read at the meter and
consequently reduces the demand charge. After 14:00, battery
is charged to be prepared for the next peak demand event.
As a result, it is important to be able to accurately estimate
the capacity in order to design an optimal battery charging and
Power Grid
Fig. 3: An example of daily battery operation for the applica-
tion of reducing demand charge (DC).
discharging scheduling and hence minimize the demand charge
in the electricity bill [15]. In other words, lack of modeling
the capacity degradation or an inaccurate fading model causes
the scheduling module to take into account a wrong capacity
value which results in suboptimal scheduling of battery usage.
This in turn increases the peak demand charge and incurs costs
to users.
In the EMS architecture designed in Fig. 1, capacity es-
timation will be used to adjust the available capacity for
the next iteration of operation. The faded capacity is also
compared to the reference capacity fading defined by the
battery manufacturers in warranty terms (shown as capacity
reference block in Fig. 1). If the estimated faded capacity
does not follow the reference standard trajectory, the health
management unit limits the battery usage through its operation
parameters such as state of charge and the throughput (absolute
accumulative value of battery usage). It will then pass the
updated limits to EMS to be implemented for the next iteration
of operation.
III. R ELATED W ORK
Capacity fading is a complex phenomenon of two factors,
namely cyclic aging and calendar aging [18]. Cyclic aging is
caused by charging and discharging actions over the course
of the battery’s lifetime. It has been observed that the battery
capacity is directly affected by charge/discharge characteristics
such as State of Charge (SoC), charge and discharge rates and
energy throughput [19]. Calendar aging is, however, caused
when battery remains idle. Calendar aging is also a function
of battery age, ambient temperature and idle time SoC.
Several papers have studied the the process of battery cyclic
aging [20]–[22]. In [20], the authors examined the cyclic aging
of battery cells based on the data collected from controlled
experiments for which the operating conditions such as charge
and discharge rates were fixed. In [21], a particle filtering
framework considering the charge and discharge cycles is
developed for modeling the cyclic aging of battery units.
The authors of [22] also proposed an ensemble model to
characterize the capacity degradation and predict the remaining
useful performance of lithium-ion batteries.
There are also a number of research papers focusing on
calendar aging [23]–[25]. In [23], a calendar life estimation
 TABLE I: Battery Aging Dataset
Date/time Charge Power [kW] Discharge Power [kW] Temperature [C] SoC [%] Measured Capacity [kWh]
5/8/2013 7:04 PM 0.0 0.9 28 65 29.0
5/8/2013 7:09 PM 1.1 0.0 29 68 29.0
5/8/2013 7:14 PM 1.8 0.0 29 72 29.0
··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ···

