View
219
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
NNAATTIIOONNAALL EELLEECCTTRRIICC TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTTAATTIIOONN IINNFFRRAASSTTRRUUCCTTUURREE WWOORRKKIINNGG CCOOUUNNCCIILL PLUG-IN HYBRID AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE WORKING GROUP
The Atheneum Hotel
1000 Brush Ave. Detroit, MI 48226 (Hermes)
June 9-10, 2010 IWC PHEV WG 5/27/2010 10:17:50 AM
Agenda
3:00pm – 5:00pm: June 9th Topic Speaker/Leader
1) Welcome and Introductions Mark Duvall / Frank Lambert
2) Review and Approval of Past Minutes and Action Items Frank Lambert
3) Mission Statement Review All
4) NEC 625 – 2014 Changes for PHEVs Greg Nieminski
5) National EVSE Residential Installation Template Eric Lee
8:00am – 8:30am: June 10th – Continental Breakfast 8:30am – 3:00pm
6) SAE J1772 Connectors Gery Kissel
7) SAE J1772 – DC Charging Gery Kissel
8) International Standards / J1772 Harmonization Greg Nieminski
9) SAE J2836 / J2847 Communications Update Rich Scholer
10) Vehicle / EVSE AC/DC Charge Architecture Rich Scholer
11) SAE J2894 Charger Grid Power Quality Jose Salazar
12) Investigation of On Board Chargers PQ Impacts through Modeling and Simulation
Randy Horton
13) Discussion: Future direction, priorities, next steps, and schedule All
14) Summary of Action Items All
Adjourn
1
JUNE 9-10, 2010—PHEVWG MEETING
AGENDA
3:00pm – 5:00pm: June 9
Topic Speaker/Leader 1) Welcome and Introductions Mark Duvall/Frank Lambert 2) Review and Approval of Past Minutes and Action Items Frank Lambert 3) Mission Statement Review All 4) NEC 625 – 2014 Changes for PHEVs Greg Nieminski 5) National EVSE Residential Installation Template Eric Lee
8:00am – 8:30am: June 10 – Continental Breakfast
8:30am – 3:00pm
6) SAE J1772 Connectors Gery Kissel 7) SAE J1772-DC Charging Gery Kissel 8) International Standards/J1772 Harmonization Greg Nieminski 9) SAE J2836/J2847 Communications Update Rich Scholer 10) Vehicle/EVSE AC/DC Charge Architecture Rich Scholer 11) SAE J2894 Charger Grid Power Quality Jose Salazar 12) Investigation of On Bard Chargers PQ Impacts through Modeling and Simulation
Randy Horton
13) Discussion: Future direction, priorities, next steps, and schedule
All
14) Summary of Action Items All Adjourn
The Atheneum Hotel Detroit, MI
Plug-In Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Working Group Meeting Minutes (#10-2)
June 9-10, 2010 Detroit, MI
Welcome and Introductions Frank Lambert, chair, and Mark Duvall, EPRI, welcomed the participants (see Attachment).
Review and Approval of Past Minutes and Action Items The minutes (#10-1) of the previous meeting (March 3-4, 2010) in Orlando, FL, were approved. The status of action items from the previous meeting is shown below.
2
Action Items: March 3-4, 2010 (Orlando) Meeting
# ACTION ITEM STATUS 1 Barbara Gonzalez will send her suggestions on the mission
statement to Jorge Emmanuel. Completed
2 All with data on charging times, charging profiles, and other information useful for developing diversity factors should provide the data to Greg Nieminski.
No information was provided.
Mission Statement Review Additional comments were made to the mission statement. A proposed change in the committee name from PHEV to PV Working Group will be decided by the ISC. The final proposed mission statement below will be discussed by the ISC.
Revised PHEV Mission Statement Plug-In Hybrid and Electric Vehicle (PHEV) Working Group
Support the development and deployment of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles
(PHEVs) by: • Facilitating and actively participating in appropriate codes and standards
committees on PHEVs to promote the safety and function of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles
• Facilitating interoperability of the charging infrastructure for PHEVs • Identifying infrastructure and utility issues for PHEVs as mobile distributed
electric resources (V2G).
NEC 625 – 2014 Changes for PHEVs Greg Nieminski, EPRI Consultant, reminded participants that proposed changes to the 2014 National Electrical Code have to be submitted by November 2011, otherwise changes cannot be made until 2017. The following possible revisions to the code were discussed:
• Demand factors – the current code requires 100% capacity but allowances can be made based on historical use to reduce capacity and cost; a preliminary proposal could be submitted in 2011 with additional data provided afterwards.
• Connection hardware for bi-directional energy flow. • EV cable from premise to EVSE – EV cable types may have to be changed due to the
higher ranges. • 50A receptacle limit in a dwelling (kitchen) – this is incompatible with the 80A SAE
limit. • Need for a 40A configuration.
ACTION ITEM: Greg Nieminski will work with Leviton to clarify the 50A receptacle
issue.
National EVSE Residential Installation Template Eric Lee, Chrysler, presented on the National EVSE Permitting Project (see Attachments). The objective of the project is to shorten the EVSE installation process by creating a national
3
permit by notification system to eliminate delays due to varying requirements across the country. He described the project approach, team members, timeline, and deliverables. A draft permit has been completed and will be tested in selected jurisdictions. Among the issues raised during discussion were: the need to share OEM marketing data to allow utilities to assess specific transformer capacity; problems of long delays in local inspections of EVSE installations; challenges with putting in new service in older houses; differing code interpretation by inspectors; different editions of the code used by different jurisdictions; reaching out to more installers; and the question of whether a certified installer is needed. The installation template should set a good precedent.
