national electric transportation...

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


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


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


Contact Info & Thank You

Eric M. [email protected]

Carl [email protected]


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)


3

Plan A

Utility / HAN

EVSE

Vehicle Owner /

User

Vehicle

Interaction between EVSE and vehicle

per (J1772TM)

Pilot PWM between EVSE & vehicle.


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

Plan 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?


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


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.


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


12

Backup

1. Connector Options (Hybrid)

2. Architecture• AC Level 1 & 2

• DC Level 1 & 2

3. Sequencing


13

Connector Options


14

Architecture(AC Level 1 & 2)


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)?


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


17

Communication Sequence

• DC Level 1– InBand Signaling – to off‐board charger

– Apply Power

– PLC – additional communication


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


S3

S4

PLC

InBand Signaling

CP

1

2

3

4Detect

5

L 1/DC+


19

Sequencing – 2 (apply power)DC Level 1

• InBand Signaling communication is on separate circuits from power.


Traction Battery

S1

S2

Gnd

L 2/DC- Charger

VehicleEVSE



EVSE

Charger

S1

L1

L2

Gnd

S2

S3

PLCS5

S6


S3

S4

PLC

InBand Signaling

CP

1

2

3

4Detect

5

L 1/DC+


20

Sequencing – 3 (add PLC)DC Level 1


Traction Battery

S1

S2

Gnd

L 2/DC- Charger

VehicleEVSE



EVSE

Charger

S1

L1

L2

Gnd

S2

S3

PLCS5

S6


S3

S4

PLC

InBand Signaling

CP

1

2

3

4Detect

5

L 1/DC+

• Messages other than the DC off‐board charger.


21

Communication Sequence

• DC Level 2– InBand Signaling – to off‐board charger

– Apply Power

– PLC – additional communication


22

Sequencing – 1a (InBand signaling)DC Level 2

• Establish communication


23

Sequencing – 2a (Apply Power)DC Level 2

• InBand Signaling communication is on separate circuits from power.


24

Sequencing – 3a (add PLC) DC Level 2

• PLC routed to EVSE and/or HAN/AMI


6-10-10 Rich Scholer - SAE Communication Task Force

1

SAE PEV Communications

• Map/flow chart of standards • Status• Topics covered in J2931


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


3


• 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)


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


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

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


7


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


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.


PHEV Charger Model – Circuit Topology

Full-Bridge DC-DC ConverterBoost Converter

Input EMI Filterfc ~ 100 kHz

Output Filter

120V & 240V input


PFC Boost Converter- Control

( ) vpvi

v Ks

KsG +=

( )

p

ziii s

s

sK

sG

ω

ω

+

+⋅=1

1


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


DC-DC Converter - Control

-

+Gi(s)

-+

TA+,TB-

IBATT

IREFTA-,TB+

( ) ipii

i Ks

KsG +=

Transistors are switched in pairs


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

+


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


Model Validation – Input Power

Measured and Simulated Charger exhibited near unity power factor ~ 0.99

(reactive power not shown for clarity)


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


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


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%


Computer Simulations – EMTP-RV

• Computer Simulations were performed using EMTP-RV to test PHEV charger transient performance during utility capacitor bank switching events.


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


Capacitor Bank Switching – Typical Case


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

≅+


Capacitor Bank Switching – Worst Case

2.4 p.u.


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.


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


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.


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

national electric transportation...

Documents