was proposed based on five different datasets, where for each
dataset, the ambient temperature is fixed but the charge/dis-
charge rates are variable. The method investigated in [24]
considers the effect of temperature, SoC, and the idle time of
the battery on the calendar aging process. In [25], the authors
developed a lifetime prediction approach based by quantifying
the impact of temperature and SoC on impedance rise and
capacity loss.
In this paper, we develop a battery degradation model
based on the real data collected from battery storage solutions
installed and operated for behind-the-meter customers. Our
model is, thus, generic and does not rely on controlled operat-
ing conditions. Moreover, we integrate both cyclic and calen-
dar aging processes in a unified framework, by extracting the
corresponding features from operation data. Our experimental
results confirm that, since batteries encounter both cyclic and
calendar aging on a daily basis, combining them can improve
the prediction accuracy of the capacity degradation model.
IV. BATTERY O PERATION DATA
To model the battery degradation process, we collect real
time-series data obtained during three years of operation of
different BTM battery installations. Table I shows sample
rows from the dataset. During operation, data of date and
time, battery charge power, battery discharge power, ambient
temperature, and state of charge (SoC) are recorded every five
minutes. The battery capacity is, however, measured at about
every six months, and is shown as the same value until the next
measurement is taken. Hence, to predict the battery capacity,
we can use six months of recorded operation information with
five minute sampling time, which is equal to 259200 input data
points. 1
When training a machine learning model on the battery
aging dataset, we face the following two challenges:
• The battery operation data are recorded at a very small
time scale (five minutes). Such fine-grained measure-
ments are unlikely to have observable impact on the
battery capacity. Moreover, the large number of data
samples causes both training and testing to be very
slow. In order to reduce the input size and also preserve
information, we propose to split the data into weekly
blocks and extract one set of features for each block.
• Unlike the battery operation data, there are very few
capacity measurements provided at a much larger time
scale. This causes the machine learning model to have
1 Thetotal number of input data points in every six months is: 6 months ×
30 days×24 hours×12 samples per hour×5 features per sample = 259200.
relatively few data points to train with. In order to im-
prove the training performance, we propose to interpolate
between the capacity measurements at times for which
battery operation features are available.
In the following, we provide the details of the feature extrac-
tion and interpolation techniques.
A. Feature Extraction
We extract the features associated with cyclic and calendar
aging from the raw battery operation data. Since a BTM
battery installation usually experiences a complete operation
cycle in a weekly basis, we preprocess each week of operation
separately. The cyclic aging features are defined as follows:
w
• Crate : Weekly charge rate calculated based on the nor-
malized charging rates as follows:
P
t∈week Pcha (t)∆T (t)/C
w Pcha (t)6=0
Crate = P ,
t∈week ∆T (t)
Pcha (t)6=0
where Pcha (t) is the charging value at time t and with
duration of ∆T (t), and C is the current battery capacity.
w w
• Drate : Weekly discharge rate calculated similar to Crate ,
where Pcha (t) is replaced with Pdis (t), the discharging
power at time t.
• W hth : Weekly Watt hour throughput defined as absolute
accumulative value of battery usage, calculated by:
X X
W hth = Pcha (t)∆T (t)+ Pdis (t)∆T (t).
t∈week t∈week
Pcha (t)6=0 Pdis (t)6=0
• SoC ave : Average weekly SoC.
• ∆SoC: Difference between the initial and final SoC
measurements at the corresponding week.
The calendar aging features are defined as follows:
• T : Battery age measured as the week number for which
we extract the weekly features.
• Tidle : Weekly idle time is the weekly accumulated shelf
time in which the battery is not charged or discharged.
• SoC idle : Idle SoC is the average SoC values during idle
times.
• T empave : Average weekly ambient temperature.
Hence, the battery operation data of each week is summa-
rized in nine features to be used as input to the machine learn-
ing model in order to predict the battery capacity degradation.
 Actual Capacity Measurements 29.0 Actual Capacity Measurements
28 Interpolated Capacity Values Interpolated Capacity Values
28.5

Capacity (kW)

Capacity (kW)
26
28.0

24 27.5

22 27.0

20 26.5
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Time Step (Five Minutes) Time Step (Five Minutes)
Fig. 4: Two examples of interpolated curves of capacity values.

B. Interpolating Between Capacity Measurements 𝐶𝑡

We want to interpolate between the capacity measurements Battery 1

Operation Data Battery Capacity ෪𝑡
Δ𝐶
at times for which battery operation features are available. 𝐶ሚ𝑡+1
Fading Model
Using an off-the-shelf interpolation technique might result
Battery Aging Model: An RNN-LSTM Approach
in a curve that is sometimes increasing and, hence, is not
Fig. 5: The proposed battery capacity fading model predicts
appropriate for our application due to the non-increasing con-
the change in capacity using operation data.
straint of battery capacity. We develop an iterative interpolation
algorithm that progressively fills out the missing values with a
I. P ROPOSED M ODEL 𝑥𝑡
weighted average of the nearby measurements or interpolated 
values. At each iteration,weithave also identifiesdata thecontaining
time steps at it = σ(Wi ht−1 + Ui xt + bi )
After preprocessing, a time-series



 ft = σ(Wf ht−1 + Uf xt + bf )
which the interpolated capacity has increased and replaces
one set of battery operation features and a capacity value per

𝑐

 𝑡−1 𝑡 𝑐
ot = σ(Wo ht−1 + Uo xt + bo )

week.theTherefore,
valuewe ofneed
theaprevious
model capable of processing time- F

them with time step.

