Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EV chargers”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Concept Study of Robotic Camera-Based Foreign Object Detection for EV Wireless Charging

Wireless charging of an electric vehicle (EV) is an emerging charging technology promising convenient, autonomous, and highly efficient EV charging without requiring heavy gauge cables. However, due to the strong electromagnetic field created by this process that surrounds the wireless charger, the presence of foreign objects can detrimentally interact with it, thus affecting wireless power transfer (WPT) performance or leading to harmful and unwanted safety risks. This paper presents the results for a concept study on a robotic camera-based foreign object detection (FOD) system, as a supplement to the industry-existing overlapped FOD coil array method, for EV wireless charging. A Raspberry PI 4 control board and compatible Raspberry PI Camera Module 2 are used to implement camera-based object detection. The FOD program was developed using a state-of-the-art deep learning object detection model with the OpenCV and Pytorch library and is compatible with camera module hardware. A dry-run test with Raspberry PI and a camera module was conducted and the preliminary FOD function was verified. The feasibility assessment is also validated by comparing the performance of five existing state-of-the-art deep learning object detection models for vehicles, animals, persons, and metals subsets, respectively. Satisfactory performance on the benchmark datasets is observed by the tests, but further improvements are needed in future work when detecting small-sized metallic objects. A programable robotic car is also under development as ongoing work for carrying the Raspberry PI and camera module while moving for the maintenance process.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Caldera_Grid

Caldera Grid is part of Caldera software platform, a suite of collective, open-source tools that was developed to improve the state of the art in modeling the impacts of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging on the grid. Caldera Grid is a co-simulation framework implemented using Hierarchical Engine for Large scale Infrastructure Co-Simulation (HELICS). The framework facilitates the co-simulation of EV charging and Smart Charge Management (SCM) strategies in Caldera Infrastructure Charge Model (ICM) with distribution level grid models in OpenDSS. Vehicle energy needs and charge session requirements generated using Caldera Charge Decision Module (CDM) are fed in as input to Caldera Grid. The EV charging models in Caldera ICM simulates both the uncontrolled charging loads as well as loads modified by the SCM strategies to develop distributed load profiles for each grid node hosting an Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) – also known as chargers. These loads were simulated in OpenDSS alongside existing distribution feeder loads. Each of these models are co-simulated in a HELICS federate. The HELICS co-simulation framework facilitates communication and synchronization between the federates. By co-simulating EV loads and distribution feeder loads, Caldera Grid can assess the potential grid impacts of EV charging on distribution feeders under various grid conditions. A control strategy federate is implemented with an interface where control strategies based on feedback from EV charging status and grid conditions can be developed and implemented. The platform can also support multiple control strategies in a single co-simulation.

Sundarrajan, ManojKumar Cebol↗
DOE OSTI2023

Demand-Side Grid (dsgrid) TEMPO Light-Duty Vehicle Charging Profiles v2022

Simulated hourly electric vehicle charging profiles for light-duty household passenger vehicles in the contiguous United States, 2018-2050. Profiles are differentiated by scenario, county, household and vehicle types, and charging type. Data was produced in 2022 using the Transportation Energy & Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) model and published in demand-side grid (dsgrid) toolkit format. Data are available for three adoption scenarios: "AEO Reference Case", which is aligned with the U.S. EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2018 (linked below), "EFS High Electrification", which is aligned with the High Electrification scenario of the Electrification Futures Study (linked below), and "All EV Sales by 2035", which assumes that average passenger light-duty EV sales reach 50% in 2030 and 100% in 2035. The charging shapes are derived from two key assumptions of which data users should be aware: "ubiquitous charger access", meaning that drivers of vehicles are assumed to have access to a charger whenever a trip is not in progress, and "immediate charging", meaning that immediately after trip completion, vehicles are plugged in and charge until they are either fully recharged or taken on another trip. These assumptions result in a bounding case in which vehicles' state of charge is maximized at all times. This bounding case would minimize range anxiety, but is unrealistic from the point of view of both electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) (i.e., charger) access, and plug-in behavior as it can result in dozens of charging sessions per week for battery electric vehicles (BEVs) that in reality are often only plugged in a few times per week.

