Next Article in Journal
A Review of Predictive Techniques Used to Support Decision Making for Maintenance Operations of Wind Turbines
Previous Article in Journal
Multiple Input-Single Output DC-DC Converters Assessment for Low Power Renewable Sources Integration
Previous Article in Special Issue
High-Sensitivity Detection Method for Metal Foreign Objects Based on Frequency Optimization in Wireless Electric Vehicles Charging
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 16
Issue 4
10.3390/en16041653
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Review on Interoperability of Wireless Charging Systems for Electric Vehicles

by
Kai Song
1,
Yu Lan
1,
Xian Zhang
2,
Jinhai Jiang
1,*,
Chuanyu Sun
1,
Guang Yang
3,
Fengshuo Yang
1 and
Hao Lan
4
1
School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China
2
School of Electrical Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin 300131, China
3
BYD Auto Industry Company Limited, Shenzhen 518000, China
4
China Automotive Technology and Research Center Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300300, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2023, 16(4), 1653; https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041653
Submission received: 15 January 2023 / Revised: 3 February 2023 / Accepted: 3 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wireless Charging Technology for Electric Vehicles)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Wireless charging technology has become an important development trend in future electric vehicle (EV) power supply technology due to its safety, flexibility, and convenience. With its industrialized development, interoperability has become an essential technical link. The interoperability of wireless charging systems refers to the ability of output performance to meet specified indicators when different transmitter and receiver devices are matched. This study reviews the research status of the interoperability of EV wireless charging technology. First, the definition and composition of the interoperability of wireless charging systems are briefly given. Then, the article provides a review of standards about interoperability so far. The interoperability of various magnetic couplers and compensation topologies is also analyzed and summarized. After that, the paper reviews the existing interoperability evaluation methods. Finally, this work highlights the existing problems and challenges in current research of interoperability. We hope that this work will contribute to the further development of EV wireless charging technology.

1. Introduction

The destruction of the natural environment and damage to human health caused by greenhouse gases, toxic smoke, and dust due to the use of fossil energy is increasingly significant. There is an urgent need to replace traditional fuel vehicles with electric vehicles charged using renewable energy sources [1,2,3]. However, the speed of development of the charging infrastructure is unable to keep pace with the increasing demand for EVs. Wireless power transmission (WPT) has therefore gradually become an important development trend due to its greater flexibility, convenience, safety, and intelligence compared with traditional contact charging [4,5,6,7,8,9]. In low-power fields, wireless charging technology is already widely used in mobile phones [10,11], wearable equipment [12,13], implantable medical devices [14,15], and smart home products [16,17]. However, wireless charging systems can also play an irreplaceable role in high-power scenarios such as electric vehicles [18,19,20,21,22,23], unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) [24,25,26,27], unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) [28,29,30,31], electric ships [32], and aerospace devices [33]. Especially in the field of EVs, wireless charging technology will be an important part of intelligent transportation due to its unmanned and automatic charging [34,35,36].
Wireless charging has a more complex system structure than contact charging due to its need for more electric energy converters. A wireless charging system usually includes a power factor correction (PFC), inverter, primary topology, transmitting coil, receiving coil, secondary topology, rectifier, and load [37,38], as shown in Figure 1. In providing these components, different suppliers may adopt different technical routes [39,40]. Even with the same technological path, fabrication tolerances and component parameters may still lead to different charging characteristics. Therefore, the charging capabilities between transmitters and receivers of different suppliers has becomes a critical research issue [41,42] for several reasons.
First, in order to regulate charging equipment, relevant wireless charging standards have been proposed, which specify charging indicators and introduce the concept of interoperability. The interoperability of wireless charging systems refers to the ability of output performance to meet specified indicators when different transmitter and receiver devices are matched. Failure to meet the specified indicators means that the corresponding transmitter and receiver cannot interoperate. Poor interoperability will lead to low charging efficiency during product matching, resulting in a significant waste of power or even failure to charge. Especially in public places, the lack of interoperability will make many vehicles unable to use the charging device, resulting in severe hindrances in developing the EV wireless charging industry. Therefore, interoperability between products has become a critical factor for the industry [43], which needs to be ensured through excellent standards.
Second, the interoperability problems center on the differences between the technical routes of the primary and secondary sides. Therefore, analyzing the interoperability between different technical routes and providing improvement schemes is necessary. Significant differences in technical routes are embodied in communication, magnetic couplers, and compensation networks, as shown in Figure 2. Communication interoperability is determined by communication mode and protocol [44,45,46]. Relevant research and technical solutions have been approaching maturity. Therefore, the interoperability of different magnetic couplers and compensation networks is the focus of this paper.
Third, the interoperability evaluation method is also essential in interoperability research. The interoperability evaluation method tests and judges the interoperability between two devices. It will help further improve the tested equipment. An excellent interoperability evaluation method can better promote the interconnection between different products.
Considering the above three aspects, this paper reviews the research status of the interoperability of EV wireless charging technology in terms of standards, interoperability analysis, and interoperability evaluation. The rest of the sections are organized as follows. A review of standards regarding interoperability is presented in Section 2. Section 3 analyzes and summarizes the interoperability of various magnetic couplers and compensation topologies. A review of the existing interoperability evaluation methods is summarized in Section 4. Section 5 highlights the prospects and challenges for wireless charging system interoperability.

2. Process of Interoperability Standardization

Standards are an important way to ensure interoperability. When formulating standard schemes and requirements, interoperability must be considered. It is necessary to ensure that the recommended schemes are interoperable with mainstream schemes and to restrict some products from entering the industry to improve the overall level.
The process of interoperability standardization is shown in Figure 3. In 2013, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), one of the standardization organizations, first addressed the communication problems of EV wireless chargers in ISO 15118 [47]. Then, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) started to set standards for EV wireless charging. In 2016, the first version of recommended standards for EV wireless charging technology by SAE was published, numbered SAE J2954. Thus far, SAE J2954 has been revised four times, the most recent in 2020. SAE J2954 provides industry specifications for wireless charging of light-duty and plug-in electric vehicles, including minimum performance, safety, electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic compatibility, interoperability, and testing. It divides the system power level into WPT1~WPT3 (Maximum input 3.7, 7.7 and 11.1 kVA) and the transmission distance into Z1~Z3 (VA Coil Ground Clearance Range 100–150, 140-210 and 170–250 mm) [48]. SAE J2954 specifically stipulates the interoperability of EV wireless charging in Chapter 8 for the first time. Meanwhile, the interoperability requirements of different power and Z classes are set, as demonstrated in Table 1 and Table 2.
Another major organization setting standards for wireless charging is the International Electro-technical Commission (IEC). In 2016, IEC 61980 was issued and it consists of three parts: general requirements in 61980-1, special requirements for system activities and communication in 61980-2, and special requirements for the off-board side in 61980-3 [49]. IEC 61980-3 also specifies interoperability requirements for off-board power transmission in Chapter 8, which is similar to SAE J2954. Requirements for on-board wireless charging equipment are specified by ISO 19363 issued in 2017 [50]. This specifies the safety and interoperability requirements of electric vehicle wireless charging.
In 2020, China began issuing national standards on EV wireless charging systems, numbered GB/T 38775. GB/T 38775.6 and GB/T 38775.7 specify ground and on-board equipment interoperability requirements [51,52]. Thus far, Parts I–VII has been released, including general requirements, communication protocols, electromagnetic compatibility, interoperability, etc. China’s national standards to date are generally consistent with international standards on general requirements. However, in terms of the recommended technical solutions, the Chinese national standard differs from the international standard in the structure and parameters of the coil and topology. For example, China’s national standard recommends a topology of double-sided LCC while the international standard SAE J2954 recommends a tunable matching network, which will be described in Section 3.
In 2022, the China Power Supply Society issued a standard for high-power wireless charging (≥WPT4) drafted by Harbin Institute of Technology, numbered T/CPSS 1001-2022 [53]. It specifies communication requirements, safety requirements, auxiliary function requirements, etc.