series data that gets weekly features and outputs the capacity c˜t = tanh(W ht−1 + U xt + b) ℎ
(1) ℎ
In thevalue.following,
Our proposed webattery
formally
capacitydescribe
fading model theestimates
interpolation  𝑡−1 G 𝑡
c = f oc + i oc˜

t t t−1 t t

method. Let C be the interpolated curve at step k. In original

the changekin capacity as shown in Fig. 1. Hence, at each time



 ht = ot o tanh(ct )
curve C step, the capacity can be predicted by adding the estimated
0 , all missing values are replaced with zero. We define



change to the old capacity value. yt = ht
the mask vector Mk as a binary vector which keeps track of 𝑦𝑡

interpolated values, i.e., it is 1 if and only 𝐶if𝑡 the corresponding Fig. 6: LSTM equations and a schematic of the LSTM unit. In
B. Our Method
capacity valueBattery is available or interpolated. Let w be a truncated We use equations,
time-series dataσ isof the
battery operations
sigmoid and ◦ denotes the entry-
and predict
function
Data 2m + 1Capacity ෪ battery capacity fading. The battery operations, such as charg-
Gaussian filter with points Δ𝐶 with variance𝐶ሚ𝑡+1 m/3. The
Operation Battery 𝑡 wise product. Variables h and c represent short- and long-term
ing or discharging rate, idle SoC time and temperature, can
iteration steps are statedFading Model
as follows: memories, respectively.
combine in a complex way to make long term impacts on
Fig.w1:~The Ck−1proposed battery capacity fading model predicts the the battery capacity. Therefore, an LSTM-based model is a
Ck ← change in capacity using, operation data. (1) tool to learn such variable-lag temporal dependencies.
suitable
w ~ Mk−1 The features extracted by the LSTM model are then fed to a
Ck (t) ← Ck−1 (t), if M0 (t) = 1, t = 1, 2, · · · , outputs the network
(2) fully-connected
one-layer capacityto makevalue. Our
the final proposed battery capacity
prediction.
Figure 5 fading
shows the model estimates
architecture used forthe change
capacity in capacity as shown in
fading
A. LSTM
Ck (t)←C k (t−1),Network
if Ck (t)>Ck (t−1) and Mk (t−1)=1,t=2,3,··· .prediction. (3) The LSTM unit and FC layer are set to have 50
Fig. 5. Hence, at each time step, the capacity can be predicted
• time-series nonlinear-¿RNN and 100 hidden neurons.
where ~•islong convolution
term -¿ LSTM
operation and division is element-wise. by adding the estimated change to the old capacity value.
At each iteration,
• Equations the curve is updated according to a 𝑦0 Recurrent neural𝑦𝑡−1network (RNN)
and figure
𝑦𝑡
is a class of artificial
normalized weighted
Recurrent neuralaverage
network filtering
(RNN) is usinga classonly the available neural networks with sequential units and hence is suitable
of artificial
or interpolated
neural networks values with (Equ. 1).units
sequential Original
and hence measurements
is suitable are FC for learning dynamic FC temporalFCbehaviors in time-series data.
for learning
then replaced dynamic
back intotemporal behaviorscurve
the updated in time-series
(Equ. data. 2). At the One particular class of RNNs is Long Short Term Memory
One particular class of RNNs is Long Short Term Memory
end, if(LSTM)
at a time step the capacity value has increased, it is LSTM
networks, which is specifically designed to capture …
(LSTM) networks, LSTM which is LSTM specifically designed to capture
replaced with the value of the previous time
long term dependencies and nonlinear relationships between step if that value long term dependencies and nonlinear relationships between
is available
inputs andor output.
already interpolated
An LSTM (Equ. 3).
network maintains The number of inputs
a time-varying 𝑥0 and output. An 𝑥𝑡−1LSTM network 𝑥𝑡 maintains a time-varying
state that can be interpreted as the memory of the network,
iterations is set as twice as the number of iterations it takes for state that can be
Fig. 3: interpreted
LSTM. as the memory of the network,
and is updated at each time step by incorporating the new
all values
inputtosample.
be nonzero. In experiments,
The time-varying memory enables the modelm to be
we choose and is updated at each time step by incorporating the new
equal to to the number
capture of data temporal
more complex points for months. toFigureIn 4figureinput
