Effects of Electric Vehicle Fast Charging on Battery Life and Vehicle Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity, four new 2012 Nissan Leaf battery electric vehicles were instrumented with data loggers and operated over a fixed on-road test cycle. Each vehicle was operated over the test route, and charged twice daily. Two vehicles were charged exclusively by AC level two electric vehicle supply equipment, while two were exclusively DC fast charged with a 50 kilowatt fast charger. The vehicles were performance tested on a closed test track when new, and after accumulation of 50,000 miles. The traction battery packs were removed and laboratory tested when the vehicles were new, and at 10,000-mile intervals throughout on-road mile accumulation. Battery tests performed include constant-current discharge capacity, electric vehicle pulse power characterization test, and low peak power tests. The data collected over 50,000 miles of driving, charging, and rest are analyzed, including the resulting thermal conditions and power and cycle demands placed upon the battery. Battery performance metrics including capacity, internal resistance, and power capability obtained from laboratory testing throughout the test program are analyzed. Results are compared within and between the two groups of vehicles over the test period. Specifically, the impacts on battery performance, as measured by laboratory and track testing, are explored as they relate to battery usage and variations in conditions encountered, with a primary focus on effects due to the differences between AC level two and DC fast charging. The contrast between battery performance degradation and the effect on vehicle performance is also explored.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".