3. Interoperability Analysis and Improvement

3.1. Interoperability of Different Coils

Magnetic couplers play the most critical role in wireless chargers. The magnetic coupler is mainly composed of a coil, magnetic core, and shielding plate, as shown in Figure 4. The coil structure is a key factor in determining interoperability.
There are three basic coil types: circular, rectangular, and Double D (DD). Their interoperability is of great significance. Coil interoperability is usually based on two aspects: the magnetic flux distribution on the physical grade and the coupling coefficient or mutual inductance on the numerical grade. For the interoperability of circular and rectangular coils, the research of [54] shows that when circular and rectangular coils with the same outer diameter are used as the transmitting coil, the mutual inductance M varies with the offset in an equal trend. As the transmitter, the rectangular coil can provide a higher coupling coefficient and transmission efficiency, proving the excellent interoperability between the circular and rectangular coils. Other authors [55] studied the coupling characteristics of square and circular coils. The mutual-inductance characteristics of the square transmitting coil and circular receiving coil (interoperability of square and circular) at various vertical distances are described by using simulations. The results show that the square–circular coupler provides better mutual inductance and efficiency than the circular–circular coupler.
Researchers at the University of Michigan, USA, researched the interoperability of circular and DD coupling coils. They pointed out that the coupling zero point appeared in the y direction (the lateral direction of vehicles’ driving direction), and the interoperability increased rapidly with the increase of the y-direction offset [56]. It was also found that there was a significant difference in the coupling coefficient between the circular and the DD type when they are used as the transmitter and receiver. The coupling coefficient between the DD transmitter and circular receiver decreased by about 50% when the maximum offset was in the y direction. In contrast, that between the circular transmitter and DD receiver decreased by less than 25% at the same offset, indicating better interoperability of the latter combination.
The interoperability of rectangular and DD coils is affected by the relative position of coils, as shown in Figure 5. The interoperability test conducted by the University of Stuttgart for the rectangular and DD (specified in SAE J2954) shows a better performance of the rectangular coil as a transmitter than the DD type. The decline rate of the coupling coefficient decreases by more than 50% with misalignment [57]. With the aid of finite element analysis, the magnetic field emission during the operation of rectangular and DD coils was studied by Oak Ridge National Laboratory [58]. The results suggested that the DD transmitter needed magnetic shielding, while the rectangular transmitter needed aluminum shielding.
However, the previous research was based on finite element simulation or prototype testing. It is difficult to summarize the general interoperability rules under arbitrary parameters. To deal with this problem, Harbin Institute of Technology proposed a method based on fitting magnetic flux distribution, which converts the coupling coefficient into a normalized function related to size. Then the changed rules of interoperability under different parameters can be obtained [60].
Some special coil structures are proposed to improve the basic coil shortage, which usually has an excellent performance in interoperability with the traditional coil. The magnetic coupling of DD and circular coil combinations without an offset is very low, resulting in poor interoperation performance. Hence, Auckland University proposed a DD-Quadrate pad (DDQP) [61]. They analyzed the system output when the DDQP was used as the receiver to interoperate with the circular and DD. Due to the addition of orthogonal coils in DDQP, the coupling zero point in the y direction moved to 70% of the coil length, significantly improving the interoperable range. The situation of the DDQP as the transmitter was studied in [62]. The charging range was more than five times larger than that of the basic coil. However, the two orthogonal coils in the DDQP require two additional sets of independent rectification and filtering circuits, which increases the complexity of the receiver.
Furthermore, the University Malaya connected the DD and circular coils in series to form an enhanced DD type [63]. Aligarh Muslim University proposed a “4D” coil with a four-coil structure [64]. Both eliminated coupling zeros, and the interoperability range was further improved. However, the above structure has dramatically changed the basic coil, and adding a Q coil will bring more power losses. Therefore, compared with the DDQP, the bipolar pad (BPP), which reduces the wire consumption by about 25%, has become a frequently used scheme to improve the interoperability of couplers. Southwest Jiaotong University has studied the interoperability characteristics of the BPP as a transmitter and receiver [65]. As the receiving end, the BPP has the same coupling zero point and charging range as the DDQP. As the transmitter, the BPP can control the coil current to adapt to the magnetic flux demand of different receiving coils, so it has the premise of interoperability with different receiving coils. Moreover, [66] proposed a three-coil structure named the Tripolar Pad (TPP). Furthermore, [67] studied the interoperability of the TPP with the circular pad (CP) and the BPP. The results show that the coupling between the TPP–CP and TPP–BPP couplers increases by driving each independent coil with currents at different amplitudes and phases. The structure was further improved in [68]. The effective charging of vehicles with varying chassis heights on a charging pile can be achieved. Furthermore, [69,70] proposed a three-phase coil structure and verified its magnetic interoperability with the SAE J2954 WPT3-recommended scheme. The interoperability characteristics of basic and special coil structures are shown in Table 3.
The interoperable charging range of different coils is related to coil size, position, transmitter type, and other factors. It is difficult to ensure interoperability only through designing parameters. Although most special coils have expanded the charging range and improved interoperability, they have added more complex structures and lack control strategies to ensure stable power and efficiency. Therefore, there is still a significant gap in research on improving the interoperability of different coils.