three compared
behaviors 5, each input sample xi , is a set of features
sample. The time-varying memory enables the model
extracted from one week of data, and yi are the change in
shows stationary
two examples models such as autoregressive
of interpolated models.
curves of The LSTM values.
capacity capacity into capture
corresponding more complex
week. Some temporal
of yi values behaviors compared to
are actual
model and equations are provided in Fig. 2.
stationary
ones and some modelsThe
are interpolated. such as autoregressive
one sample per one week models. The LSTM
V. P ROPOSED 𝑥𝑡 M ETHOD is a trade-off
modelbetweenandkeeping modelare
equations complexity
provided to be
in low
Fig. 6.
and also to preserve the information in data. The number of
After preprocessing, we have a time-series data containing Battery
time steps is about operation
150 samples, which features
helps the such
LSTM as charging or discharging
model
one set of battery 𝑐
operation features per week and the to capture rate,
corre- idle
the temporal SoC time
correlations and temperature
in data. behave in a complex way
𝑡−1 𝑐 𝑡
sponding capacity value. Therefore, F we need a model capable to make long term impacts on the battery capacity. Therefore,
R EFERENCES
of processing time-series ℎ 𝑡−1
data thatG gets weekly ℎ 𝑡
features and an LSTM-based model is a suitable tool to learn such variable-
[1] L. Liao and F. Köttig, “Review of hybrid prognostics approaches
for remaining useful life prediction of engineered systems, and an
application to battery life prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability,
vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 191–207, 2014.
[2] S. M. Rezvanizaniani, Z. Liu, Y. Chen, and J. Lee, “Review and recent
𝑦𝑡 advances in battery health monitoring and prognostics technologies for
 𝑦0 𝑦𝑡−1 𝑦𝑡
FC FC FC
LSTM … LSTM LSTM
𝑥0 𝑥𝑡−1 𝑥𝑡
Fig. 7: Network used for capacity fading prediction.
lag temporal dependencies. We feed the features extracted by
the LSTM model to a one-layer fully-connected (FC) network
to make the final prediction. Figure 7 shows the architecture
used for capacity fading prediction. In this figure, each input
sample xi , is a set of features extracted from one week of
data, and yi is the change in capacity in corresponding week.
Some of yi values are actual ones and some are interpolated.
The number of time steps is about 150 samples, which helps
the LSTM model to capture the temporal correlations in data.
VI. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
We randomly split the data into three sets of training data
(70%), validation data (15%) and test data (15%). Validation
data is used to set the hyperparameters and to choose the
best performing model. Training features are normalized to
have zero mean and unit variance. Validation and test features
are also normalized using the mean and standard deviation of
training data. The LSTM unit and FC layer are set to have 50
and 100 hidden neurons, respectively.
The model is trained to minimize the Mean Absolute Error
(MAE) with respect to the interpolated capacity values. The
final test error is computed based on actual capacity measure-
ments. For this, we aggregate the deviations from interpolated
measurements in one sampling period (six month) and report it
as the error in the corresponding time period. We then compute
the mean absolute values of all deviations as the final error.
The model performance is compared with persistence and
autoregressive (AR) models. Persistence method assumes that
the next measurement of capacity will be the same as current
capacity, i.e., capacity does not degrade. AR model is a linear
function of current and historical battery operation features.
Let X be the feature matrix of size N × d, where N and d
are number of samples and number of features, respectively.
In matrix X, each row contains features of one week. The AR
Pq−1
model of order q can be formulated as ỹt = τ =0 Xt−τ Aτ +
β, where Xi is the i-th row of X, i.e., features of time-step i,
Ai is a vector of size d×1, and β is a scalar. In our dataset, we
have N = 150 and d = 9, and we use all available historical
data for training and testing the model.