ACTION ITEM: Eric Lee will share the national permitting template at the next meeting.
SAE J1772 Connectors Gery Kissel, GM, gave an update on SAE J1772 (see Attachments). He noted that Tim Rose of REMA is leading the coupler compatibility testing effort. Each supplier is providing coupler samples for mechanical fit, temperature rise, and no-load endurance tests. John Halliwell, EPRI, is leading the EVSE compatibility testing work. Draft comments will be taken during the June 22 meeting. During discussion, Mr. Kissel clarified that only minor changes to J1772 are expected; if major revisions are made, recertification of devices in the UL pipeline might be needed. Some participants expressed concern about the possible impacts on their upcoming installation deadlines.
SAE J1772-DC Charging Mr. Kissel also presented on DC level 2 charge (presentation included in the previous Attachment). He began by summarizing the nominal configuration operating voltage and corresponding rated power, noting the controversy regarding 150A vs. 200A in the DC level 2 ratings. He described the C1 coupler for AC level 1 & 2 and DC level 1 charging, the C2 “hybrid” coupler for AC and DC levels 1 & 2, and a C3 coupler for level 3 charging. Apparently, there is now a draft charging standard for China. Next steps include a decision regarding the IEC ground pin, validation to see if mating forces are less than 80 N, and harmonization of EU and the China standards. During discussion, Jose Salazar, SCE, explained that isolation is not required by utilities and is up to the equipment manufacturer. The DC level 3 may be defined for heavy-duty trucks and buses. With regards to table 4 of IEC 62196 paragraph 12, a big gap was noted between the 63A/70A and the 250A device ratings. Mr. Nieminski suggested the following parameters for a 200A device: minimum grounding conductor (copper) – 16 mm2 and 6 AWG; time – 6 seconds; short-time test current – 1,530A.
International Standards/J1772 Harmonization Mr. Nieminski focused on the new work proposal to develop specific requirements for DC charging stations. A project team meeting is tentatively planned for September in Japan. In 2000, IEC 61851 Part 23 was developed but never published. The new standard will be IEC 62196-3 and will be applicable to DC charging of EVs up to 1,000 VDC and 400A. Mr. Nieminski noted that Mr. Kissel’s presentation could be a starting point for the IEC work but there may be an alternative proposal from Japan.
4
SAE J2836/J2847 Communications Update Rich Scholer, Ford, gave an update on PEV communications (see Attachments). He reviewed overall maps/flow charts of the relevant standards and the people leading each part. J2931/1 is intended for other items such as protocols and testing. He also provided a status on the various standards and a Venn diagram showing how they overlap. During discussion, Mr. Scholer pointed out the need to continue partitioning each section and solving them in smaller clusters rather than merging all the standards. J2836/3 and J2847/3 dealing with reverse energy flow may include provisions to prevent contact with live parts during disconnection. Mr. Scholer affirmed ongoing links with NIST PAP, the Smart Energy Alliance, Open Smart Grid User Group, ISO, IEC, and other groups. Mr. Nieminski reported the creation of a new IEC committee, Strategic Group 3 (SG3), to develop a generic standard for smart grid communication.
ACTION ITEM: Frank Lambert will invite a representative of the IEC SG3 to present at the next meeting.
Vehicle/EVSE AC/DC Charge Architecture Mr. Scholer also presented a long-term Plan A and a short-term Plan B on SAE communications (see Attachments). In Plan A, which involves the PEV communicating with the utility and/or HAN, SEP 2.0 stack is still being developed and roll-out is projected in another two years. Plan B, which involves the PEV communicating with the EVSE, will be incorporated in J2931/2 with production qualified parts manufactured by the third quarter of 2010. During discussion suggestions were made to clarify the symbolic representation of the architecture. Mr. Maitra noted that inband signaling is not SEP 2.0 compliant. Concern was expressed that auto makers may not be completely supportive of SEP 2.0. Mr. Scholer and others, however, reaffirmed their commitment to SEP 2.0 even though they do not fully understand it yet. He added that all they are doing is transmitting the signal over the control pilot rather than the power line. The next steps are to continue PLC and inband signaling testing, reviewing SEP 2.0 stack, and finalizing EMC testing. Mr. Scholer presented slides to demonstrate sequencing for DC Level 1 & 2 charging.
SGIP Interoperability Project
Jerry Melcher, EnerNex, gave an update on the Smart Grid Interoperability Standards Project. NIST turned over the execution to a governing board. Priority Action Plans (PAPs) were created for key areas. He then described each of the PAP 11 tasks. Task 1 relates to PEV use cases. Task 2 has to do with developing a high level communication information model. Task 3 addresses impediments to collaboration such as between SAE and IEC. Task 4 involves mapping the models to IEC 61968, 61850. Task 5 is on current regulations and is chaired by CPUC representatives so they can share rule-making activities. Task 6 involves reviewing about a dozen primary standards and two dozen secondary standards.
ACTION ITEM: Jerry Melcher will send Jorge Emmanuel weblinks to the SGIP work. [Completed; see below]
SGIP Home:
http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/WebHome
5
Priority Action Plan website: http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PriorityActionPlans#Individual_PAP_Lists SGIP PAP 11 PEV webpage: http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PAP11PEV
SAE J2894 Charger Grid Power Quality Jose Salazar, SCE, presented the background and status of SAE J2894 based on the 1997 IWC legacy document (see Attachments). The document is in its 4th revision and may become official by September 2010. Mr. Salazar compared the new SAE parameters with the old IWC values for charger PQ and AC service characteristics. Mr. Maitra noted that IEEE 519 uses a 5% maximum voltage distortion compared to the 2% based on DPQ II. Mr. Salazar noted that they will reconsider the voltage distortion value. For voltage sag, the CBEMA curve was used as reference. Questions were raised regarding the recommendation for load rate (soft start) and the impact on ancillary services. Mr. Salazar explained the new cold load pick-up procedure. The random restart was removed as a compromise between distribution level issues and transmission level problems in the long term. Mr. Salazar noted that the percent efficiency requirement is at maximum rated voltage. He showed some performance data from the delta-q charger. The document will have a Part 2 which will deal with testing. Mr. Salazar stated that he will ask vendors for individual harmonic spectra of their chargers.