3.2. Interoperability of Different Topologies

The compensation network plays the role of impedance matching and reactive power compensation. Even if the coils have good interoperability, an unreasonable compensation network will still lead to an impedance mismatch. As a result, the load cannot fully absorb the energy, leading to a decrease in active power received by the load [71]. Therefore, the compensation network must be considered when assessing interoperability.
To date, the compensation networks widely used in EV wireless charging systems mainly include series (S), parallel (P), and LCC. The research on interoperability between them is relatively complete. Scholars from the Ontario University of Technology in Canada compared the combination of basic compensation topologies (S and P) in terms of power, efficiency, stability, etc. [72]. In the four varieties under voltage source inputs, if S is used at the transmitter, the output power of the two topologies is the same under different loads. In contrast, if P is used at the transmitter, the output power of both topologies at the receiver will decrease significantly. Moreover, only the S–S topology has frequency stability (the load change does not affect the resonant frequency), and the other three combinations will deviate from the resonant state due to the load change. Therefore, S and P do not have good interoperability.
The double-sided LCC (DSLCC) compensation topology proposed by the University of Michigan provides a new solution for improving topology interoperability [73], as shown in Figure 6. Researchers from the Hefei University of Technology compared and analyzed the topology characteristics of S–S and DSLCC. The results show that DSLCC topology is superior to S–S topology in coping with parameter drift, device stress, efficiency stability, etc. [74]. The team further studied the interoperability between LCC and S, P [75]. The LCC–S, LCC–P, and S–LCC combinations could achieve the same power output under equal coil parameters. P–LCC could also output the same power under specific coupling coefficients, as shown in Table 4. The Chinese Academy of Sciences research also proves from reflected impedance that when the equivalent load of S compensation is close to the optimal load of LCC compensation, the two functions in the system can be considered equivalent [76]. In conclusion, DSLCC is easier to interoperate with other topologies than S and P. It has been included in China’s national standards.
Notably, SAE J2954 recommended a tunable matching network (TMN), as shown in in Figure 7. In this topology, variable inductors and capacitors are used to achieve power regulation and resonance maintenance [48]. TMN topology is more flexible than LCC topology. When it interoperates with LCC, TMN as the receiving side shows better interoperability.

4. Interoperability Evaluation Method

4.1. Evaluation Based on Power Efficiency

When conducting an interoperability test, the test equipment must be at the specified charging position to transmit the rated power with the rated efficiency. In SAE J2954, efficiency is defined as the energy ratio from the grid to the battery, which cannot be less than 85% at the rated working point and 80% at the maximum offset point. Therefore, the evaluation method based on power and efficiency is the most common and intuitive to determine interoperability, which has been widely used in industries. Figure 8 shows the interoperability test of Qualcomm’s different products [77]. The researchers conducted tests on circular, solenoid, and DD coils. They used the multi-dimensional movable bench shown in Figure 8a to simulate different charging positions. An 85 kHz fixed frequency inverter was used to supply power to the transmission pad and the electronic load was used to simulate the battery on the secondary side. Whether the interoperability requirements are met can then be judged by the efficiency test results of different products, as shown in Figure 8b. The test results are consistent with the theoretical analysis and simulation results.
Figure 9 shows the interoperability testing of products by SEW, IPT Technology, and other German enterprises [78]. Different enterprises’ vehicle assembly (VA) and ground assembly (GA) products were cross-tested, as shown in Figure 9a. The test involved two GA products, one reference device and four VA products, and was completed at a working frequency of 140 kHz. The four VA products were first tested for interoperability with the reference device, and then tested with two GA products. Vehicle A and Vehicle B were equipped with DD coils, while Vehicle C and Vehicle D were equipped with smaller solenoid coils. The efficiency test results shown in Figure 9b intuitively show differences in product interoperability. There is no obvious difference in the efficiency test results of the four vehicles, and they all meet the requirements specified in the standard. Furthermore, Witricity and Qualcomm cooperated with institutions such as the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) to supplement the power factor, electromagnetic exposure level, and human safety tests based on this method, enriching the connotation of interoperability testing [79,80]. However, the port’s external energy and internal impedance characteristics are very complex in EV wireless charging systems. The power-efficiency evaluation method can only characterize whether the external characteristics meet the requirements but cannot reflect the impact of the internal parameters, nor can it provide a theoretical basis for product optimization design.

4.2. Evaluation Based on Coil Parameters

Considering that the power-efficiency method requires the tested system to work at full power output, Momentum Dynamics Corp., USA, explored the evaluation method based on the coil’s parameters. The coupling coefficient k and quality factor Q of the magnetic couplers were used to evaluate the behavior of EV wireless charging systems [81]. After simplifying the magnetic coupler with the loose coupling transformer model, power and efficiency can be expressed by k and Q, as shown in Figure 10. The evaluation results can be obtained only through weak-current measurement. Compared with the power-efficiency method, the k–Q method does not require full power output and reduces requirements for auxiliary equipment. However, some defects of this method cause it to be rarely used:
I. The k–Q method can only obtain the highest efficiency rather than real-time efficiency, which cannot reflect the impact of other parameters (compensation topology, equivalent load, etc.) on efficiency.
II. The measurement of k and Q is not straightforward. Under the effect of the magnetic core, Q is affected by the excitation current, resulting in a significant error under weak current measurement [82]. Therefore, it is not easy to comprehensively evaluate interoperability through k and Q.

4.3. Evaluation Based on Port Impedance

Considering the complex testing work and the failure to reflect the effect of magnetic parameters on interoperability, the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and Mercedes Benz first proposed an evaluation method based on port impedance mapping [83]. According to impedance mapping theory, the whole circuit on the secondary side is equivalent to an impedance connected in series on the transmitting coil, called the reflected impedance. This can be expressed as:
Z r = ω M 2 j ω L VA + r VA + Z e
where ϖ is the working angle frequency, M is the mutual inductance of the magnetic couplers, LVA and rVA are self-inductance and internal resistance of the secondary coil, and Ze is the equivalent load considering the compensation network and power converter in the secondary side.
On this foundation, they defined VA port impedance ZVA and GA port impedance ZGA as shown in (2) and Figure 11a:
Z G A = j ω L G A + r G A + ω M 2 j ω L V A + Z V A
where LGA and rGA are self-inductance and internal resistance of the primary coil. ZGA and ZVA contain enough factors used to evaluate the transmission power of magnetic couplers. Therefore, they can be used to evaluate the interoperability of wireless charging systems. The evaluation method based on port impedance can then be established by specifying the standard value regions, as shown in Figure 11b.
Figure 12 shows the behavior of port impedance in SAE J2954. The port impedance of the tested product is located in the corresponding region, indicating that the rated power can be output during interoperability. Since port impedance includes self-inductance, mutual inductance, load, and other parameters, the location of impedance value in the complex plane can guide the design of parameters to improve interoperability. However, cross-testing is unavoidable, and the workload of impedance testing is still huge. On this basis, BMW and the Technical University of Munich (TUM) first introduced the concept of “benchmark equipment” [84], which was included in the recommended test scheme by SAE J2954. This method takes the benchmark equipment as the rule and converts the cross-test of VA and GA equipment in the traditional method into the test between VA (GA) and benchmark GA (VA) equipment. On the one hand, this dramatically reduces the test workload caused by too many products under test. On the other hand, the introduced benchmark equipment is conducive to standardization and specification.
Further, TUM extended the impedance method to obtain a method for designing systems [85]. Operational boundaries were mapped to each interface to establish the interoperable impedance region, helping component design and evaluation. Harbin Institute of Technology defined the relevant characteristic factors based on the original port impedance mapping and divided the impedance standard value region (shown in Figure 13), reducing the misjudgment rate of the original method at the impedance boundary [86]. Tsinghua University and Tiangong University also proposed corresponding improvement measures for the port impedance evaluation method [87,88,89,90], effectively expanding the application scope of the port impedance evaluation method, as shown in Figure 14 and Figure 15.
However, the impedance angle is difficult to measure accurately at high frequencies. To solve this problem, [91] proposed an impedance measurement method based on power decomposition, as shown in Figure 16. The input power was decomposed to calculate the phase difference, significantly improving the measurement accuracy. Moreover, Ref. [92] also proposed a novel method to measure high-power VA impedance. By selecting several different test ports and parameters to reconstruct the port impedance expression, a measurement method with lower uncertainty was realized.
Recently, Ref. [93] used the port impedance method to evaluate the interoperability of a 50 kW magnetic coupler. They further considered the influence of electromagnetic compatibility and misalignment. Over time, the port impedance method has gradually become the mainstream interoperability evaluation method.