Array↗
DOE OSTI2025

EVSE Characterization: V2G EVSE Comparison

As part of the U.S. Department of Energy EVs@Scale consortium Next-Generation Profiles project, results and analysis from the characterization of high-power conductive and wireless charging infrastructure are presented. This characterization is conducted over a wide range of direct current (DC) current and DC voltage operation for nominal test conditions and off-nominal test conditions. Test plans and procedures were developed to define the test configurations and requirements, measurement parameters, and test procedures used throughout testing. Results from a 2024 study conducted on electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) characterization by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) include two bi-directional vehicle-to-grid (V2G) capable EVSEs. These EVSE are referred to as V2G-EVSE9 and V2G-EVSE10. Laboratory testing is conducted at nominal test conditions to characterize the power transfer capabilities, efficiency, power factor, and other power quality metrics of the two DC EVSEs capable of V2G bi-directional power transfer. Results from testing show the performance is consistent for V2G-EVSE9 and V2G-EVSE10 when comparing charging to discharging performance, except for V2G-EVSE10 for power transfer when operating above 70% of the rated DC current. V2G-EVSE10 efficiency is >98% while charging and <91% while discharging at the same operating conditions, near maximum-rated current, at 300VDC. In contrast, V2G-EVSE9 results are consistent for charging and discharging. This EVSE is nearly 96% efficient while charging or discharging when operating over 50% of rated AC power. V2G EVSE performance is also characterized during off-nominal AC grid conditions involving AC voltage deviation (426 VAC to 518 VAC), AC frequency deviation of +2% (58.8 Hz to 61.2 Hz), and AC voltage harmonics injection. Many test conditions have little-to-no impact on performance characteristics of the two EVSEs; however, there are a few notable findings with significant power transfer capability impacts. AC voltage harmonics injection resulted in negative impacts on power quality attributes for both EVSEs, but with no impact on power transfer capability. Off-nominal AC voltage and frequency conditions resulted in unstable or lack of power transfer capability for both EVSEs. V2G-EVSE9 is unable to transfer power when AC voltage is >300V L-N. V2G-EVSE10 is unable to transfer power when AC frequency deviation exceeds +0.8%. V2G energy management system transient response and latency are quantified during laboratory testing. V2G-EVSE9 and V2G-EVSE10 utilize cloud-based V2G energy management systems that command the power transfer level between the EVSE and EV. The latency and response characteristics of the entire systems (web-based user interface, V2G energy management system, cellular communications, and EVSE response) are quantified through laboratory testing for V2G-EVSE9 and V2G-EVSE10. V2G-EVSE9 latency ranges from 0.8 to 1.8 seconds, whereas V2G-EVSE10 latency ranges from 3.4 to 8.8 seconds. The ramp rate to a change in power transfer request also differs between the two EVSEs. V2G-EVSE10 ramp rate ranges from 50% to -250% of rated AC power per second, whereas V2G-EVSE9 rate ranges from 95% to -95% of rated AC power per second. At the highest rate of change in power transfer, V2G-EVSE10 can change from full charge power to full discharge power in less than one second. The V2G EVSE characterization presented in this report provides valuable insights and results for use by numerous entities. This includes modeling and simulation organizations, decision makers, fleet planning, industry stakeholders, and many others involved with the development and deployment of electrified transportation technologies. Additional high-power DC chargers, bidirectional chargers, and inductive power transfer EVSE characterization results are anticipated from additional EVSE brands and models, which will be detailed in future publications in support of the U.S. Department of Energy EVs@Scale consortium Next-Gen Profiles project.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2025

EVI-Rental: A Scalable Model to Quantify the Impact of Rental Car Electrification

This fact sheet describes the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure - Rental Car (EVI-Rental) tool, a flexible and comprehensive simulation tool that addresses key questions about the charging demand, infrastructure needs, and business impacts of adding growing numbers of electric vehicles (EVs) to rental fleets. To validate the EVI-Rental model, the Athena research team conducted a case study at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) to understand the impact of state-of-charge requirements, different charger types and charging schedules, solar power generation, and behind-the-meter storage on a fully electrified rental car fleet.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Evaluation of smart charging for electric vehicle-to-building integration: A case study