Investigation of Onboard Chargers PQ Impacts through Modeling and Simulation Randy Horton, EPRI, presented on PQ modeling and simulation of onboard chargers (see Attachments). He described models for the charger circuit topology, PFC boost converter, DC-DC converter, and battery. He also compared modeling results with measurements made on a Ford Escape charger. He used the EMTP-RV software to simulate PHEV charger transient performance during utility capacitor bank switching events. Based on his studies, Mr. Horton concluded that harmonic current generation of Level 1 chargers are well within the IEC limits and that although capacitor bank switching can trigger overvoltage protection of PHEV battery chargers, there is sufficient ride-though capability. Participants discussed the possibility of modeling charger efficiency. With regards to Mr. Salazar’s query regarding the 10% total harmonic distortion in J2894, Mr. Horton suggested considering the IEC standards for individual harmonics, especially the third harmonic.
Discussion: Future direction, priorities, next steps, and schedule The following issues were discussed. There are no common mechanisms for demand response and each utility applies their own version of demand response. Most OEMs are willing to share information on where their vehicles are, which would help utilities to aggregate load and monitor transformer loading. Interest was expressed in the national permitting process and in an update on SEP 2.0. Participants were also interested in building construction standards related to EV infrastructure. Some voluntary standards may soon become mandatory and there may be relevant provisions in the LEED certification standards.
6
ACTION ITEMS: Frank Lambert will work with Greg Robinson, Jose Salazar, and Michael Bourton to arrange for an overview and update on SEP 2.0 for the next meeting.
Efrain Ornelas will arrange to get an update of building codes related to
EV infrastructure.
Announcements The Plug-In 2010 Conference and Exposition, organized by EPRI and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, will take place on July 26-29, 2010, at the San Jose Convention Center in San Jose, CA. For more details go to www.plugin2010.com
Next Meeting The next meeting of the IWC is scheduled for September 1-2, 2010 in Detroit, MI.
Summary of Action Items Greg Nieminski will work with Leviton on clarifying the 50A receptacle issue. Eric Lee will share the national permitting template at the next meeting. Frank Lambert will invite a representative of the IEC SG3 to present at the next meeting. Jerry Melcher will send Jorge Emmanuel weblinks to the SGIP work. [Completed; see
above] Frank Lambert will work with Greg Robinson, Jose Salazar, and Michael Bourton to arrange
for an overview and update on SEP 2.0 for the next meeting. Efrain Ornelas will arrange to get an update of building codes related to EV infrastructure
Adjournment With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
7
Attachments
PHEVWG Attendance List
First Name Last Name Company Abernathy Doris Electric Power Research Institute Anegawa Takafumi Tokyo Electric Power Co. Aoki Hiroyuki Tokyo Electric Power Co. Asgeirsson Haukur DTE Energy Atkins Lance Nissan Technical Center North America Bartel Martin Northeast Utilities Bellino George General Motors Company Berezin Slav GM Global Technology Engineering Blais Jeff Manitoba Hydro Blake Chad NREL Bohn Ted Argonne / DOE Boroughs Ralph Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Bourton Michael Grid2Home Bowermaster Dan Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Briggs Stephen FirstEnergy Service Company Brown Jim Enwin Utililties Ltd.-Windsor Carlson Nicholas Detroit Edison Co. Coley Bryan Southern Company Collins Watson Northeast Utilities Cromie Richard Southern California Edison Co. Crosby Matthew California Public Utilities Commission Culp James Progress Energy Daniels Cedric Alabama Power Co. Duvall Mark Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Echols Ben Georgia Power Co. Emmanuel Jorge E&ER Group Faul Les ComEd Fietzek Cliff BMW of North America, LLC Garcia Josephine Electric Power Research Institute Girimonte Sam Chrysler, LLC Gonzalez Barbara Pepco Holdings, Inc. Gulmi Ronald National Grid USA Hall Ed Dominion Resources, Inc. Halliwell John Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Hawkins Robert Ultimate Business Solutions Heitmann Paul ETEC Hofen Thomas Mercedes-Benz Research & Development North America Houseman Doug Enernex Irwin Stuart ClipperCreek Karwa Manoj Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. Kissel Gery GM Global Technology Engineering Kosowski Mark Electric Power Research Institute Kumita Kunihiko Toyota Motor Corporation Lambert Frank Georgia Tech/NEETRAC
8
Langston John Duke Energy Corp. Lee Eric Chrysler, LLC Lesiw Mark Consumers Energy MacCurdy Dwight Sacramento Municipal Util. Dist. Maitra Arindam Electric Power Research Institue Martinez-Fonts Andrew Silver Spring Networks McCabe Mike NRG Energy, Inc. Medina Ana DTE Energy Melcher Jerry Enernex Momeni Massoud Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Muller Mike SPX Service Solutions Musyj Lawrence EnWin Utilities, Ltd. Nichols Ruben Gulf Power Co. Nieminski Greg DBA Greg Nieminski Oliver Doug Ford Motor Co. Ornelas Efrain Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Pointon Joel San Diego Gas & Electric Co. Robinson Greg Xtensible Solutions Rowand Mike Duke Energy Corp. Roy Bryan New West Technologies Roy Serge CHAdeMo Association Salazar Jose Southern California Edison Co. Schlotzhauer Craig General Motors of Canada Scholer Rich Ford Motor Co. Scripps Sally Consumers Energy Shanahan Daniel CabAire Showers Aaron Robert Bosch Corp. Sisco Brian Eaton Corporation Smith P.E. Karen Salt River Project Snyder David CenterPoint Energy, Inc. Stevenson Tim City of Windsor Thompson Ron Eaton Corporation Tobias Steven National Grid USA Tolios Kostas DTE Energy Tsang Alec BC Hydro Uyeki Robert Honda R&D North America, Inc. Waters Michael Progress Energy, Inc. Windover Paul New West Technologies Wong Frank Aeronvironment Wu Bo Ford Motor Co. Yeider Ted Paceco Corp.