5. Existing Problems and Expectations

After the review of current research, existing research on interoperability could be further promoted in the following aspects:
I. The core criterion of the port impedance interoperability evaluation is whether the measured impedance value is within the reference region. Therefore, the boundary of the impedance reference region is of vital importance. However, the calculated impedance region boundary function is a little different from the actual equipment, due to the vehicle and ground environment, installation height, fluctuation of electrical parameters, and so on. However, the complex influence of the above parameters on the reference region makes it difficult to express by mathematical formulas or obtain by exhaustive methods, resulting in lower accuracy of the evaluation results. Therefore, quantifying the influence of environmental parameters on the boundary and further determining the tolerance region of impedance is necessary.
II. Interoperability between devices of different power frequencies needs to be considered. The study by [94] uses finite element analysis and network circuit analysis to compare two different coil systems (WPT1 and WPT2) regarding interoperability aspects. It is shown that proper tuning of the primary side helps to increase interoperability. However, the operating frequencies of the two systems studied are identical. Due to the management requirements of the radio frequency band, some high-power systems may be required to work in different frequency bands from low-power systems. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has proposed two high-power candidate frequency bands (22 kHz (19–25 kHz) and 60 kHz (55–57 kHz and 63–65 kHz)) and a medium-power candidate frequency band (80 kHz (79–90 kHz)) for EV wireless charging devices. In addition, the current regulations of China’s State Radio Office also require that wireless charging equipment with rated power over 22 kW should work at 20 kHz while other equipment works at 85 kHz. However, the impedance between devices with different frequencies is difficult to match. It will lead to much reactive power in the charging process, making it difficult to meet the interoperability requirements. Therefore, the interoperability of wireless charging systems with different frequencies needs further research.
III. Batteries of electric vehicles are the largest, lowest-cost, and safest energy storage systems [95,96]. With the energy storage demand, the vehicle-to-grid (V2G) charging function of the charging system has become increasingly important [97,98,99,100,101,102]. On this foundation, vehicle-to-grid interoperability needs further analysis. In addition, the integration between the conductive charger and the wireless charger also needs to be considered. This could help to improve the compatibility of electric vehicle chargers and reduce the system costs. For example, [103] proposed a novel DC–DC topology, introducing the receiving coil to the on-board conductive charger, as shown in Figure 17. It provides a feasible solution for integration between the conductive and wireless chargers. Meanwhile, this is also an exploration of interoperability between plug-in chargers and wireless charging devices. However, there are still few studies on the integration of plug-in electric vehicle chargers and wireless chargers. The existing research only verifies the feasibility of the technical scheme, but is not mature enough to support industrial application. The integration method of plug-in EV chargers and wireless chargers can be further explored.

6. Conclusions

Electric vehicle wireless charging is an automatic charging technology and has be-come an important development trend. Research on the interoperability of wireless charging is the key to realizing the interconnection of various technical routes. This paper presents the current research on the interoperability of EV wireless charging technology in standards, interoperability analysis, and interoperability evaluation.
I. A review of standards for interoperability is presented. The current interoperability standards are generally complete, but the interoperability requirements for higher power levels still need to be defined.
II. The interoperability of various magnetic couplers and compensation topologies is analyzed and summarized. The interoperability analysis of compensation topologies has been sufficiently in-depth. However, there is still a significant gap in research on improving the interoperability of different coils and V2G interoperation.
III. A review of the existing interoperability evaluation methods is summarized and the port impedance method has gradually become mainstream. However, the method to determine the tolerance area is still unclear. Further research is needed to determine the appropriate tolerance regions to improve accuracy.
We believe that with the efforts of researchers, the research on interoperability will be further improved to promote the industrial development of EV wireless charging technology.

Author Contributions

Summary of existing problems, K.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.L.; review of evaluation based on coil parameters and port impedance, X.Z.; writing—review and editing, J.J.; review of topology interoperability analysis, C.S.; review of coil interoperability analysis, G.Y.; review of interoperability evaluation based on power efficiency, F.Y.; review of relevant standards, H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by [National Natural Science Foundation of China] grant number [52277006, 51977043], [Southern Power Grid Corporation Wireless Power Transmission Joint Laboratory funded by the Opening Foundation Projects], [State Key Laboratory of Smart Grid Protection and Operation Control], Public Open Project of Automobile Standardization of China [CATARC-Z-2022-01330].

