Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Simulation platform assesses regenerative braking impact on lithium-ion battery aging in urban electric buses, indicating optimized depth of discharge.
This study assesses the impact of regenerative braking on lithium-ion battery aging and operational efficiency of lithium-ion batteries in urban electric buses using a Rainflow-based cycle-counting framework. A previously developed simulation platform based on Energetic Macroscopic Representation (EMR) is employed to reproduce realistic daily driving cycles. Battery degradation is quantified by combining the Rainflow Counting Method with Miner’s Rule, enabling cumulative damage assessment across different depth of discharge (DoD) levels and regenerative braking intensities, kbr. Four representative cycling profiles—fixed 50%, 60%, and 70% DoD and a variable mixed-use scenario—were simulated under regenerative braking intensities ranging from 0% to 100%. Results indicate that regenerative braking extends average battery lifespan by approximately 0.9 years while increasing daily driving range by around 6 km. Profiles with lower DoD values, particularly when combined with moderate regenerative braking (kbr ≈ 0.3), achieved the most favourable balance between cycle induced degradation and energy recovery. Although higher DoD scenarios deliver greater mileage gains, they also accelerate capacity fade. The variable cycling profile demonstrated robust and consistent performance, highlighting the benefits of route and load variability. Additionally, lifetime mileage analysis demonstrates that intermediate DoD levels combined with regenerative braking maximize cumulative energy throughput while preserving service life. Overall, the proposed methodology offers a computationally efficient and practically applicable approach for battery life assessment under dynamic operating conditions, offering valuable insights for optimizing energy management strategies and electric bus fleet operations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ferreira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: