Battery Cell Balancing for Improved

Performance in EVs - Part II: Active

Balancing Technologies
Por Lee H. Goldberg
Colaboracin de Hearst Electronic Products
12/07/2011

Techniques that equalize the charge/discharge characteristics of a batterys individual cells are
essential for extending the range and service life of electric vehicles and many portable
electronic products. In fact, the passive cell balancing technologies discussed in Part I of this
series are already part of the protection and management systems in most of the 5 kWh-20 kWh
batteries used by todays hybrid-electric and plug-in-hybrids (PHEVs). These smart passive
balancing systems use impedance tracking, coulomb counting, and other state-of-charge
monitoring techniques (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Battery management plays a critical role in modern EV propulsion systems. (Courtesy
of Maxim Integrated Circuits).

Since even these advanced passive balancing systems allow cells with higher capacity to fully
charge by repeatedly bleeding off the energy in weaker cells, they can only unlock a portion of a
batterys stranded capacity. As a result, there is a lively debate about whether the next
generation of pure EVs can tolerate the lost range and lost charge/discharge cycles if their 25-
100 kWh batteries are passively balanced.

At least in theory, the better alternative is an active cell balancing system which re-distributes the
charge from stronger cells to prop up the weaker cells within a battery stack. But, while
electronics manufacturers are promoting the virtues of their early active cell balancing
technologies, many battery and electric vehicle manufacturers have concerns about whether
active systems added cost and complexity are worth the extended range and operational lifetime
they provide.

In this article, we will take a closer look at active cell balancing techniques and where they may
play a role in the next generation of electric vehicles and other high-capacity storage applications.

Why active cell balancing?

As discussed in Part I, passive (top) balancing prevents cells with lower capacities from
limiting the charge that cells with larger capacities can accept. This is accomplished (Figure 2)
using a bleed resistor to unload over-charged cells so their output voltage falls below the
chargers voltage regulation point, so the remainder of the stack can continue charging. To guard
against damage, individual cell conditions must be sampled frequently, with laptop batteries
typically monitored at 4-10 samples per second (sps) and EV/HEV batteries from 20-100 sps.

Figure 2: Passive cell balancing can be implemented using general-purpose components (Figure
2a) or an application-specific IC (2b). (Courtesy of Infineon and Analog Devices).

While passive top balancing eliminates the risk of catastrophic cell failure and provides some
improvement in run time and service life, it effectively reduces a battery stacks overall current
capacity to that of the weakest cell. Since passive balancing is normally done only when the
battery is charging, it cannot fix the imbalances that develop during operation (due to internal
impedance and self-discharge) which further diminish capacity.

The alternative is active balancing techniques which transfer a stronger cells excess charge to
one or more cells which need it. Most active systems use switching MOSFETs similar to those
used in passive mechanisms except that they substitute inductors for the bleed resistors which
serve as the secondary side of a transformer whose primary sits across the entire battery stack
(Figure 3).

Figure 3: Inductively-coupled active cell balancing using an MCU to monitor cell voltage and
control the inductively-coupled charge pumps. A filter circuit on the MCUs A/D input allows
measurement of cell voltages from the primary side of the charge pumps transformer. (Courtesy
of Infineon).

Active top balancing (Figure 4) is accomplished by momentarily connecting the cell with the
higher voltage to its secondary winding of the balancing circuit, creating an induced voltage on
the primary winding. The donor cells switch is then opened and the switch on an acceptor
cell is closed, allowing the primarys energy to be driven back into its secondary winding. This
technique allows energy to be transferred between cells during charge, standby, or discharge
with efficiencies in the neighborhood of 85 percent.

Figure 4: Top balancing using an active magnetic switching circuit (4a) is performed by
energizing one of the transformers secondary windings to induce currents in its primary
winding (4b). (Courtesy of Infineon).

Active inductive balancing can also used to perform bottom balancing which allows stronger
cells to share their charge with weaker cells. Bottom balancing can be done at any time but is
usually done during the discharge cycle as cells with less capacity approach their maximum
discharge limits. In this case, the primary winding is energized with a pulse of the battery stack
voltage with the secondary switches on all of the cells open. Once the primary is energized, the
connection to the secondary winding for the cell to be charged is closed, allowing the stored
energy to be transferred (Figure 5). Bottom balancing unlocks energy that would have otherwise
been stranded inside a battery.

Figure 5: Bottom balancing using an active magnetic switching circuit (5a) is performed by
energizing the transformers primary side to induce currents in one of the its secondary windings.
(5b). (Courtesy of Infineon).

Most active balancing designs employ variations of the technique shown above, but Texas
Instruments has developed an alternative architecture they refer to as PowerPump. Instead of the
classical one-to-many architecture described earlier, PowerPump shuttles charges between
adjacent cells using a simple charge-coupled switch (Figure 6). Operating at roughly 200 kHz,
the circuit can switch Q1 to push current from the top cell to the bottom cell through the body
diode of Q2. Likewise, charge can be shuttled from the lower to the upper cell by applying the
switching waveform to Q2. Since the losses involved are relatively low, its practical for a
PowerPump circuit to boost a non-adjacent cell by passing the excess charge across several other
cells to where its needed in a bucket brigade fashion.

Figure 6: Texas Instruments PowerPump cell balancing technology uses a simple charge
shuttling scheme to transfer energy between adjacent cells.

The TI bq78PL114 master gateway battery controller, for example, is part of a complete Li-Ion
control, monitoring, and safety solution designed for large series cell strings. Texas instruments
also has recently introduced an automotive-grade active balancing solution based on PowerPump
technology which will be discussed in the following section.

Implementation strategies

All battery balancing techniques must work within the framework of the battery packs other
battery management and protection functions. In most automotive designs, the software for cell
balancing algorithms and control functions will be run on an automotive-qualified host MCU,
typically located within the battery management system (BMS) itself (Figure 7). The BMS MCU
can often use the same electronics used to determine cell voltage, charge/discharge current, and
state of charge (SOC) for the batterys fuel gauge and charge management systems to perform
similar measurements required for its cell balancing operations. As discussed in Part I of this
series, a battery cells SOC can be determined using precise voltage measurements or, if greater
accuracy is desired, combined with coulomb counting, or some other technique which measures
the total current flowing in and out of the cell. In either scenario, the cell voltage measurement
requires an A/D converter with 12 to 14-bits of resolution.

Figure 7: A block diagram of a typical battery management system. (Courtesy of Texas
Instruments).

At present, most manufacturers do not offer complete integrated solutions for active cell
balancing, but they do offer off-the shelf products that handle necessary A/D, multiplexing, level
shifting, and communication functions that can reduce their parts count, module size, and BOM
cost.

For example, Maxims offers a 12-Channel, high-voltage battery monitor developed specifically
for Lithium-based automotive storage systems (Fig.8a) combining a 12-bit SAR-type A/D, a
high-voltage switch bank input which is controlled by a simple state machine. It is equipped with
a high-speed I2C bus for SMBus-laddered serial communication. Rather than rely on the host
processor for fault protection, a companion chip, the MAX11080, is used to provide an
instantaneous over-voltage or under-voltage fault indication when any of the cells cross the user-
selectable threshold for longer than the set program-delay interval (Figure 8b). At present,
Maxims product line only offers passive balancing solutions but these devices are equally useful
as the measurement and protection elements of an active solution.



Figure 8: An integrated battery cell monitoring and protection solution, capable of supporting
up to 12 Li-Ion cells.

An active balancing circuit also can be implemented using an addressable driver that allows the
host MCU to control a series of power MOSFETS that serve as the switches on the balancing
transformers primary and secondary legs. MOSFET power devices with fast switching
characteristics and low Rdson like Infineons OptiMOS series, Microsemis CoolMOS devices and
Fairchilds PowerTrench integrated FET+Schottky products have the speed, current capacity,
and low switching losses necessary for efficient charge transfer between cells.

If active cell balancing technology finds acceptance in mainstream applications, it is likely that
most IC manufacturers involved with battery management will offer more highly-integrated
products that support an active balancing scheme. But, for the moment, the only company to
offer an automotive-grade battery management IC with active cell balancing capabilities is Texas
Instruments. The bq76PL536-Q1 (Figure 9), based on TIs PowerPump charge-shuttling
technology, provides battery monitoring, electrical/thermal protection and active balancing for
up to six cells. Its high-speed (SPI) bus allows the devices to be stacked vertically, providing
reliable communications across a high-voltage battery cell stack of up to 192 cells without
additional isolation.

Figure 9: A block diagram of Texas Instruments bq76PL536-Q1, an automotive-grade battery
monitor/protection device with integrated active cell balancing capabilities. (Courtesy of Texas
Instruments).

The bq76PL536-Q1 has a second I2C bus that is used to communicate with a host MCU which
programs and controls its on-chip monitoring and balancing functions. Fault (secondary)
protection for over-voltage, under-voltage, and over-temperature conditions are detected using
comparators, so they are independent of the ADC system and host controller to insure rapid,
deterministic response. All protection thresholds and detection delay times can be programmed
via the I2C host interface and stored in an internal EPROM.

Conclusions

Highly-integrated solutions such as TIs bq76PL536-Q1 will help narrow the cost differential
between active and passive cell balancing systems. But with the low cost of some passive
solutions, it is unclear whether the added run time and battery life afforded by active technology
will ever outweigh the added cost and complexity it brings to an EVs BMS. At least part of the
answer to this question lies how much improvement manufacturers can deliver in the quality and
uniformity of their automotive batteries. If the capacity and impedance variations of todays cells
(typically 2 percent-3 percent) can be further narrowed through advances in manufacturing
processes, battery chemistry, and nano-materials, balancing all but the largest EV batteries could
be performed with minimal losses using simple, low-cost passive systems. A recent study
conducted by Maxim Semiconductor calculated the value of the 10 percent-12 percent extra
charge/discharge cycles that active balancing can add to an automotive battery pack. Assuming
the battery pack cost $5000, active balancing unlocks around $500 worth of added value,
although it is spread out over the vehicles 8.5 year service life. If this study is correct,
manufacturers may have a difficult time justifying the $70/yr in savings unless the added cost of
active balancing is relatively low and it also gives the vehicle a tangible range boost (5 percent-
10 percent).

On the other hand, proponents of active balancing technologies say that once highly-integrated
solutions arrive, they will cost less to implement than todays passive systems. These cost
savings would mostly be due to eliminating the costly high-power resistors, thermal management
components, and the high-current wiring required in the 100+ kWh battery packs that will power
the next generation of EVs.

While its still too early to determine whether active cell balancing will become the de facto
standard for EV/HEV battery management systems, its a sure bet that it will be the technology
of choice in high-performance vehicles and other applications where run time, energy efficiency
and service life are essential.