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mak, H.Y.; Rong, Y.; Shen, Z.J.M. Infrastructure planning for electric vehicles with battery swapping. Manage. Sci. 2013, 59, 1557–1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Noorollahi, Y.; Golshanfard, A.; Aligholian, A.; Mohammadi-ivatloo, B.; Nielsen, S.; Hajinezhad, A. Sustainable energy system planning for an industrial zone by integrating electric vehicles as energy Storage. J. Energy Storage 2020, 30, 101553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Alkawsi, G.; Baashar, Y.; Abbas, D.U.; Alkahtani, A.A.; Tiong, S.K. Review of renewable energy-based charging infrastructure for electric vehicles. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Detka, K.; Gorecki, K. Wireless power transfer—A review. Energies 2022, 15, 7236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhang, Z.; Pang, H.; Georgiadis, A.; Cecati, C. Wireless power transfer-an overview. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 1044–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mahesh, A.; Chokkalingam, B.; Mihet-Popa, L. Inductive wireless power transfer charging for electric vehicles-a review. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 137667–137713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ahmad, A.; Alam, M.S.; Chabaan, R. A comprehensive review of wireless charging technologies for electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Transport. Electrific. 2018, 4, 38–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lecluyse, C.; Minnaert, B.; Kleemann, M. A review of the current state of technology of capacitive wireless power transfer. Energies 2021, 14, 5862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; He, X.; Luo, B.; Mai, R. Research and application of capacitive power transfer system: A review. Electronics 2022, 11, 1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shi, B.; Wen, F.; Chu, X. A multireceiver wireless power supply system with power equalization in stereoscopic space. Electronics 2021, 10, 713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Park, Y.-J. Next-generation wireless charging systems for mobile devices. Energies 2022, 15, 3119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Park, Y.-J.; Kim, J.-E.; Na, K.-M.; Yang, K.-D.; Cho, K.-H. Optimization and analysis of multilayer planar spiral coils for the application of magnetic resonance wireless power transfer to wearable devices. Energies 2021, 14, 5113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Van, S.D.; Ngo, H.Q.; Cotton, S.L. Wireless powered wearables using distributed massive mimo. IEEE Trans. Commun. 2020, 68, 2156–2172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mahmood, M.F.; Mohammed, S.L.; Gharghan, S.K. Ultrasound sensor-based wireless power transfer for low-power medical devices. J. Low Power Electron. Appl. 2019, 9, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wang, G.; Liu, W.; Sivaprakasam, M.; Kendir, G.A. Design and analysis of an adaptive transcutaneous power telemetry for biomedical implants. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap. 2005, 52, 2109–2117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Liu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Zhu, C.; Chan, C.C. A study on the safety analysis of an inductive power transfer system for kitchen appliances. Energies 2022, 15, 5218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chow, J.P.-W.; Chung, H.S.-H.; Chan, L.L.-H.; Shen, R.; Tang, S.C. Optimal design and experimental assessment of a wireless power transfer system for home-cage monitoring. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 9779–9793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aziz, A.F.A.; Romlie, M.F.; Baharudin, Z. Review of inductively coupled power transfer for electric vehicle charging. IET Power Electron. 2019, 12, 3611–3623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mou, X.; Gladwin, D.T.; Zhao, R.; Sun, H. Survey on magnetic resonant coupling wireless power transfer technology for electric vehicle charging. IET Power Electron. 2019, 12, 3005–3020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Trivino, A.; Gonzalez-Gonzalez, J.M.; Aguado, J.A. Wireless power transfer technologies applied to electric vehicles: A review. Energies 2021, 14, 1547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kashani, S.A.; Soleimani, A.; Khosravi, A.; Mirsalim, M. State-of-the-art research on wireless charging of electric vehicles using solar energy. Energies 2023, 16, 282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mohamed, A.A.S.; Shaier, A.A.; Metwally, H.; Selem, S.I. An overview of dynamic inductive charging for electric vehicles. Energies 2022, 15, 5613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Palani, G.; Sengamalai, U. A Critical Review on Inductive Wireless Power Transfer Charging System in Electric Vehicle; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  24. Chittoor, P.K.; Chokkalingam, B.; Mihet-Popa, L. A review on uav wireless charging: Fundamentals, applications, charging techniques and standards. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 69235–69266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wu, M.; Su, L.; Chen, J.; Duan, X.; Wu, D.; Cheng, Y.; Jiang, Y. Development and prospect of wireless power transfer technology used to power unmanned aerial vehicle. Electronics 2022, 11, 2297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wu, S.; Cai, C.; Liu, X.; Chai, W.; Yang, S. Compact and free-positioning omnidirectional wireless power transfer system for unmanned aerial vehicle charging applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2022, 37, 8790–8794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nguyen, M.T.; Nguyen, C.V.; Truong, L.H.; Le, A.M.; Quyen, T.V.; Masaracchia, A.; Teague, K.A. Electromagnetic field based wpt technologies for uavs: A comprehensive survey. Electronics 2020, 9, 461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Teeneti, C.R.; Truscott, T.T.; Beal, D.N.; Pantic, Z. Review of wireless charging systems for autonomous underwater vehicles. IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 2019, 46, 68–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, D.a.; Cui, S.; Zhang, J.; Bie, Z.; Song, K.; Zhu, C. A Novel Arc-shaped lightweight magnetic coupler for auv wireless power transfer. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2022, 58, 1315–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Niu, S.; Zhao, Q.; Chen, H.; Yu, H.; Niu, S.; Jian, L. Underwater wireless charging system of unmanned surface vehicles with high power, large misalignment tolerance and light weight: Analysis, design and optimization. Energies 2022, 15, 9529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kim, J.; Kim, K.; Kim, H.; Kim, D.; Park, J.; Ahn, S. An efficient modeling for underwater wireless power transfer using z-parameters. IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat. 2019, 61, 2006–2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Guidi, G.; Suul, J.A.; Jenset, F.; Sorfonn, I. Wireless charging for ships: High-power inductive charging for battery electric and plug-in hybrid vessels. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 2017, 5, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Abdolkhani, A.; Hu, A.P.; Nair, N.-K.C. A double stator through-hole type contactless slipring for rotary wireless power transfer applications. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2014, 29, 426–434. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ji, B.; Chen, Z.; Mumtaz, S.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Zhu, J.; Li, C. Swipt enabled intelligent transportation systems with advanced sensing fusion. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 15643–15650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhou, Z.; Liu, Z.; Su, H.; Zhang, L. Intelligent path planning strategy for electric vehicles combined with urban electrified transportation network and power grid. IEEE Syst. J. 2022, 16, 2437–2447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, S.; Yu, J.J.Q. Electric vehicle dynamic wireless charging system: Optimal placement and vehicle-to-grid scheduling. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 6047–6057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Onar, O.C.; Chinthavali, M.; Campbell, S.L.; Seiber, L.E.; White, C.P. Vehicular integration of wireless power transfer systems and hardware interoperability case studies. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 5223–5234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Miller, J.M.; Onar, O.C.; Chinthavali, M. Primary-side power flow control of wireless power transfer for electric vehicle charging. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Ind. Electron. 2015, 3, 147–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Okasili, I.; Elkhateb, A.; Littler, T. A review of wireless power transfer systems for electric vehicle battery charging with a focus on inductive coupling. Electronics 2022, 11, 1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Venkatesan, M.; Rajamanickam, N.; Vishnuram, P.; Bajaj, M.; Blazek, V.; Prokop, L.; Misak, S. A review of compensation topologies and control techniques of bidirectional wireless power transfer systems for electric vehicle applications. Energies 2022, 15, 7816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ombach, G.; Kurschner, D.; Mathar, S. Universal base coil solution for interoperable system for stationary wireless ev charging. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Sustainable Mobility Applications, Renewables and Technology (SMART), Kuwait, Kuwait, 23–25 November 2015. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ibrahim, M.; Bernard, L.; Pichon, L.; Laboure, E.; Razek, A.; Cayol, O.; Ladas, D.; Irving, J. Inductive charger for electric vehicle: Advanced modeling and interoperability analysis. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 8096–8114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Simon, O.; Krempel, T.; Schnurbusch, W.; Hoppe, A.; Turki, F. Proposal of a power source definition to provide interoperable use of wireless power transfer systems. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference (IEVC 2014), Florence, Italy, 17–19 December 2014. [Google Scholar]
  44. Vaidya, B.; Mouftah, H.T. Deployment of secure ev charging system using open charge point protocol. In Proceedings of the 14th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC 2018), Limassol, Cyprus, 25–29 June 2018. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ancillotti, E.; Bruno, R.; Palumbo, S.; Capasso, C.; Veneri, O. Experimental set-up of dc pev charging station supported by open and interoperable communication technologies. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Symposium on Power Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and Motion (SPEEDAM 2016), Capri, Italy, 22–24 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
  46. Karpenko, A.; Kinnunen, T.; Madhikermi, M.; Robert, J.; Framling, K.; Dave, B.; Nurminen, A. Data exchange interoperability in iot ecosystem for smart parking and ev charging. Sensors 2018, 18, 4404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. ISO 15118-1; Road Vehicles—Vehicle to Grid Communication Interface—part 1: General Information and Use-Case Definition. KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockholm, Sweden, 2013.
  48. SAE J2954; Wireless Power Transfer for Light-Duty Plug-in/Electric Vehicles and Alignment Methodology. SAE International: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2016.
  49. IEC 61980; Electric Vehicle Wireless Power Transfer (wpt) Systems—Part 1: General Requirements. International Electrotechnical Commission: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016.
  50. ISO 19163; Electrically Propelled Road Vehicles—Magnetic Field Wireless Power Transfer—Safety and Interoperability Requirements. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.
  51. GB/T 38775.6; Electric Vehicle Wireless Power Transfer—Part 6: Interoperability Requirements and Testing—Ground Side, China. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2021.
  52. GB/T 38775.7; Electric Vehicle Wireless Power Transfer—Part 7:Interoperability Requirements and Testing—Vehicle Side, China. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2021.
  53. T/CPSS 1001-2022; Technical specification for high-power wireless charging of electric vehicles, China. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2022.
  54. Kishan, D.; Vinod, M.; Harischandrappa, N. Magnetic coupling characteristics of spiral square—Circular coupled coils for wireless ev battery charging system. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 17th India Council International Conference (INDICON), New Delhi, India, 10–13 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
  55. Al-Saadi, M.; Valtchev, S.; Romba, L.; Goncalves, J.; Crciunescu, A. comparison of spiral and square coil configurations in wireless power transfer system for contactless battery charging. In Proceedings of the 2019 Electric Vehicles International Conference (EV 2019), Bucharest, Romania, 3–4 October 2019. [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhang, W.; White, J.C.; Abraham, A.M.; Mi, C.C. Loosely coupled transformer structure and interoperability study for ev wireless charging systems. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 6356–6367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lammle, T.; Parspour, N.; Holz, J. Comparison of circular and double-d coil topologies for automotive inductive charging systems. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (WoW), Seoul, Republic of Korea, 15–19 November 2020. [Google Scholar]
  58. Mohammad, M.; Onar, O.C.; Pries, J.L.; Galigekere, V.P.; Su, G.-J.; Wilkins, J. Analysis of magnetic field emissions and shield requirements for interoperating high-power ev wireless charging system. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC 2021), Virtual, Online, USA, 14–17 June 2021. [Google Scholar]
  59. Yang, G.; Song, K.; We, R.; Huang, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Q.; Zhu, C. Interoperability improvement for wireless electric vehicle charging system using adaptive phase-control transmitter. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 41365–41379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Yang, G.; Song, K.; Sun, Y.; Huang, X.; Li, J.; Guo, Y.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Q.; Lu, R.; Zhu, C. Interoperability improvement for rectangular pad and dd pad of wireless electric vehicle charging system based on adaptive position adjustment. IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl. 2021, 57, 2613–2624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Budhia, M.; Boys, J.T.; Covic, G.A.; Huang, C.-Y. Development of a single-sided flux magnetic coupler for electric vehicle ipt charging systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2013, 60, 318–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lei, Z.; Ruddell, S.; Thrimawithana, D.J.; Madawala, U.K.; Hu, P.A. A hybrid wireless charging system with ddq pads for dynamic charging of evs. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (WoW), Chongqing, China, 20–22 May 2017. [Google Scholar]
  63. Alam, M.M.; Mekhilef, S.; Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Horan, B. Dynamic charging of electric vehicle with negligible power transfer fluctuation. Energies 2017, 10, 701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Ahmad, A.; Alam, M.S.; Mohamed, A.A.S. Design and interoperability analysis of quadruple pad structure for electric vehicle wireless charging application. IEEE Trans. Transport. Electrific. 2019, 5, 934–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Liu, Y.; Mai, R.; Liu, D.; Li, Y.; He, Z. Efficiency optimization for wireless dynamic charging system with overlapped dd coil arrays. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 2832–2846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kim, S.; Zaheer, A.; Covic, G.; Boys, J. Tripolar pad for inductive power transfer systems. In Proceedings of the IECON 2014—40th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Dallas, TX, USA, 29 October 2014–1 November 2014. [Google Scholar]
  67. Kim, S.; Covic, G.A.; Boys, J.T. Tripolar pad for inductive power transfer systems for ev charging. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 5045–5057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Liao, Z.-J.; Feng, Q.-K.; Jiang, C.-H.; Wu, F.; Xia, C.-Y.; Yu, D.-S. Analysis and design of eit-like magnetic coupling wireless power transfer systems. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. 2021, 68, 3103–3113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kurpat, T.; Eckstein, L. A three-phase inductive power transfer coil with sae j2954 wpt3 magnetic interoperability. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (WoW 2019), London, UK, 17–21 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
