# Extending Battery Lifetime by Avoiding High SOC
## 4 Drive Cycle and Drive Cases
### User Case Study  
Going over to more realistic drive cases, two different cases for the three vehicles are investigated. Now, the drive distance is the same for all vehicles in order to show what lifetime the different vehicle batteries would achieve. In the case where the driving distance is too far for Vehicle 3, as mentioned before, fully electric drive is assumed until the battery is depleted, first after that is the ICE started.  
User 1 has a driving distance of 25 km to work and works five days a week. During weekends, the user drives 75 km twice. All the trips are on highway and the WLTC Extra High is used to estimate the C-rate. The car is charged after each trip to 50% SOC (62% SOC for Vehicle 3) during weekdays and fully charged on weekends. The reference case is that the driver always charges fully whenever possible, and then leaves the vehicle with fully charged battery during parking.  
User 2 has a driving distance of 25 km to work and works five days a week. During weekends, the user drives 75 km twice. The trips to work consist of mixed driving and the full WLTC is used to estimate the C-rate. For the longer trips in the weekend, the WLTC Extra High is used to estimate the C-rate. The car is charged after each trip to 50% SOC during weekdays and fully charged on weekends. The reference case is again that the driver always charges to full whenever possible.  
The different cases with the parameters used as input to the ageing model for the three vehicles are shown in Table 6.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameters** & **DOD1 (\%)** & **Trips** & **C-Rate** & **T\({}_{\text{short}}\)(\({}^{\circ}\)C)** & **DOD2 (\%)** & **Trips** & **C-Rate** & **T\({}_{\text{short}}\)(\({}^{\circ}\)C)** & **FCE** \\
**Case: User, Vehicle** & **(SOC\({}_{\text{init}}\) (\%))** & **Week** & & **(SOC\({}_{\text{init}}\) (\%))** & **Week** & & **Week** & **Week** \\ \hline \hline
1: User 1, Vehicle 1 & 30 (50) & 10 & 1.09 & 30 & 89 (89) & 2 & 1.09 & 30 & 4.8 \\ re: User 1, Vehicle 1 & 30 (90) & 10 & 1.09 & 30 & 89 (90) & 2 & 1.09 & 30 & 4.8 \\
2: User 1, Vehicle 2 & 26 (50) & 10 & 0.95 & 30 & 77 (77) & 2 & 0.95 & 30 & 4.1 \\ re: User 1, Vehicle 2 & 26 (90) & 10 & 0.95 & 30 & 77 (90) & 2 & 0.95 & 30 & 4.1 \\
3: User 1, Vehicle 3 & 62 (62) & 10 & 2.27 & 30 & 90 + ICE (90) & 2 & 2.27 & 30 & 8 \\ re: User 1, Vehicle 3 & 62 (90) & 10 & 2.27 & 30 & 90 + ICE (90) & 2 & 2.27 & 30 & 8 \\ \hline
4: User 2, Vehicle 1 & 21 (50) & 10 & 0.39 & 30 & 89 (89) & 2 & 1.09 & 30 & 3.9 \\ re: User 2, Vehicle 1 & 21 (90) & 10 & 0.39 & 30 & 89 (90) & 2 & 1.09 & 30 & 3.9 \\
5: User 2, Vehicle 2 & 19 (50) & 10 & 0.35 & 30 & 77 (77) & 2 & 0.95 & 30 & 3.4 \\ re: User 2, Vehicle 2 & 19 (90) & 10 & 0.35 & 30 & 77 (90) & 2 & 0.95 & 30 & 3.4 \\
6: User 2, Vehicle 3 & 46 (50) & 10 & 0.85 & 30 & 90 + ICE (90) & 2 & 2.27 & 30 & 6.4 \\ re: User 2, Vehicle 3 & 46 (60) & 10 & 0.85 & 30 & 90 + ICE (90) & 2 & 2.27 & 30 & 6.4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: Drive cases translated into DOD, inital State of Charge (SOC\({}_{\text{init}}\)), C-rate, and Full Cycle Equivalent (FCE) per week to be used as ageing model input values.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Drive Cycle** & **WLTC** & **WLTC Medium** & **WLTC Extra High** \\ \hline Distance (km) [13] & 23.3 & 4.8 & 7.2 \\ Time (s) [13] & 1800 & 433 & 323 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Vehicle 1} & **C-rate** & 0.39 & 0.23 & 1.09 \\  & **DOD (\%)** & 19 & 3 & 10 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Vehicle 2} & **C-rate** & 0.35 & 0.22 & 0.95 \\  & **DOD (\%)** & 18 & 3 & 9 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Vehicle 3} & **C-rate** & 0.85 & 0.53 & 2.27 \\  & **DOD (\%)** & 42 & 6 & 20 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Results from the vehicle model for the three vehicles running the Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Cycle (WLTC) drive cycles.