Higher electric vehicle (EV) adoption will stress the importance of demand flexibility to achieve more economic, efficient, and reliable grid operation. Charging technologies will be paramount in shifting temporally to better fit the variable generation of wind and solar. As such, analysis is warranted on the benefits of EV charge scheduling with respect to installation cost, operation cost, difficulty of implementation, and grid flexibility. We tackle this by analyzing the cost savings of implementing an EV charge scheduling infrastructure to reduce demand charges and installation costs. In this paper, we analyze a case study for operation of 16 level 2 chargers and 1 fast charger for two different building types. We then evaluate various test phases for controlling building and charging loads using an adaptive charging network (ACN) algorithm to characterize the ACN’s potential to reduce overall project cost.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2024

On-Board AC Charging Topology Integrated with Electric Vehicle Motor Drive System

On-board AC charging is a convenient and widely adopted method for recharging electric vehicles (EVs) directly from standard alternating current (AC) power sources. This paper presents a novel topology for AC charging of EVs that utilizes EV 3-phase electric machine windings as the input inductors, thus eliminating the requirement for bulky grid interfacing inductors and resulting in a compact and cost-effective integrated motor drive and charger system. The proposed approach leverages the motor windings and parallel operating half-bridge inverter during the charging process by interconnecting the inverter phases with the motor windings in a mechanically interleaved and electrically paralleled manner. The implementation of this unique and innovative idea, achieved through precise control and arrangement of the motor winding as a series inductor, successfully eliminates the possibility of unintended motion of the electric machine during the charging process.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2026

DOE EV Data Collection - Charging Data

Charging data are collected from one of three sources, each with varying levels of additional information. These sources, in approximate order from most to least additional information, are: • The electric vehicle supply equipment (charger) • Onboard the vehicle itself • From a utility submeter. Many chargers provide software that allows for the collection and reporting of charging session data. If unavailable, data may be recorded by the charging vehicle’s onboard systems. If neither of these options is available, data can be acquired from utility submeters that simply track the energy flowing to one or more chargers. Data collected directly from the electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) are typically the most accurate and highest frequency. However, it is not always possible to discern which exact vehicle is being charged during any one session. EVSE-side data can be identified where a single charger ID but a range of vehicle IDs are present (e.g., CH001, EV001-EV005). Data collected from the vehicle’s onboard systems usually does not provide information on which exact charger is being used. Vehicle-side data can be identified where a single Vehicle ID but a range of Charger IDs are present (e.g., EV001, CH001-CH005). Data collected from utility submeters provide no information on which specific vehicle is charging or which specific charger is in use. Submeter data can be identified where multiple Vehicle IDs and multiple Charger IDs are present, but only a single Fleet ID is present (e.g., EV001-EV005, CH001-CH005, Fleet01). The **Charge Data Daily/Session Dictionaries** contains definitions for each available parameter collected as part of an individual charging session, aggregated at either a daily or session level. The parameters available will vary between vehicles and chargers. The **Charger Attributes** table contains specific charger characteristics, coded to at least one anonymous Charger ID and linked to either a single or a range of Vehicle IDs. Vehicle ID can be used as a key between charging data and vehicle attribute tables. The **Charger Attributes Data Dictionary** contains definitions for each available parameter collected on the physical and operational characteristics of the charging hardware itself. The **Vehicle Attributes Data Dictionary** contains definitions for each available parameter associated with a vehicle’s physical and functional attributes and fleet context. The **Vehicle Attributes** table contains specific vehicle characteristics, coded to an anonymous Vehicle ID. This Vehicle ID can be used as a key between vehicle data and vehicle attribute tables, and in cases where charging data are supplied, links a vehicle with the charger(s) that supplied it power. The **Charging Data** tables contain the data from each charger’s operations, coded to at least one anonymous Charger ID and linked to either a single or a range of Vehicle IDs. Vehicle ID can be used as a key between charging data and vehicle attribute tables. Data is being uploaded quarterly through 2023 and subject to change until the conclusion of the project.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Siting and sizing of public–private charging stations impacts on household and electric vehicle fleets