Figure 8 shows the results of predicted capacity fading for
three different batteries. As can be seen, our proposed model
accurately predicts weekly capacity degradation and provides a
close estimate for the actual capacity. The AR model, however,
fails to track the capacity changes and thus produces results
with large deviations from actual values. Table II provides the
MAE results. The proposed model significantly outperforms
TABLE II: Comparison of different methods for prediction of
capacity fading.
Model Persistence Model AR Model Proposed Model
MAE (kW) 0.84 0.41 0.22
both persistence model (by 73%) and AR model (by 46%).
Note that MAE shows the average error in predicting the
capacity after six months from the previous measurement.
VII. C ONCLUSION
An accurate prediction of capacity fading helps energy
management system to better monitor the behavior of batteries
and give real-time suggestions to improve the product lifetime.
It also provides a better baseline for manufacturers to decide
on warranty rules for their products. In this paper, we trained
a deep learning model on real battery operation data to predict
capacity fading. We first processed operation data of each
week separately to extract the features associated with cyclic
and calendar aging. We then interpolated between capacity
measurements at times for which battery operation features are
available. The preprocessed data were used to train a model
with LSTM units followed by a fully-connected network.
The experimental results showed that our method accurately
predicts capacity fading and significantly outperforms baseline
models, including persistence and autoregressive (AR) models.
In our future works, we will develop a health management
framework to complete the battery health aware module.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. Koohi-Kamali, V. Tyagi, N. Rahim, N. Panwar, and H. Mokhlis,
“Emergence of energy storage technologies as the solution for reliable
operation of smart power systems: A review,” Renewable and Sustain-
able Energy Reviews, vol. 25, pp. 135–165, 2013.
[2] W. Zhang, M. Qiu, and X. Lai, “Application of energy storage technolo-
gies in power grids,” Power System Technology, vol. 7, 2008.
[3] C. Wang, W. Sun, T. Yi, Z. Yan, and Y. Zhang, “Review on energy
storage application planning and benefit evaluation methods in smart
grid,” in Proceedings of the Chinese Society of Electrical Engineering,
vol. 33, pp. 33–41, 2013.
[4] A. Hooshmand, J. Mohammadpour, H. Malki, and H. Daneshi, “Power
system dynamic scheduling with high penetration of renewable sources,”
in American Control Conference (ACC), pp. 5827–5832, IEEE, 2013.
[5] 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.
[6] A. Khaligh and Z. Li, “Battery, ultracapacitor, fuel cell, and hybrid
energy storage systems for electric, hybrid electric, fuel cell, and plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles: State of the art,” IEEE transactions on Vehicular
Technology, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 2806–2814, 2010.
[7] W. Kempton, V. Udo, K. Huber, K. Komara, S. Letendre, S. Baker,
D. Brunner, and N. Pearre, “A test of vehicle-to-grid (v2g) for energy
storage and frequency regulation in the pjm system,” Results from an
Industry-University Research Partnership, vol. 32, 2008.
[8] D. Kottick, M. Blau, and D. Edelstein, “Battery energy storage for
frequency regulation in an island power system,” IEEE Transactions
on Energy Conversion, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 455–459, 1993.
[9] X. Liu, A. Aichhorn, L. Liu, and H. Li, “Coordinated control of dis-
tributed energy storage system with tap changer transformers for voltage
rise mitigation under high photovoltaic penetration,” IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 897–906, 2012.
[10] A. Hooshmand, Predictive Energy Management Methods for Smart
Grids. PhD thesis, 2012.
[11] R. Zamora and A. K. Srivastava, “Controls for microgrids with storage:
Review, challenges, and research needs,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 2009–2018, 2010.
 0 0 29 Actual Capacity
Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