  70. Sun, K.; Covic, G.A.; Thrimawithana, D.; Kim, S. Reduced switch operation of the tripolar for interoperability in inductive power transfer. In Proceedings of the IEEE MTT-S Wireless Power Transfer Conference (WPTC)/IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies—Wireless Power (WoW)/Wireless Power Week Conference, London, UK, 18–21 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
  71. Hou, J.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Wong, S.-C.; Tse, C.K. Analysis of output current characteristics for higher order primary compensation in inductive power transfer systems. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 6807–6821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mude, K.N.; Aditya, K. Comprehensive review and analysis of two-element resonant compensation topologies for wireless inductive power transfer systems. Chin. J. Electr. Eng. 2019, 5, 14–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Li, S.; Li, W.; Deng, J.; Trong Duy, N.; Mi, C.C. A double-sided lcc compensation network and its tuning method for wireless power transfer. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2015, 64, 2261–2273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Li, W.; Zhao, H.; Deng, J.; Li, S.; Mi, C.C. Comparison study on ss and double-sided lcc compensation topologies for ev/phev wireless chargers. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2016, 65, 4429–4439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Li, W.; Han, Z.; Kan, T.; Mi, C. Inter-operability considerations of the double-sided lcc compensated wireless charger for electric vehicle and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle applications. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power (2015 WoW), Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 5–6 June 2015. [Google Scholar]
  76. Guo, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yan, B.; Wang, K.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, L. Interoperability analysis of compensation network in electric vehicle wireless charging system. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Power Electronics and Application Conference and Exposition (PEAC), Shenzhen, China, 4–7 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
  77. Ombach, G.; Kurschner, D.; Mathar, S.; Chlebosz, W. Optimum magnetic solution for interoperable system for stationary wireless ev charging. In Proceedings of the 2015 Tenth International Conference on Ecological Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), Monte Carlo, Monaco, 31 March 2015–2 April 2015. [Google Scholar]
  78. Simon, O.; Mahlein, J.; Turki, F.; Dörflinger, D.; Hoppe, A. Field test results of interoperable electric vehicle wireless power transfer. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Power Electronics & Applications, Karlsruhe, Germany, 5–9 September 2016. [Google Scholar]
  79. Ombach, G. Design and safety considerations of interoperable wireless charging system for automotive. In Proceedings of the 2014 Ninth International Conference on Ecological Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), Monte-Carlo, Monaco, 25–27 March 2014. [Google Scholar]
  80. Schneider, J.; Carlson, R.; Sirota, J.; Sutton, R.; Taha, E.; Kesler, M.; Kamichi, K.; Teerlinck, I.; Abeta, H.; Minagawa, Y.; et al. Validation of wireless power transfer up to 11kw based on sae j2954 with bench and vehicle testing. In Proceedings of the SAE World Congress Experience (WCX 2019), Detroit, MI, USA, 9–11 April 2019. [Google Scholar]
  81. Miller, J.M.; Schrafel, P.C.; Long, B.R.; Daga, A. The wpt dilemma-high k or high q? In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power (WoW 2016), Knoxville, TN, USA, 4–6 October 2016. [Google Scholar]
  82. Kalra, G.R.; Pearce, M.G.S.; Kim, S.; Thrimawithana, D.J.; Covic, G.A. Measuring the q-factor of ipt magnetic couplers. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (WoW 2019), London, UK, 17–21 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
  83. Barth, D.; Cortese, G.; Darrat, A.H.; Cheng, C.; Wohr, E.; Suriyah, M.R.; Leibfried, T. Interoperability rating of wireless charging equipment using a decoupled impedance interface. In Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC 2020), Virtual, Gijon, Spain, 18 November–16 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
  84. Hassler, M.; Niedermeier, F.; Krammer, J.; Diepold, K. A Method for interoperable interface description of inductive power transfer systems. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (Wow 2018), Montreal, QC, Canada, 3–7 July 2018. [Google Scholar]
  85. Kraus, D.; Hassler, M.; Covic, G.; Herzog, H.-G. Impedance based design method for interoperable wireless power transfer systems. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE 2021), Virtual, Online, Canada, 10–14 October 2021. [Google Scholar]
  86. Song, K.; Yang, G.; Wei, R.; Huang, X.; Zhang, Q.; Zhu, C. Interoperability evaluation of wireless electric vehicle charging systems based on impedance. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE 2019), Baltimore, MD, USA, 29 September–3 October 2019. [Google Scholar]
  87. Shi, B.; Yang, F.; Wei, B.; Ouyang, M. Electrical interoperability evaluating of wireless ev charging systems based on impedance space. World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zhang, X.; Chen, Z.; Sha, L.; Yang, Q.; Li, Y.; Han, D. Research on interoperability evaluation method of electric vehicle wireless power transfer system based on three parameters characterization. Proc. CSEE China 2022, 42, 1569–1582. [Google Scholar]
  89. Zhang, X.; Bai, X.; Sha, L.; Chen, Z.; Yang, Q. Research on interoperability evaluation method of different coils in wireless charging system of electric vehicles. Trans. China Electrotech. Soc. China 2020, 35, 4150–4160. [Google Scholar]
  90. Sha, L.; Liu, J.; Chen, Z. Research on evaluation method of electric vehicle wireless charging interoperability based on two parameter representation. Processes 2022, 10, 1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Yang, G.; Song, K.; Huang, X.; Wang, C.; Huang, X.; Li, J.; Zhu, C. Improved interoperability evaluation method for wireless charging systems based on interface impedance. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 36, 8588–8592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Hassler, M.; Atasoy, O.; Kesler, M.; Twelker, K.; Achatz, T.; Jetz, M.; Krammer, J. Impedance measurement on inductive power transfer systems. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PELS Workshop on Emerging Technologies: Wireless Power Transfer (WoW 2019), London, UK, 17–21 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
  93. Kraus, D.; Damhuis, C.; Covic, G.; Herzog, H.-G. Leakage field and compensation assessment of an interoperable high power 50 kw wireless power transfer system using an impedance plane method. In Proceedings of the Wireless Power Week (WPW), Bordeaux, France, 5–8 July 2022. [Google Scholar]
  94. Kraus, D.; Vangapandu, S.V.; Herzog, H.G. Interoperability analysis of two different coil systems for inductive power transfer. In Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications (EPE ECCE Europe), Genova, Italy, 3–5 September 2019. [Google Scholar]