To facilitate the provision of electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) in urban areas, this study investigates the benefits of co-locating fleet-owned chargers with public charging stations to enable construction incentives and cord-sharing cost savings. Shared EVCS can serve charging demand from both user types: private (household) EV owners and those managing fleet vehicles – like shared and fully automated EV (SAEV) fleets. Using POLARIS to simulate all person-travel across the 6-county Austin, Texas region, new EVCS were sited and sized with DC fast-charging (DCFC) plugs to lower operating and construction costs while providing public + private (PP) service across an 81-square-mile core geofence (where 200 SAEVs were active) over 24-hour days. When co-location is permitted, 115 DCFC cords were added to the 23 existing (publicly available) stations to enable SAEVs and household EVs (HHEVs) charging access, within the geofence. Each 250-mile-range SAEV was simulated to travel an average of 330 miles per day, serve over 92 person-trips, and recharge 2.7 times a day (for 2.4 h per session). The new DCFC plugs were primarily added to public EVCS at shopping centers and schools, and in residential settings along freeways. The average plug served 4.8 EVs per day. Most co-located PP EVCS permitted immediate (no-wait) charging, except for 2 stations along freeways that averaged 8 min of wait time to begin charging. In conclusion, the co-location strategy lowered fleet owners’ initial EVCS construction costs by 12 % (thanks to cord-sharing to avoid cord duplication), while reducing SAEV wait times to just 3.1 min (versus 10.7 min if SAEV managers had to build and operate their own EVCS).

EV charging modeling↗
DOE OSTI2025

A New Design Consideration for Bidirectional Resonant Converters

This paper introduces innovative design considerations for a bidirectional resonant converter, optimized for Electric Vehicle (EV) charging and vehicle-togrid (V2G) applications. By eliminating the need for complex voltage or current gain functions, the proposed design greatly simplifies the development process, making it more accessible for manufacturers and system integrators. This approach not only reduces engineering time and resource investment but also accelerates time-to-market, giving stakeholders a competitive edge in rapidly expanding EV infrastructure markets. In addition, the streamlined design ensures soft switching at maximum output power, leading to higher efficiency and improved durability, which translates to lower operating costs and a longer service life for EV charging equipment. These benefits provide a clear pathway to more cost-effective, scalable, and sustainable EV charging and V2G solutions, enhancing value for stakeholders by facilitating smoother integration into the grid and supporting energy resilience. To validate the benefits, a 60 kW bidirectional charger with a flexible input range of 700−900VDC and an output range of 400−1250VDC was developed, underscoring the design's adaptability and potential for large-scale implementation.

Asa, Erdem [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000190884812)↗
DOE OSTI2024

Customer-Focused Key Performance Indicators for Electric Vehicle Charging

To systematically improve the public charging experience, EV charging industry stakeholders need to define and measure it precisely. Many stakeholders currently measure aspects of the charging experience, but they typically employ metrics that are either operational in nature, such as charger uptime and mean time between failures, or composite customer satisfaction indices. To improve the customer experience most effectively, the industry needs metrics that define the charging experience from the perspective of the customer, not business operations. Furthermore, industry practitioners need granular metrics to know what specific aspects of the charging experience need improvement. This report defines such customer-focused metrics, called key performance indicators (KPIs).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Customer-Focused Key Performance Indicators for Electric Vehicle Charging

To systematically improve the public charging experience, EV charging industry stakeholders need to define and measure it precisely. Many stakeholders currently measure aspects of the charging experience, but they typically employ metrics that are either operational in nature, such as charger uptime and mean time between failures, or composite customer satisfaction indices. To improve the customer experience most effectively, the industry needs metrics that define the charging experience from the perspective of the customer, not business operations. Furthermore, industry practitioners need granular metrics to know what specific aspects of the charging experience need improvement. This report defines such customer-focused metrics, called key performance indicators (KPIs).

33 - ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2025

ChargeX KPIs Transition to SAE

To systematically improve the public charging experience, EV charging industry stakeholders need to define and measure it precisely. Many stakeholders currently measure aspects of the charging experience, but they typically employ metrics that are either operational in nature, such as charger uptime and mean time between failures, or composite customer satisfaction indices. To improve the customer experience most effectively, the industry needs metrics that define the charging experience from the perspective of the customer, not business operations. Furthermore, industry practitioners need granular metrics to know what specific aspects of the charging experience need improvement. This presentation gives an overview of the key performance indicators (KPIs) defined by the ChargeX Consortium.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Plug-in electric vehicles in China and the USA: a technology and market comparison

As the top two plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) markets in the world, China and the United States of America (USA) have developed different market structures that are influenced by government policies, test procedures, customer acceptance, and vehicle performance. There are differences in PEV test procedures and vehicle class definitions as well. This paper quantifies such differences and compares PEV characteristics and markets in the two countries using actual data collected over several years. First, although China surpasses the USA in annual PEV production because of generous PEV policies and higher charging infrastructure availability, the USA has a higher PEV adoption rate per capita (2.3 versus 0.81 per 1000 people at the end of 2017). Second, the most popular vehicle classes are A00 battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in China but long-range mid-size BEVs in the USA. Moreover, China's electric and plug-in hybrid sport utility vehicle market is growing quickly. Third, the electricity consumption rated under Chinese test procedures is 20%-40% lower than that rated under US procedures. The sales-weighted electricity consumption of an average BEV in China is 23% lower than that in the USA because of larger proportions of small and micro BEVs in China. Fourth, PEV battery cost in the two countries is currently close to $210-$220 kWh. Finally, China has higher numbers of charging infrastructure, and the ratio of PEVs to public chargers is 9.0 in China versus 17.9 in the USA at the end of 2018.

China EV market↗
DOE OSTI2021

EMOS (Energy Management Optimization System) [SWR-21-46]

EMOS software performs a real-time hierarchal optimal control for energy systems like multi-port electric vehicles charging site with distributed energy resources (DERs) and energy storage systems (ESSs). It gathers information in real-time from electric vehicles, power grid, and DERs, solves a multi-objective energy management optimization problem, and output setpoint for chargers, ESS converters, DERs converters, and grid converters. The software incorporates a novel integration of two control tasks: a) An Energy Management Optimization (EMO), which is the brain of EMOS controller that gathers information in real-time from EVs [e.g., battery size, state-of-charge (SOC), desired SOC, and charge acceptance curve], grid (e.g., electricity price, allowed feeder capacity, ramp rate limit, and reactive power), and DERs (e.g., prediction for solar generation for PV systems). It solves a control optimization problem in real-time to find optimal setpoint for ESSs power dispatch, EVs charging rate, and grid inverters. The objectives are to (1) minimize the charging cost considering grid energy, demand charges, and battery energy, (2) minimize charging time to meet fast charging criterion, (3) keep high energy level on ESSs at the end of an operating period, while satisfying constraints related to grid, EVs, and power converters. b) Real-Time Energy Management System (RT-EMS) is a rule-based algorithm that has faster response than EMO. It receives optimal setpoint from EMO and actual measurements from the system and modify the setpoint to compensate for any fast disturbance in the system, until a new optimum solution is received. Fast disturbances may include vehicle connect/disconnect, unpredicted variation in DERs profiles, variation in grid voltage, errors in PV generation prediction, and others. In addition, RT-EMS regulates voltage at point of common coupling (PCC) by managing reactive power of grid converters.

Mohamed, Ahmed↗
DOE OSTI2026

National Dataset of EV Charging Stations With Estimates of Load and Vehicle Throughput

Current data from the AFDC provide locations and many details about EV charging stations, but not estimates of their peak loads or the number of vehicles they can accommodate. This dataset will augment the AFDC charging station locations with estimates of transmission load and vehicle throughput based on engineering specifications of the chargers, charging patterns based on vehicle types, battery capacities, and user behavior.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