Predicted Using Our Model
20 20 28 Predicted Using AR Model

Capacity (kW)
40 40 27

60 60
26

80 80
25
100 Actual Faded Capacity 100 Actual Faded Capacity
Predicted Using AR Model Predicted Using Our Model 24
120 120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week)

(a)
0 0 Actual Capacity
Actual Faded Capacity 29
Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

10 Predicted Using AR Model 10 Predicted Using Our Model
28 Predicted Using AR Model
20 20

Capacity (kW)
30 30 27

40 40
26
50 50
25
60 60
Actual Faded Capacity
70 70 Predicted Using Our Model 24

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week)

(b)

0 0 29 Actual Capacity
Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

Weekly Faded Capacity (W)

Predicted Using Our Model

10 10 Predicted Using AR Model
28

Capacity (kW)
20 20
27
30 30
40 40 26

50 50
25
60 Actual Faded Capacity 60 Actual Faded Capacity
70 Predicted Using AR Model 70 Predicted Using Our Model 24

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week) Time Step (Week)

(c)
Fig. 8: Comparison of autoregressive (AR) and proposed methods for capacity fading prediction for three different batteries.
Left column compares the predicted faded capacity of the AR model with actual values. Middle column compares the predicted
faded capacity of our proposed model with actual values. Right column shows the predicted capacity using the AR and proposed
models along with the actual curve obtained by interpolating between capacity measurement (star points). As can be seen, our
proposed model accurately predicts the weekly capacity degradation and provides a close estimate for the actual capacity. The
AR model, however, fails to track the capacity changes and thus produces results with large deviations from actual values.

[12] A. Hooshmand, B. Asghari, and R. K. Sharma, “Experimental demon- [19] S. A. Pourmousavi, B. Asghari, and R. K. Sharma, “A novel algorithm to
stration of a tiered power management system for economic operation of integrate battery cyclic and calendar agings within a single framework,”
grid-tied microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 5, in Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), Power &
no. 4, pp. 1319–1327, 2014. Energy Society, pp. 1–5, IEEE, 2016.
[13] A. Hooshmand, R. Sharma, and B. Asghari, “Multi-objective energy [20] F. Rufus, S. Lee, and A. Thakker, “Health monitoring algorithms for
management methods for micro-grids,” Feb. 14 2017. US Patent space application batteries,” in Prognostics and Health Management,
9,568,901. 2008. International Conference on, pp. 1–8, IEEE, 2008.
[14] “Electric rates,” 2018. PG&E Corporation, available at [21] B. Saha and K. Goebel, “Modeling li-ion battery capacity depletion in
https://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/electric.shtml. a particle filtering framework,” in Proceedings of the annual conference
of the prognostics and health management society, San Diego, 2009.
[15] A. Oudalov, R. Cherkaoui, and A. Beguin, “Sizing and optimal operation
[22] Y. Xing, E. W. Ma, K.-L. Tsui, and M. Pecht, “An ensemble model for
of battery energy storage system for peak shaving application,” in Power
predicting the remaining useful performance of lithium-ion batteries,”
Tech, 2007 IEEE Lausanne, pp. 621–625, IEEE, 2007.
Microelectronics Reliability, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 811–820, 2013.
[16] R. Moslemi, A. Hooshmand, and R. K. Sharma, “A data-driven de- [23] Q. Zhang and R. E. White, “Calendar life study of li-ion pouch cells,”
mand charge management solution for behind-the-meter storage appli- Journal of Power Sources, vol. 173, no. 2, pp. 990–997, 2007.
cations,” in Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies [24] J. Belt, V. Utgikar, and I. Bloom, “Calendar and phev cycle life aging
Conference (ISGT), pp. 1–5, IEEE, 2017. of high-energy, lithium-ion cells containing blended spinel and layered-
[17] R. Moslemi, A. Hooshmand, and R. K. Sharma, “A machine learning oxide cathodes,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 196, no. 23, 2011.
based demand charge management solution,” in Innovative Smart Grid [25] M. Ecker, J. B. Gerschler, J. Vogel, S. Käbitz, F. Hust, P. Dechent, and
Technologies Conference Europe, IEEE PES, pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2017. D. U. Sauer, “Development of a lifetime prediction model for lithium-
[18] C. Schlasza, P. Ostertag, D. Chrenko, R. Kriesten, and D. Bouquain, ion batteries based on extended accelerated aging test data,” Journal of
“Review on the aging mechanisms in li-ion batteries for electric vehicles Power Sources, vol. 215, pp. 248–257, 2012.
based on the fmea method,” in Transportation Electrification Conference
and Expo (ITEC), 2014 IEEE, pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2014.

View publication stats