  95. Arfeen, Z.A.; Abdullah, M.P.; Hassan, R.; Othman, B.M.; Siddique, A.; Rehman, A.U.; Sheikh, U.U. Energy storage usages: Engineering reactions, economic-technological values for electric vehicles-a technological outlook. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2020, 30, e12422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Emodi, N.V.; Dwyer, S.; Nagrath, K.; Alabi, J. Electromobility in australia: Tariff design Structure and consumer preferences for mobile distributed energy storage. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Sharma, A.; Sharma, S. Review of power electronics in vehicle-to-grid systems. J. Energy Storage 2019, 21, 337–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Joseph, P.K.; Devaraj, E.; Gopal, A. Overview of wireless charging and vehicle-to-grid integration of electric vehicles using renewable energy for sustainable transportation. IET Power Electron. 2019, 12, 627–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ouramdane, O.; Elbouchikhi, E.; Amirat, Y.; Gooya, E.S. Optimal sizing and energy management of microgrids with vehicle-to-grid technology: A critical review and future trends. Energies 2021, 14, 4166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Hussain, M.T.; Bin Sulaiman, N.; Hussain, M.S.; Jabir, M. Optimal management strategies to solve issues of grid having electric vehicles (ev): A review. J. Energy Storage 2021, 33, 102114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Inci, M.; Savrun, M.M.; Celik, O. Integrating electric vehicles as virtual power plants: A comprehensive review on vehicle-to-grid (v2g) concepts, interface topologies, marketing and future prospects. J. Energy Storage 2022, 55, 105579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Alsharif, A.; Tan, C.W.; Ayop, R.; Dobi, A.; Lau, K.Y. A comprehensive review of energy management strategy in vehicle-to-grid technology integrated with renewable energy sources. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2021, 47, 101439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Elshaer, M.; Bell, C.; Hamid, A.; Wang, J. DC-DC topology for interfacing a wireless power transfer system to an on-board conductive charger for plug-in electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2021, 57, 5552–5561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 16 01653 g001 550
Figure 1. Composition of EV wireless chargers.
Figure 1. Composition of EV wireless chargers.
Energies 16 01653 g001
Energies 16 01653 g002 550
Figure 2. Three kinds of interoperability in wireless charging systems.
Figure 2. Three kinds of interoperability in wireless charging systems.
Energies 16 01653 g002
Energies 16 01653 g003 550
Figure 3. Process of interoperability standardization.
Figure 3. Process of interoperability standardization.
Energies 16 01653 g003
Energies 16 01653 g004 550
Figure 4. Magnetic coupler structure.
Figure 4. Magnetic coupler structure.
Energies 16 01653 g004
Energies 16 01653 g005 550
Figure 5. Interoperability of DD coil and rectangular coil (a) Rectangular transmitter–rectangular receiver; (b) DD transmitter–DD receiver (c) Rectangular transmitter–DD receiver; (d) DD transmitter–rectangular receiver. Reprinted from Ref. [59].
Figure 5. Interoperability of DD coil and rectangular coil (a) Rectangular transmitter–rectangular receiver; (b) DD transmitter–DD receiver (c) Rectangular transmitter–DD receiver; (d) DD transmitter–rectangular receiver. Reprinted from Ref. [59].
Energies 16 01653 g005
Energies 16 01653 g006 550
Figure 6. DSLCC topology of EV wireless charging systems.
Figure 6. DSLCC topology of EV wireless charging systems.
Energies 16 01653 g006
Energies 16 01653 g007 550
Figure 7. TMN topology for WPT3/Z2.
Figure 7. TMN topology for WPT3/Z2.
Energies 16 01653 g007
Energies 16 01653 g008 550
Figure 8. Interoperability testing by Qualcomm based on the power-efficiency method (a) Multi-dimensional movable bench; (b) System efficiency test results.
Figure 8. Interoperability testing by Qualcomm based on the power-efficiency method (a) Multi-dimensional movable bench; (b) System efficiency test results.
Energies 16 01653 g008
Energies 16 01653 g009 550
Figure 9. Interoperability test and results of products by German companies (a) Cross tests between VA and GA; (b) Efficiency test results.
Figure 9. Interoperability test and results of products by German companies (a) Cross tests between VA and GA; (b) Efficiency test results.
Energies 16 01653 g009
Energies 16 01653 g010 550
Figure 10. Relationship between k–Q and transmission efficiency.
Figure 10. Relationship between k–Q and transmission efficiency.
Energies 16 01653 g010
Energies 16 01653 g011 550
Figure 11. Interoperability evaluation method based on port impedance (a) Schematic of port impedance; (b) ZGA standard mapping region.
Figure 11. Interoperability evaluation method based on port impedance (a) Schematic of port impedance; (b) ZGA standard mapping region.
Energies 16 01653 g011
Energies 16 01653 g012 550
Figure 12. The behavior of the port impedance.
Figure 12. The behavior of the port impedance.
Energies 16 01653 g012
Energies 16 01653 g013 550
Figure 13. The reference impedance regions based on characteristic factors proposed by Harbin Institute of Technology (a) Region of ZGA; (b) Region of ZVA.
Figure 13. The reference impedance regions based on characteristic factors proposed by Harbin Institute of Technology (a) Region of ZGA; (b) Region of ZVA.
Energies 16 01653 g013
Energies 16 01653 g014 550
Figure 14. Reference region of inverter port impedance proposed by Tsinghua University.
Figure 14. Reference region of inverter port impedance proposed by Tsinghua University.
Energies 16 01653 g014
Energies 16 01653 g015 550
Figure 15. Improved impedance region proposed by the Tiangong University.
Figure 15. Improved impedance region proposed by the Tiangong University.
Energies 16 01653 g015
Energies 16 01653 g016 550
Figure 16. Power decomposition algorithm for measuring port impedance.
Figure 16. Power decomposition algorithm for measuring port impedance.
Energies 16 01653 g016
Energies 16 01653 g017 550
Figure 17. The integration between the conductive charger and the wireless charger.
Figure 17. The integration between the conductive charger and the wireless charger.
Energies 16 01653 g017
Table
Table 1. Interoperability requirements of various power classes.
Table 1. Interoperability requirements of various power classes.
VA
WPT1WPT2WPT3
GA 1WPT1RequiredRequiredRequired
WPT2RequiredRequiredRequired
WPT3RequiredRequiredRequired
1 GA means ground assembly.
Table
Table 2. Interoperability requirements of various Z classes.
Table 2. Interoperability requirements of various Z classes.
VA
Z1Z2Z3
GAZ1RequiredN/A 1N/A
Z2RequiredRequiredN/A
Z3RequiredRequiredRequired
1 N/A means not applicable.
Table
Table 3. Interoperability of several types of coil structures.
Table 3. Interoperability of several types of coil structures.
Coil CombinationEquivalent ModelCouplingCoupling Zero PositionInteroperable Charging Range
Circular–CircularEnergies 16 01653 i001Medium40% of coil diameterLess than 40% of coil diameter
Rectangular–CircularEnergies 16 01653 i002Medium50% of coil length and widthLess than 50% of length and width
DD–DDEnergies 16 01653 i003HighAbout 34% of coil length
About 70% of coil width		Less than 34% length, 70% of width
Circular–DDEnergies 16 01653 i004HighoppositeOffset about 1/4 coil diameter
DD–CircularEnergies 16 01653 i005LowoppositeOffset about 1/4 coil diameter
DD–DDQPEnergies 16 01653 i006High77% of coil length and widthLess than 77% of length and width
BPP–DDEnergies 16 01653 i007High77% of coil length and widthLess than 77% of length and width
Table
Table 4. Interoperability of several types of coil structures.
Table 4. Interoperability of several types of coil structures.
Topology CombinationEquivalent ModelRated PowerLoad IndependenceFrequency StabilityMisalignment Tolerance
S–SEnergies 16 01653 i008AccessibleYesYesPoor
S–PEnergies 16 01653 i009AccessibleNoneNonePoor
P–SEnergies 16 01653 i010InaccessibleNoneNoneGood
P–PEnergies 16 01653 i011InaccessibleNoneNoneGood
LCC–SEnergies 16 01653 i012AccessibleYesYesGood
LCC–PEnergies 16 01653 i013AccessibleYesNoneGood
S–LCCEnergies 16 01653 i014AccessibleYesYesPoor
P–LCCEnergies 16 01653 i015Accessible under specific couplingNoneNonePoor
LCC–LCCEnergies 16 01653 i016AccessibleYesYesGood
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Song, K.; Lan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Jiang, J.; Sun, C.; Yang, G.; Yang, F.; Lan, H. A Review on Interoperability of Wireless Charging Systems for Electric Vehicles. Energies 2023, 16, 1653. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041653

AMA Style

Song K, Lan Y, Zhang X, Jiang J, Sun C, Yang G, Yang F, Lan H. A Review on Interoperability of Wireless Charging Systems for Electric Vehicles. Energies. 2023; 16(4):1653. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041653

Chicago/Turabian Style

Song, Kai, Yu Lan, Xian Zhang, Jinhai Jiang, Chuanyu Sun, Guang Yang, Fengshuo Yang, and Hao Lan. 2023. "A Review on Interoperability of Wireless Charging Systems for Electric Vehicles" Energies 16, no. 4: 1653. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041653

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop