## 4 Simulation and Experiment Results and Discussion
### Simulation Results  
The ECM was constructed using the Simscape Battery and Simulink toolboxes within the MATLAB package, as illustrated in Figure 9. In the MOAs, the current values began \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Algorithm** & **Particle No.** & **Iteration No.** & **Tuning Parameter** \\ \hline PSO & 30 & 100 & \(c_{1}=1.2,\ c_{2}=0.15,\ \omega\in[0.4,\,0.9]\) \\ WSO & 30 & 100 & N/A \\ JSA & 30 & 100 & \(\beta=3,\,\gamma=0.1\) \\ GWO & 30 & 100 & N/A \\ BWO & 30 & 100 & N/A \\ LFDA & 30 & 100 & N/A \\ AGTO & 30 & 100 & \(p=0.3,\,\beta=3,\ w=0.8\) \\ DO & 30 & 100 & \(\alpha\in[0,\,1],\ \kappa\in[0,\,1]\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Selected parameter values of the applied MOAs. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**\(I_{c1}\) (A)** & \(I_{c2}\) (A) & \(I_{c3}\) (A) & \(I_{c4}\) (A) & \(I_{c5}\) (A) \\ \hline \(0\sim 2.9\) & \(0\sim 2.9\) & \(0\sim 2.9\) & \(0\sim 2.9\) & \(\frac{V_{cut-off}-4.18}{R_{\alpha}(\text{SOC})}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Range setting of the objective current parameter. at random starting points to prevent the solutions from becoming trapped in local optima. This randomness contributed to variations in the best solutions due to the random fluctuations in the parameters. Consequently, the average MSCC values for each MOA were computed ten times over 100 iterations. The conventional CC-CV method was also included for comparison with the MSCC results obtained through the MOA protocols. The simulation results are presented in terms of four charging performance evaluation indicators (CPEIs): the best FC (FC\({}_{\text{best}}\)), charge time (CT), maximum charge temperature (MCT), and EL. The results are summarized in Tables 5 and 6. According to the CPEI results in Table 5, the FC value was the highest for the CC-CV method and the lowest for the DO method. Regarding CT, the FM produced the smallest value; however, due to FM's inability to manage temperature increases, its CT value was relatively high. Although the CT value for DO was higher than that of FM, it remained the smallest compared to the other MOAs. Furthermore, the MCT value for DO was the lowest, and the EL value for DO was also the lowest, indicating that it was the most efficient method. Selected MSCC values are presented in Table 6. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Algorithm** & \(\mathbf{I_{\text{ct}}}\) **(A)** & \(\mathbf{I_{\text{ct2}}}\) **(A)** & \(\mathbf{I_{\text{ct3}}}\) **(A)** & \(\mathbf{I_{\text{ct4}}}\) **(A)** & \(\mathbf{I_{\text{ct5}}}\) **(A)** \\ \hline
1C CC-CV & 2.9 & - & - & - \\ FM & 2.9 & 1.7247 & 1.0257 & 0.6102 & 0.3628 \\ PSO & 2.5913 & 2.0793 & 1.1363 & 0.8092 & 0.3628 \\ WSO & 2.2686 & 1.9596 & 1.2916 & 0.7526 & 0.3628 \\ JSA & 2.5959 & 1.8545 & 1.5304 & 0.7448 & 0.3628 \\ GWO & 2.5989 & 1.7147 & 1.0226 & 0.7096 & 0.3628 \\ BWO & 2.5959 & 1.9732 & 0.8508 & 0.6612 & 0.3628 \\ LFDA & 2.5534 & 1.7258 & 1.0071 & 0.6558 & 0.3628 \\ AGTO & 2.5419 & 1.5045 & 1.0892 & 0.6522 & 0.3628 \\ DO & 2.5482 & 1.4356 & 0.9227 & 0.6023 & 0.3628 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Simulation OCC results. Figure 9: ECM model for simulation. Figure 14: Charging configuration of GWO. (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. Figure 12: Charging configuration of WSO. (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. Figure 13: Charging configuration of \(\mathrm{JSA}\). (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. Figure 16: Charging configuration of LFDA. (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. Figure 17: Charging configuration of AGTO. (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. Figure 15: Charging configuration of BWO. (**a**) Simulation. (**b**) Experiment. The experimentally obtained CPEIs are summarized in Table 7. The FC value was largest for the CC-CV method, and was smallest for DO, consistent with the simulation results, showing a reduction of 27% compared to the CC-CV method. The CT value was the smallest for FM, followed by DO, while the CC-CV method had the largest CT value.