National EVSE Permitting Project Update
IWC Meeting
Grid Interaction Tech Team – National EVSE Permit Update
Date June 9, 2010,
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Grid Interaction Tech Team Members
OEMs
Eric Lee Chrysler *
Government / Labs
Keith Hardy DOE *Eric Lee Chrysler Tarek Abdel‐Baset Chrysler/BTSBritta Gross GMGery Kissel GM
Keith Hardy DOE Ted Bohn ANLJohn Smart INLTerry Penny NRELCarl Rivkin NREL
Nancy Homeister FordAllan Gale Ford
Carl Rivkin NRELRay Boeman ORNLMichael Kintner PNNL
Utility PartnersHauker Asgeirsson DTENick Carlson DTERi h d C i SCE
Other Contributors Mark Kosowski EPRIEnid Joffe Clean Fuel Connections
Richard Cromie SCERobert Graham SCELoic Gaillac SCE
Selected AHJs Target Markets
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future
* = Co‐chairs
National Permit Template ProjectObjective: Shorten the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) installationObjective: Shorten the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) installation process from weeks to days
Issue:EVSE installation requirements can vary from state to state and from municipality to municipality ThisEVSE installation requirements can vary from state to state and from municipality to municipality. This combined with multiple inspection requirements by some jurisdictions can result in significant delays (weeks to months) in installations. For EVs to migrate successfully from early adopters to main stream applications – this process must be fast and as seamless as possible.
Approach:Create a national permit by notification system that harmonizes EVSE installation requirements and eliminates delays associated with jurisdiction specific approvals. This system would allow the home/site owner to install (using a licensed electrical contractor) and immediately operate after self certifying that the EVSE was installed in compliance with the national permit template The “Authorities Having Jurisdiction”EVSE was installed in compliance with the national permit template. The Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) can - at their discretion, inspect EVSE installations to ensure compliance with the national template.
Goals/Deliverables:• An on-line national template for safe, consistent and timely EVSE installationAn on line national template for safe, consistent and timely EVSE installation• A method for notifying the AHJ that EVSE will be installed at a retail or commercial locations – this could
be in the form a nationally available web based tool. • A national data base to assist grid load planning • Training for inspector and contractors on EVSE installation
Targeting Funding Opportunities
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future
Training for inspector and contractors on EVSE installation
Partners:NREL, USCAR, Utilities, Other DOE Labs, EVSE Installers & Selected AHJs
Project Timeline and Deliverables
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
2010
Mar 22P j t T
Project TimelineJul 15I t
Jun 30M t ith llProject Team
Kickoff Meeting(Completed Mar
19)
Incorporate feedback into permit(In Process)
Meet with all Jurisdictions
and obtain feedback(In Process)
Apr 23Complete Codes &
Major Deliverables
Standards Review incl’ identification of gaps(Completed Apr 5)
Jul 31Revised National Permit for EV Charging
Apr 5Spreadsheet
containing codes and standards for EV charging stations
(Completed, No gaps id tifi d)
Apr 15Draft National Permit for EV charging stations(Completed) Currently reviewing draft with OEMs and team
b t ll tidentified) members to collect comments
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future
Project Deliverables Status
1. Basic gap analysis, including codes and standards citations was completed indicating that sufficient requirements are in place to safely address installationrequirements are in place to safely address installation of electric vehicle charging stations
2. A draft permit has been developed and reviewed internally by the Team. Several comments were provided and incorporated in the draft permit.
3. Valuable input was provided by industry and installerp p y y4. Draft Permit is ready to present to key jurisdictions for
input5 Project team will meet June 11 2010 with the objective5. Project team will meet June 11, 2010 with the objective
of selecting jurisdictions to perform trial runs of the permit
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future
Contact Info & Thank You
Eric M. LeeEML4@Chrysler.com
Carl RivkinCarl.rivkin@nrel.gov
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future
Power in Motion1
QMX3.3 PrototypePerformance Data for SAE J2894
Power in Motion
Presented By: Conway Hui
Date: 14 May 2010
Power in Motion
QMX 3.3 Prototype Design
Power in Motion
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Output (W)
Eff (
%)
120Vac, HV Out, 200V120Vac, HV Out, 300V120Vac, HV Out, 400V240Vac, HV Out, 200V240Vac, HV Out, 300V240Vac, HV Out, 400V
Electrical Performance ‐
Efficiency
Power in Motion
0.96
0.965
0.97
0.975
0.98
0.985
0.99
0.995
1
1.005
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Output Power (W)
Pow
er F
acto
r
120Vac 240Vac
Power Factor, Revised PFC Control
Power in Motion
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Output Power (W)
Cur
rent
TH
D (%
)
120Vac 240Vac
Current THD, Revised PFC Control
1
SAE Communications
Plan A
Plan B
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
2
The long term plan (A)• Plan A
– PEV communicates with the utility &/or HAN
– Requirements• Auto qualified parts
• Simple, cost effective system
– Issues• J1 (PEVs) was two years ago
– EVSEs may be upgraded easier than PEVs
• We are still testing and evaluating (& selecting)
• SEP 2.0 stack is still being developed this year
– Projected roll‐out• Two more years (with current level of effort)
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
3
Plan A
Utility / HAN
EVSE
Vehicle Owner /
User
Vehicle
Interaction between EVSE and vehicle
per (J1772TM)
Pilot PWM between EVSE & vehicle.
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
EVSE
Plan A ‐ Architecture
* CAN is referred to as “the vehicle communication medium” and the PEV will always include a bridge to off‐board communication.
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B 4
Meter
SEP
Control Pilot
EVSE
Control Pilot
PWM
PWM
PLC
PEV
CAN* to SEP
Charger
CAN
PLC
HAN
SEP
ZigBee PLC Wi-Fi
PEV
CAN* to SEP
Charger
CAN
Meter
SEP
EUMD
EUMD
CAN
CAN
5
The short term plan (B)• Plan B
– PEV (BECM) communicates with the EVSE (off‐board charger)
– Requirements• Simple, point‐to‐point, stand alone or integrated
– Issues• Also short time frame (BEV’s need it now)
– Projected roll‐out• Continue test May and June, 2010• Incorporate in J2931/2 June and July, 2010 (standard)• Production qualified part 3Q 2010
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
6
Plan B
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
76‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
PEV
Plan B ‐ Architecture
• Assumes Inband signaling is FSK (Analogue Modem).
EVSEFSK on
PWM
PLC
HAN Meter Dependent
ZigBee, PLC or Wi-Fi
Meter
InBandModem
InBandModem EUMD
CAN toSEP
Control Pilot
PLCModem SEP
Plan A
Used for off board charger
CAN
Charger
SEP to CAN
CAN
PhyBridge
Router
8
TimelineWe are here
Test and Selection Process
Implement
Plan B
Test and Selection Process
Implement
Plan A
J1?
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
EVSE
9
Transfer Path
• (U1) TOU – Time of Use• (U2) DR – Demand Response• (U3) RTP – Real Time Pricing• (U4) CPP – Critical Peak Pricing• (U5) OET – Optimized Energy Transfer
1 Physical
2 Data Link
5 Session
6 Presentation
Stack Layers
3 Network
4 Transport
7 Application
DC Messages
DR Messages
TOU Messages
RTP Messages
CPP Messages
OET Messages
DR Messages
TOU Messages
RTP Messages
CPP Messages
OET Messages
Off-board Charger
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
Objective:1. Determine stack layer for initialization2. Keep routing (bridging/gateway) at lowest level in stack to minimize cost, security and other
aspects
10
Transfer Path
1 Physical
2 Data Link
5 Session
6 Presentation
Layer
3 Network
4 Transport
7 Application
TOU Messages TOU Messages
Initialization messages (identifications):
Vehicle ID Smart PEV Present
Energy exchange messages (energy, price, timing):
Energy requestPower request…
Process:1. Determine the transfer
level for each category.2. Reduce read/write to
simplify transfer time, complexity and security risks.
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
11
SAE Next Steps
• Continue PLC Testing • Continue InBand Signaling Tests• Review SEP 2.0 stack
– Understand bridging vs. gateway• Network or other layers vs. Application transporting• Keep information exchange at lowest level
– Minimize complexity– Minimize security
• Finalize EMC test June/July, 2010 for PLC
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
12
Backup
1. Connector Options (Hybrid)
2. Architecture• AC Level 1 & 2
• DC Level 1 & 2
3. Sequencing
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
13
Connector Options
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
14
Architecture(AC Level 1 & 2)
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
15
Architecture (AC Level 1 & 2 + DC Level 1)
• InBand Signaling required for DC messages• PLC for additional communications• Issues:
– Any issues with both operating?– Sequence InBand, then PLC?– CCID trips (ground circuit is common)?
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
16
Architecture (AC Level 1 & 2, DC Level 1 + DC Level 2)
• Communication on 1, 3 & 4, power on 6 & 7.
6
7DC -
DC +
3) DC Level 2 Charging (up to 80 kW) Vehicle includes 2nd Connector (or Hybrid) added S7 & 8.
AC Level 1 & 2,DC Level 1 & 2
Traction Battery S1
S2
1
2
3Gnd
L 2
L 1
Charger
Vehicle EVSE
J1772™ Hybrid
Connector
EVSE
Charger
S1
L1
L2
Gnd
S2
S3
PLCS5
S6
S5 & 6 are optional depending on charger
S3
S4
PLC
InBand Signaling
CP4Detect
5
S7
S8
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
17
Communication Sequence
• DC Level 1– InBand Signaling – to off‐board charger
– Apply Power
– PLC – additional communication
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
18
Sequencing – 1 (InBand signaling)DC Level 1
• Establish communication
AC Level 1 & 2, DC Level 1
Traction Battery
S1
S2
Gnd
L 2/DC- Charger
VehicleEVSE
J1772™ Level 1 / 2 Connector
2) DC Level 1 Charging (up to 19.2 kW to off-board charger - in EVSE)J1772™ connector, and added S3 & 4.
EVSE
Charger
S1
L1
L2
Gnd
S2
S3
PLCS5
S6
S5 & 6 are optional depending on charger
S3
S4
PLC
InBand Signaling
CP
1
2
3
4Detect
5
L 1/DC+
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
19
Sequencing – 2 (apply power)DC Level 1
• InBand Signaling communication is on separate circuits from power.
AC Level 1 & 2, DC Level 1
Traction Battery
S1
S2
Gnd
L 2/DC- Charger
VehicleEVSE
J1772™ Level 1 / 2 Connector
2) DC Level 1 Charging (up to 19.2 kW to off-board charger - in EVSE)J1772™ connector, and added S3 & 4.
EVSE
Charger
S1
L1
L2
Gnd
S2
S3
PLCS5
S6
S5 & 6 are optional depending on charger
S3
S4
PLC
InBand Signaling
CP
1
2
3
4Detect
5
L 1/DC+
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
20
Sequencing – 3 (add PLC)DC Level 1
AC Level 1 & 2, DC Level 1
Traction Battery
S1
S2
Gnd
L 2/DC- Charger
VehicleEVSE
J1772™ Level 1 / 2 Connector
2) DC Level 1 Charging (up to 19.2 kW to off-board charger - in EVSE)J1772™ connector, and added S3 & 4.
EVSE
Charger
S1
L1
L2
Gnd
S2
S3
PLCS5
S6
S5 & 6 are optional depending on charger
S3
S4
PLC
InBand Signaling
CP
1
2
3
4Detect
5
L 1/DC+
• Messages other than the DC off‐board charger.
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
21
Communication Sequence
• DC Level 2– InBand Signaling – to off‐board charger
– Apply Power
– PLC – additional communication
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
22
Sequencing – 1a (InBand signaling)DC Level 2
• Establish communication
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
23
Sequencing – 2a (Apply Power)DC Level 2
• InBand Signaling communication is on separate circuits from power.
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
24
Sequencing – 3a (add PLC) DC Level 2
• PLC routed to EVSE and/or HAN/AMI
6‐10‐10 Rich Scholer ‐ SAE ‐ Plan A and B
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
1
SAE PEV Communications
• Map/flow chart of standards • Status• Topics covered in J2931
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
2
Map/flow chart of standards
• Utility Programs– U1: TOU – Time of Use– U2: DR - Direct Load/Price Control– U3: RTP (Active Management)– U4: CPP - Critical Peak Pricing– U5: OET - Optimized Energy Transfer
• Connection methods– S1: Cordset EVSE
• (120V AC to vehicle)– S2: Premise EVSE
• (240V AC to vehicle)– S3: Premise EVSE w/Off-Charger
• (DC to vehicle)
• Locations– L1: Home:
• Connects at premise– L2: Another's Home
• Inside the utility’s service territory &
• A: premise pays tariff• B: customer pays tariff
– L3: Another's Home• Outside the utility’s service
territory – L4: Public:
• Curbside, workplace, business, multi family dwelling
J2836/1™ & J2847/1
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
3
Map/flow chart of standards
• Communication with the off-board charger in the EVSEJ2836/2™ & J2847/2
J2836/3™ & J2847/3• Reverse Energy Flow
– V2G (Vehicle to Grid)– V2H (Vehicle to Home)– V2L (Vehicle to Load)– V2V (Vehicle to Vehicle) - later
J2836/4™ & J2847/4• Diagnostics – Charging system
plus more (if desired)
J2836/5™ & J2847/5
• Customer specific messages– Expected charge times– Energy statistics– Charge station info (driving
circles)
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
4
Map/flow chart of standards• Protocol
– Power Line Carrier (PLC)– ZigBee– Wi-Fi– Inband Signaling– More (cell, URC, etc.)
• Testing– Test and performance specs for the communication mediums.– Establish the PEV/EVSE digital communication "Gold Standard".
(Complements J1772™ that identifies the analogue aspects of interface).– Interoperability requirements and test. Various Vehicle and EVSE
manufacturers in current and projected market.• Requirements for PEV to EVSE/HAN/AMI (May be here or J2847/1)
– Registration (mobile and fixed EVSE and PEV)– Association (PEV to sub meter for rate incentives)– Authentication of the session (not a table saw or welder).
J2931/1
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
5
Status of Standards(Initial versions planned for publishing,
then additional testing and re-ballot with updates)
• J2836/1™ & J2847/1 – Utility requirements– J2836/1™ Published March, J2847/1 affirmation complete, June 16th.
• J2836/2™ & J2847/2 – DC charging– Planned 3Q 2010
• J2836/3™ & J2847/3 – Reverse energy flow– Kickoff June, 2010 (V2G, V2H & V2L are initial approaches).
• J2836/4™ & J2847/4 – Diagnostics– Planned kickoff 3Q, 2010.
• J2836/5™ & J2847/5– Initial messages started with /1 docs and expected kickoff 3Q, 2010.
• J2931 /1, /2, /3 & /4??– Kickoff March, 2010. Expected initial ballot 3Q, 2010.
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
6
Protocol topics covered in J2931• J2931/1 - General info, requirements,
mapping to all slash sheets – J2836™, J2847 & J2931
• J2931/2 - Inband Signaling (Control Pilot)– Off-board charger
• Digital modem (Clipper Creek)• Analog modem (Ariane Controls)
• J2931/3 - Utilities (SEP 2.0)– Power Line Carrier (PLC)– ZigBee– Wi-Fi
• J2931/4 – Customer mediums– Cell, URC, Wi-Fi, more
• Major actors– Customer– Utility (AMI)– PEV– EVSE– HAN
6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
7
Map/flow chart of standards
J2836/2™ J2847/2
Off-boardCharger J2836/3™
J2847/3Reverse
Energy Flow
J2836/4™J2847/4
Diagnostics
J2836/1™J2847/1
Utility Programs
J2836/5™ J2847/5 Customer Interface
PLCZigBeeWi-Fi Cell
URCWi-Fi
Inband SignalingAnalog modemDigital modem
The mapping process (examples)1. Implement a utility program using SEP 2.0
– J2836/1™ for use case (U1 thru 5)– J2847/1 for messages (U1 thru 5)– J2931/3 for SEP 2.0 protocol (PLC, ZigBee or Wi-Fi)
2. DC energy transfer– J2836/2™ for architecture– J2847/2 for messages– J2931/2 for InBand signaling protocol
3. Reverse Energy Flow– J2836/3™ for architecture (V2G, V2H, V2L or V2V)– J2847/3 for messages – J2931/3 for SEP 2.0 protocol (PLC, ZigBee or Wi-Fi)
4. More …
6-10-10 8Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force
Investigation of On-Board Chargers PQ Impacts through Modeling and Simulation
Randy Horton,Ph.D., P.E.Arindam Maitra, Ph.D.Eric HubbardJohn Halliwell
June 10, 2010
2© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Agenda
• Background• PHEV Charger Model• PHEV Charger Model Validation (steady-state)• PHEV Charger Operation (transient response)• Conclusions• Future Steps
3© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Background
• Project began as an investigation of the impacts of PHEV battery charger operation on utility power quality via computer simulations (EMTP-RV) and measurements.– PHEV → Utility
• Project later evolved to include investigating the impact of the utility system PQ on PHEV charger operation.– Utility → PHEV
• So far we have only evaluated the impact of a single Level 1 charger at the point of connection, e.g. 120V outlet.– Investigation of multiple chargers and their impact at
the point of common coupling (PCC) will be forthcoming.
4© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PHEV Charger Model – Circuit Topology
Full-Bridge DC-DC ConverterBoost Converter
Input EMI Filterfc ~ 100 kHz
Output Filter
120V & 240V input
5© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PFC Boost Converter- Control
( ) vpvi
v Ks
KsG +=
( )
p
ziii s
s
sK
sG
ω
ω
+
+⋅=1
1
6© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PFC Boost Converter – Protection Functions
• Input Current Limiter (Brown-out Protection)– Constant power device – V↓ I↑– Transistor is turned off when current set-point is
exceeded.• PWM Modulator Limit (Output Current Limiter)• Output Overvoltage Protection
– Transistor is turned off when voltage set-point is exceeded.
• Soft Start
7© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
DC-DC Converter - Control
-
+Gi(s)
-+
TA+,TB-
IBATT
IREFTA-,TB+
( ) ipii
i Ks
KsG +=
Transistors are switched in pairs
8© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Battery Model – 330V – 10 kWh (30.3 Ah)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
400
420Nominal Current Discharge Characteristic at 13.2A
Ampere-hour (Ah)
Vol
tage
Discharge curveNominal areaExponential area
0.1
+
-330 Vdc
+
9© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Model Validation: Ford Escape
• Measurements were made on a Ford Escape in Rome GA.
• Connected to the grid via standard 120V connector.
• Battery was at 40% charge at beginning of measurement period.
120V Charger Connection
10© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Model Validation – Input Power
Measured and Simulated Charger exhibited near unity power factor ~ 0.99
(reactive power not shown for clarity)
11© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Model Validation – Input Current (S.S. – Time Domain)
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
Time [Seconds]
Cur
rent
[Am
ps]
measuredemtp
12© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Model Validation – Input Current (FFT)
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
60 180
300
420
540
660
780
1500
Frequency (Hz)
Cur
rent
(Am
ps-r
ms)
EMTP-RV
Measured
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
660
720
780
1380
1500
Frequency (Hz)
Cur
rent
(Am
ps-r
ms)
EMTP-RV
Measured
13© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Model Validation – Input Current (FFT)
Frequency (Hz) Simulation (Arms) % of Fund Measured (Arms) % of Fund60 11.91 100.0% 11.72 100.0%120 0.05 0.4% 0.01 0.1%180 0.06 0.5% 0.34 2.9%240 0.02 0.2% 0.01 0.0%300 0.09 0.8% 0.10 0.9%360 0.02 0.1% 0.00 0.0%420 0.12 1.0% 0.07 0.6%480 0.01 0.1% 0.00 0.0%540 0.13 1.1% 0.05 0.4%600 0.02 0.1% 0.00 0.0%660 0.15 1.3% 0.02 0.2%720 0.01 0.1% 0.00 0.0%780 0.15 1.2% 0.00 0.0%
1380 0.07 0.5% 0.01 0.1%1500 0.05 0.5% 0.01 0.1%
Simulated THDi = 2.6%
Measured THDi = 3.1%
14© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Computer Simulations – EMTP-RV
• Computer Simulations were performed using EMTP-RV to test PHEV charger transient performance during utility capacitor bank switching events.
15© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capacitor Bank Switching – Surge Generation
( )( )
LCs
LRs
LCsVsV
s
b1
1
2 ++=
% 100 eOS ×−
−
≈21% ζ
ζπ
LLCR
2=ζ
Hz 60 LC
>>π2
1If
Overshoot
%OS for most distribution systems is on the order of 170-190% assuming cap
bank is energized at voltage peak
16© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capacitor Bank Switching – Typical Case
17© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capacitor Bank Switching – Worst Case
• The worst case overvoltage occurs when the frequency of voltage surge is equal to the resonant frequency of the boost converter (as seen from its input)
• This occurs when
L1
C1
L2
C2
( ) capsysCL
CLL ππ 21
21
221
≅+
18© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capacitor Bank Switching – Worst Case
2.4 p.u.
19© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conclusions
• Harmonic current generation of the Level 1 charger that was analyzed is very low (well within the limits of IEC 61000 3-2)– Measurements from other Level 1 chargers (not
provided here) show similar results.• Capacitor bank switching can create voltage transients
that are sufficient to trigger overvoltage protection of PHEV battery chargers (boost converter output); however, the EMTP-RV charger model showed sufficient “ride through” capability.
20© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conclusions
• It is important to recognize that simulation results are highly dependent on boost converter design, and will likely vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.
• Tests of actual chargers need to be made to further validate model.– Capacitor Switching (if practical)– Voltage Sag/Swell tests– Step Change in Load
21© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Next Steps
• Laboratory Testing and Model Validation• Multiple Charger Evaluation using EMTP-RV and possibly
OpenDSS.– Will create different scenarios (garage locations, multi-
family, single-family, etc.) and look at overall PQ impact.
• Off-Board PHEV Charger Evaluation– Investigate PQ impacts of larger (and faster) single-
phase and three-phase chargers.
22© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity
Gery KisselSAE J1772™ Task Force Lead
June 10, 2010
Document Status◦ Coupler Compatibility Testing
◦ EVSE Compatibility Testing
Charging Configurations and Ratings
DC Fast Charge◦ Ground Pin Study and Harmonization Potential
◦ Mate / Unmate Force – Mechanical Assist
◦ Hybrid Coupler Design Status
China Draft Standards
Next Steps
Testing will be conducted by the manufacturers
Coupler samples will be exchanged
Couplers will be provided with 36 inch cable harnesses
Participating manufacturers will provide inlets
Inlets will be equipped with thermocouples for temperature measurements during electrical tests
Test criteria under development
Samples will be provided with pre-evaluation baseline data
Based upon established criteria the evaluating manufacturer will immediately communicate any discrepancies to the original manufacturer
Samples will be returned to the original manufacturer upon completion of the evaluation along with measured results
Results will be consolidate and summary presented to SAE Task Force
John Halliwell, EPRI, leading this effort
EVSE equipment manufactures have provided John with input to an initial draft
The draft has been posted on the SAE J1772™ site under the 10_05_25 meeting documents
Draft comments will be taken during the 7/22 task force meeting
Final comments and completion targeted for 7/27 task force meeting
The test procedure will then be available on the task force site and will be included as a new appendix in the next revision of J1772™
AC L1: 120V AC single phase◦ Configuration current 12,
16 amp◦ Configuration power 1.44,
1.92kw
AC L2: 240V AC single phase◦ Rated Current ≤ 80 amp◦ Rated Power ≤ 19.2kw
AC L3:TBD◦ AC single or 3φ ?
DC L1: 200 – 450V DC◦ Rated Current ≤ 80 amp◦ Rated Power ≤ 19.2kw
DC L2: 200 – 450V DC◦ Rated Current ≤ 200 amp◦ Rated Power ≤ 90kw
DC L3: TBD◦ 200 – 600V DC ?◦ Rated Current ≤ 400 amp?◦ Rated Power ≤ 240kw?
Voltages are nominal configuration operating voltages,
not coupler rating.
Rated power is at nominal configuration operating voltage
and coupler rated current.
PHEV / EREV –C1 coupler as standard◦ AC L1 & L2, DC L1◦ Largest vehicle volume (90%?), smallest inlet◦ Coupler C2 as option
BEVs - C2 “Hybrid” coupler as standard◦ Single vehicle charge inlet for AC L1 & L2, DC L1 &
L2◦ Coupler C3 as option
Commercial / Fleet Vehicles –C3 coupler as standard◦ AC L3, DC L3◦ Optional for BEVs
C1: AC L1 & L2, DC L1
C2 “Hybrid Inlet”:
AC L1 & L2, DC L1 & L2
C3 TBD: AC L3 & DC L3
“Hybrid” Coupler Design
Combine AC L1, L2 and DC L1, L2 in one coupler.
Add DC pins, 200 amp capacity
Reuse ground, control pilot and proximity circuit pins from AC L1, L2
Ground Pin Size Study◦ CONFIRMED -- 3rd-Party testing of 2.8mm ground
pin with 6AWG cable according to UL2251, Paragraph 41 Ground Path Current Test & Table 41.1 Short-time test currents of 1530A for 6 seconds
EU Ground Requirements◦ IEC 62196 requires an “earthing”/ground pin with a
cross-section equal to half of the power pins (above 16 sqmm)
◦ IEC 62196, paragraph 12:
Suggest adding “200 amp” entry to IEC62196 Table 4 that harmonizes with UL2251 Paragraph 41 Ground Path Current Test & Table 41.1 Short-time test currents of 1530A for 6 seconds◦ Additional ground pin would not be required for EU
If harmonization of IEC62196 Table 4 and UL2251 Paragraph 41 Ground Path Current Test & Table 41.1not possible, a 6mm ground pin option should be added to the design
Mate / Unmate Force - Mechanical Assist◦ Multiple design iterations attempting to design and
package mate / unmate mechanical assist
◦ Mechanical assist adds complexity to both inlet and connector
◦ Study underway to determine of mechanical assist can be eliminated and mate with a force ≤ 80N
80
90
No IEC ground pin
provisions
80
100
Draft China charging standards surfaced week of April 22
Standard includes unique control pilot circuit, proximity circuit and DC charge coupler
Uses IEC Type 2 or Mennekes coupler as physical base for AC charging
Working to understand China position
Decision regarding IEC ground pin
REMA and Amphenol to validate the insertion and extraction forces with available contact technologies. Minimum of 30 days required to affirm.
Harmonization with EU and China◦ It is unclear the extent of the delay to harmonize
standards
Recommended