Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Article ID 204131

Research Article
Optimizing the Heat Dissipation of an Electric
Vehicle Battery Pack

Hsiu-Ying Hwang, Yi-Shin Chen, and Jia-Shiun Chen

Department of Vehicle Engineering, National Taipei University of Technology, No. 1, Section 3,
Chung-hsiao E. Road, Taipei 10608, Taiwan

Correspondence should be addressed to Hsiu-Ying Hwang; hhwang@mail.ntut.edu.tw

Received 19 September 2014; Accepted 20 November 2014

Academic Editor: Libardo Vicente Vanegas Useche

Copyright © Hsiu-Ying Hwang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Battery packs are critical components to electric vehicles. They are designed to last for the designed life cycles. Temperature affects
the performance and life span of batteries. Maintaining stable and evenly distributed temperatures within the operating temperature
range among all modules and battery cells is one of key factors to prolong the life of battery packs. This paper studied the effects of
the ventilation locations of the inlets and outlets and the gaps among battery cells on the rate of heat dissipation and temperature
distribution in the pack. An existing battery pack was used as a baseline design. A computational fluid dynamics model was created
to analyze the temperature distribution and air flow conditions. The design intent is to keep the package changes to the minimum
but with better cooling efficiency. The results show that the locations and shapes of inlets and outlets have significant impact on
the battery heat dissipation. A design is proposed to minimize the temperature variation among all battery cells. The temperature
difference between highest and lowest ones for the evaluated event is reduced from 6.04∘ C to 3.67∘ C with 39% improvements, and
the heat dissipation rate is improved with 3.8%.

1. Introduction demand (hard acceleration, climbing, etc.) and can maintain

People have been paying great attention about global warm-
ing which is recognized as a result caused mainly by the emis-
sions of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel combustion. To
help in relieving the global warming and crude oil depletion,
electric vehicles (EV) are considered to be the mainstream
of the future transport vehicles. And battery/battery pack
is one of the main power sources of EV. Battery pack as
the main power source of EV is required to meet the high
energy and power density, long cycle life, long lasting time,
and so forth. Lithium-ion batteries are one of the ideal
energy storage systems for the electric vehicles. Generally,
the battery pack has a number of battery modules or cells
in series and/or in parallel to achieve the desired voltage
and capacity. For long distance travel, a vehicle would be
equipped with a larger battery pack, and a large amount of
heat thus is generated. A single cell overheats and failure
can happen and degrade the performance of the entire pack;
therefore a favorable ventilation system design can quickly
take away the tremendous heat generated by the high power
the performance and reliability of the battery pack.
The common heat transfer types for the ventilation sys-
tems are air-cooling, liquid-cooling, phase change cooling,
or any combination. Air cooling system has the advantages of
simple structure, light weight, low cost, easy maintenance and
repair, and no liquid leakage problems. It is suitable for elec-
tric vehicles [1]. With the increase of the elderly population in
Taiwan, the design of the vehicle in response to the needs of
elder person has gradually increased. Our research team has
an intelligent mobile carrier project (Research Contract num-
ber NSC-99-2218-E-027-001) focusing on the need of short-
haul travel of the elderly to create a smart, light-weighted, and
powered by lithium-ion batteries, as shown in Figure 1.
Several scholars have carried out some ventilation sys-
tems for battery packs. Pesaran associated with other scholars
[2–6] explored the strengths and weaknesses of cooling
systems of the battery pack. They also used heat transfer prin-
ciples and finite element analysis (FEA) to predict the tem-
perature distribution of cells in the pack. Based on the sim-
ulation results, the temperature increases 1.2∘ C in the series

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

2 Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Figure 1: Intelligent light weight vehicle for the elderly.
ventilation system with each additional line of cells. Finally,
they focused on the problem of battery integration and
indicated that not only should the battery pack maintain
the maximum temperature of the pack below the allowed
working-temperature limit but also it needs to maintain the
temperature uniformity among the cells in the pack. The
maximum temperature differences among modules for a
small pack and for a large pack were suggested to be below
2∘ C∼3∘ C and 7∘ C∼8∘ C, respectively. Zolot et al. [7] studied
battery pack designs for a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV),
including the arrangement of the module and thermal path
analysis of the battery packs, under three different tempera-
tures (0∘ C, 25∘ C, and 40∘ C) and three different driving cycles
(HWFET, FTP, and US06). The experimental results show
that the case of maintaining the battery pack temperature at
25∘ C has the best thermal performance of battery pack for
all three driving traffic cycles. Payne et al. [8] studied the
thermal management system for the battery pack of plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). They investigated different
fin designs for the cells and the modules and also studied
the effect of serpentine manifold on the pressure drops and
the flow field characteristics of the pack. Ghosh et al. [9, 10]
analyzed the heat transfer performance of the ventilation
system for the HEV by using computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) software, ANSYS-FLUENT. The aims of their studies
were to maintain the cells under the working-temperature
range and to keep the pack with uniformly distributed tem-
perature. They also optimized the cooling path of the entire
ventilation system to ensure that the battery pack had the
most uniform temperature distribution under all operating
conditions. Ma et al. [11] conducted a series of studies
for commercially available lithium-ion battery packages of
PHEV. They used the FEA software, ABAQUS, to evaluate
the thermal performance of the 26650 Li-ion battery cells and
used CFD software for flow field analysis to obtain the air
temperatures around the cells in the pack and then mapped
the air temperatures to the finite element model to analyze
thermal characteristics of the battery pack. Results of analyses
were compared with those from the experiments, and they
showed a good correlation. Sun et al. [12] used the complex
analysis method, which is combined with the 3D CFD model,
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016
the equivalent circuit model, FORTRAN codes, and other
tools, to evaluate the thermal performance of the battery pack
of an HEV. In order to achieve the minimum temperature
difference among the cells, a set of design of experiments
(DOE) was used to obtain an optimal design. Lin [13] used
the CFD software, ANSYS-ICEPACK, to analyze the cooling
effects of two different cell gaps on the lithium-ion batteries.
The simulation results show that the bigger the cell gap is, the
better the heat is dissipated. Sui et al. [14] used CFD software
ANSYS-CFX to simulate the ventilation structure of a nickel-
metal hydride (Ni-MH) battery pack of an HEV. According
to the simulation results, the temperature field distribution
of battery pack was improved with a ladder-pattern layout.
Lin et al. [15] used the CFD software, ANSYS-ICEPAK, to
analyze the heat transfer performance of battery module for
an EV and to investigate the effects of the cell gap on the
battery cooling. Fan et al. [16] utilized a high air flow rate to
improve the temperature uniformity for an existing lithium-
ion battery module of a PHEV. They used a commercial CFD
code, ANSYS-FLUENT 12.0., for their analyses.
Most literatures studied either the effects of the gaps
among cells on the thermal performance of the battery pack
or the effect of the configurations of cooling air inlets/outlets
of the ventilation systems on the heat dissipation of the
battery pack. The study with both considered is hardly seen.
In this present study, a typical and common design battery
pack (similar to the one in the literature [13]) was used as
the baseline design. We used a forced air cooling system
and optimized the thermal performance of the battery pack
considering the inlet locations and the shapes of the outlets.
This paper aims to keep the maximum temperature of battery
pack below the target value and to maintain the uniformity
of temperature distribution. Uneven gaps among the battery
cells were also considered in the study.
2. Heat Generation
The battery pack is one of the major heat sources of the EV.
One must first understand the thermal behaviors of the cell
or module in the pack. In this study, the heat produced from
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Battery pack
Inlet
Unit battery
(battery cell)
Outlet
Y
Z X
Figure 2: Baseline battery pack.
chemical reaction or mixing effects was ignored. The heat
generation rate of one unit cell [17] is shown in
𝑑𝐸
𝑞 = 𝐼 (𝐸 − 𝑈) − 𝐼 (𝑇 ),
𝑑𝑇
where 𝑞 is the heat generation rate of one cell in units of 𝑊, 𝐼 is
the current in units of Amp, 𝐼 > 0 for discharge and 𝐼 < 0 for
charge, 𝐸 is the equilibrium voltage or open-circuit potential
of the cell in units of 𝑉, 𝑈 is the voltage or potential of the cell
in units of 𝑉, 𝑇 is the temperature in units of K, and 𝑑𝐸/𝑑𝑇 is
the temperature coefficient in units of 𝑉/𝐾. The first term on
the right-hand side of (1), 𝐼(𝐸−𝑈), is the joule heating caused
by the internal resistance of battery and can be rewritten in
terms of the internal resistance 𝑅 as 𝑞joule = 𝐼2 × 𝑅. (𝐸 − 𝑈) is
the overpotentials. The second term on the right-hand side of
(1) is the reversible entropic heat, denoted by 𝑞entropy , which
is due to the entropy changes from electrochemical reactions
and can be positive or negative.
Due to very low activity of the electrolyte and small gap
inside the battery, the internal convection effect of the battery
can be ignored [20, 21]. The battery cell mainly consists of
opaque substances with very little radiation; therefore the
radiation effect is not considered. The internal heat transfer
of the battery is mainly from the heat conduction. The energy
balance in a unit cell can be written as
𝜕𝑇 𝜕2 𝑇 𝜕2 𝑇 𝜕2 𝑇
𝜌𝐶𝑝 = 𝑘𝑥 2 + 𝑘𝑦 2 + 𝑘𝑧 2 + 𝑄,
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
where 𝜌 is the local density in units of kg/m3 , 𝐶𝑝 is the local
specific heat in units of J/(kg K), 𝑘𝑥 , 𝑘𝑦 , and 𝑘𝑧 are the local
thermal conductivities in 𝑥, 𝑦, and 𝑧 coordinates, respec-
tively, in units of W/(m K), 𝑄 is the cell heat generation rate
per volume in units of W/m3 , 𝑇 is the local cell temperature
in units of 𝐾, and 𝑡 is the time in units of 𝑠. The temperature
distribution in the battery can be calculated using (2).
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016
3
Inlet
Table 1: Properties of cell and pack [18, 19].
Density Specific heat Thermal conductivity
(kg/m3 ) (J/kg K) (W/m K)
(1) Housing of cell 1930 910 0.17
Core of cell 1622 623 1.2
Case of battery pack 2719 871 202.4
3. Modeling
The heat transfer process of battery pack is a typical field-
thermal coupling phenomenon. The heat is generated from
the core transferring to housing while the cooling air passes
the cell housing taking away the heat. There are thirty-two
battery cells arranged in eight rows and four columns in the
pack. The gap among cells is 15 mm apart. Two inlets are
located at the front and back of the pack and two outlets are
at the top of the pack. Each has the dimension of 50 mm ×
50 mm. The inlets are aligned with the center of gap 2 and gap
4, as shown in Figure 2. Aluminum alloy is used for the pack
case with a thickness of 3 mm. The analysis model includes
the unit cell, battery pack, and ventilation system. Each part
is described in the following sections.
3.1. Unit Cell. In the present study, we focus on exploring the
(2) temperature distribution of the entire pack. A lump battery
system is used. The battery cell is modeled with a single core
and a thermal stability plastic housing [18]. The cell is in
rectangular parallelepiped shape with dimensions of 75 mm
(length) × 150 mm (width) × 150 mm (height). The housing
material of cell is 3 mm thick heat resistance plastic. The heat
generation rate of a unit cell is assumed to be 12.8 W. The
detailed properties used for the analysis are summarized in
Table 1. The mesh size for cells is 5 mm × 5 mm × 5 mm. All
cells use structure meshes, hexahedral elements, as shown in
4 Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Y
Z X
Figure 3: Meshes for cell.
Figure 3. A total of 432,000 grids are created for the thirty-two
cells.
3.2. Battery Pack and Ventilation System Type. The entire
battery pack of thirty-two cells is arranged in a pattern of
eight rows and four columns. The gap among the cells can
affect the heat dissipation of the battery pack. In this research,
the gap of 15 mm was used in the baseline design. The battery
pack case is made of aluminum alloy with a thickness of
3 mm. In order to install four fans at both ends of the case,
four opening holes of 50 mm × 50 mm face directly to gap 2
and gap 4 and two outlets are located on the top of battery
pack.
The heat conduction formula of the ventilation system of
battery pack [3] can be described as follows:
𝑑𝑇𝑏𝑎
𝑁 [𝑞 − 𝑀𝑏 𝐶𝑏 ( )]
𝑑𝑡
(3)
𝑑𝑇𝑓
= [𝑚𝑓 𝐶𝑓 (𝑇out − 𝑇in ) − 𝑀𝑓 𝐶𝑓 ( )] ,
𝑑𝑡 pack
where 𝑁 is the number of rows in the ventilation path, 𝑞 is
the cell heat generation rate in units of W, 𝑀𝑏 is the cell mass
in units of kg, 𝐶𝑏 is the weighted-average heat capacity of the
cell in units of J/(kg K), 𝑇𝑏𝑎 is the average cell temperature in
units of K, 𝑇in is the incoming fluid temperature to the cell
in units of K, 𝑇out is the temperature of the fluid leaving the
cell in units of K, 𝑚𝑓 is the mass flow rate of fluid in units of
kg/s, 𝐶𝑓 is the fluid specific heat in units of J/(kg K), 𝑀𝑓 is
the mass of fluid in units of kg, 𝑇𝑓 is the surrounding fluid
temperature in units of 𝐾, and 𝑡 is the time in units of s. The
second terms of left-hand side and right-hand side of (3) are
the thermal inertia of cell and of fluid, respectively. For the
steady state condition, these two terms are zero.
The inlets and outlets of the cooling system in a traditional
series ventilation system are placed in the same direction,
as shown in Figure 4. The cooling air passes the first row
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016
75
150
150
Unit: (mm)
of cells and then the second row and sequentially flows
through the rest to the last row and exits. The cooling
air enters from the inlets, encountering the cells at the
first row, absorbing the heat generated from the cells, and
continuously flowing through the gaps among cells till the
last row. Since the air flows through the whole pack in
sequence, the temperature of the air gets higher, and the
capability of carrying heat/transferring heat gets lower. The
cell temperature in the second row is higher than that in the
first row, and so forth. However, the end row of the cells
is closer to the outlets and easier to get cool; it has lower
temperature than the row before it instead.
The traditional series ventilation systems generally have
large temperature differences among the cells. This present
study used a semiseries ventilation system to improve the
condition. There are thirty-two battery cells in the pack. The
cooling air enters from the inlets located at two ends of the
battery pack and exits through the outlets on the top of the
battery pack. The detailed configuration and dimension of
the battery pack are shown in Figure 5. The detailed material
properties are shown in Table 1.
3.3. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Model. In order to
maintain the uniformity of the mesh size, the element length
of the fluid and structure must be consistent. In this study, we
used CFD preprocessing software, GAMBIT. The mesh size of
5 mm is selected for the entire pack. All of cells used structure
mesh, hexahedral elements, with a total of 432,000 grids from
the thirty-two cells. The internal flow field of the pack used
nonstructure mesh, tetrahedral elements, with grid numbers
around two million. At least three or more layers were used
among the cells, as shown in Figure 6.
To simplify the model and save computation time, the
following assumptions were made in this study.
(1) The fluid in the pack is air with Reynolds number (Re)
of 23058, and the flow field associated is turbulent
flow.
Advances in Mechanical Engineering 5

Temp. (∘ C)
51.96 Outlet Inlet
50.71
49.45
48.20
46.94
45.69 Inlet
44.43
43.17
41.92
40.66
39.41
38.15
36.90
35.64 Y Front view
34.38
33.13 X Z
31.87
30.62 Outlet
29.36
28.11 Z Top view of battery
26.85
X Y surface temperature

Temp. (∘ C)
51.96 Y
50.71
49.45 Z X Back view
48.20
46.94 Air flow
45.69
44.43
43.17
41.92
40.66
39.41
38.15
36.90 Y Side view
35.64
34.38 Z X
33.13
31.87
30.62
29.36
28.11 Z Top view of battery
26.85 X Y core temperature

Figure 4: Series ventilation system.

Gap 5
Inlet

Gap 4

Gap 3

Unit battery
Gap 2

Outlet Inlet
Gap 1
Y 905 mm
Z
Z X
X Y

170 mm

Column Column Column Column

Row Row Row Row Row Row Row Row
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4

100 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 100 15 Y 15 15 15 15
Y Unit: (mm) X Z
Z X 675 mm

Figure 5: The configuration and dimensions of semiseries ventilation system, baseline design.

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

6 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Cell Cell

Cell Gap

Z X

Z
X Y

Figure 6: The unstructured gird mesh for internal field flow and the air gap of the battery pack.

(2) The boundary condition for inlets is given intake Table 2: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of baseline
fan, and for outlets is selected pressure outlet. The design (Unit: ∘ C).
performance curve of intake fan is shown in Figure 7.
𝑇max = 46.98 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
(3) No-slip boundary condition between the fluid and the Row 1 41.95 40.94 40.94 41.95
surface of cell is complied. Row 2 45.98 43.96 43.96 45.98
(4) The room temperature is applied on the inlets as 300 K Row 3 46.98 44.97 44.97 46.98
(approximate 27∘ C) and a pressure of one atmosphere. Row 4 46.98 44.97 44.97 46.98
(5) In order to understand heat transfer characteristics of Row 5 46.98 44.97 44.97 46.98
the proposed heat dissipation in the cruise mode, the Row 6 46.98 44.97 44.97 46.98
steady-state flow field analysis was chosen. Row 7 45.98 43.96 43.96 45.98
Row 8 41.95 40.94 40.94 41.95
For the numerical simulation, the commercial CFD
software package, ANSYS-FLUENT 12.0, was utilized. The
convergence criterion was set such that the residual value of
governing equations for the momentum equation is below 1 × higher average temperatures. The velocity of the cooling air
10−5 , for continuity equation is below 1 × 10−5 , and for the inside the pack is shown in Figure 10; the faster velocity is
energy equation is below 1 × 10−7 . For the turbulence flow field about 6.32 m/s occurring in Gap 2 and Gap 4, and the velocity
problem, the standard 𝑘-𝜀 turbulence model was used. The of cooling air at Gap 1 and Gap 5 is mostly below 1 m/s (blank
residual value of turbulent kinetic energy 𝑘 and dissipation portion of pack in the Figure 10), respectively.
rate 𝜀 are set 1 × 10−5 in the simulation. If the above conditions The maximum temperature of each cell in the pack is
cannot be reached, a maximum number of iterations of 2000 drawn into a bar chart, as shown in Figure 11. The cell
times are set for termination of operation. temperatures within the pack are symmetrically distributed
and detailed data which can be found in Table 2. The battery
4. Baseline Design Simulation cells in Row 1 and Row 8 have low temperature due to the
position close to the intake fan, and temperature of cells
Figure 8 shows a temperature distribution in the battery pack among the middle two columns (Column 2 and Column 3)
of the semiseries ventilation system. Figure 8(a) shows that is lower than the lateral cells due to the fact that the cooling
the maximum temperature is 43.96∘ C at the surface of cell air inlets are facing Gap 2 and Gap 4. The air outlets of pack
while the maximum temperature of the entire pack is 46.98∘ C are located at Gap 3 which is above the battery cell and its
occurring in the core within cell, as shown in Figure 8(b). The resistance is relatively small; most of the cooling air flows
maximum temperature difference Δ𝑇max between the surface through this path and takes away the heat generation form
and core of the cell is 3.02∘ C (Table 21). cells. Only a small amount of the cooling air flows through
Figure 9 shows that cell temperatures at both ends (Row 1 the outermost gaps, Gaps 1 and 5, and at the rates lower than
and Row 8) of the pack are lower, which is due to the fact that 1 m/s. The cooling effect is limited, therefore, the outer battery
those cells are close to the inlet of cooling air. However, the cells in Column 1 and Column 4 have higher temperatures, as
cells among Column 1 and Column 4 inside the pack have shown in Figure 9 (side view).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 7

1.2
1

Flow rate Q (m3 /min)

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Pressure P (in H2 O)

Performance curve of fan

Figure 7: The performance curve of intake fan.

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
Max temp. of surface = 43.96∘ C
46.98 46.98 Max temp. of core = 46.98∘ C
45.98 45.98
44.97 44.97
43.96 43.96
42.96 42.96
41.95 41.95
40.94 40.94
39.94 39.94
38.93 38.93
37.92 37.92
36.92 36.92
35.91 35.91
34.90 34.90
33.90 33.90
32.89 32.89
31.88 Y 31.88 Y
30.88 30.88
29.87 Z X 29.87
28.86 28.86 Z X
27.86 27.86
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 8: The simulation results of baseline design.

Column Column Column Column

Temp. (∘ C)
1 2 3 4
46.98 Gap 5
45.98
44.97
43.96
42.96
41.95 Gap 4
40.94
39.94 Y
38.93 X Z Front view
37.92 Gap 3
36.92
35.91
34.90
33.90 Row Row Row Row
32.89 Gap 2
31.88 1 3 5 7
30.88
29.87
28.86
27.86 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 9: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (baseline design).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

8 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00 10.00
9.55 Gap 5 9.55
9.10 9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 7.75
7.30 Gap 4 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50 Gap 3 5.50
5.05
Inlet 5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 3.70
3.25 Gap 2 3.25
2.80
2.80
2.35 2.35 Y
1.90 1.90
1.45 1.45
1.00 Gap 1 1.00
Z X
Z
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 10: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (baseline design).

50
49
48
47
Temperature (∘ C)

46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 11: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (baseline design).

The uniform of the temperature distribution is one of Table 3: The maximum temperature difference of baseline design
the important factors that affected the performance and the (Unit: ∘ C).
reliability of the battery pack. In this study, the highest cell
𝑇max = 46.98 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
temperature in the pack minus the temperature of each cell
Row 1 −5.03 −6.04 −6.04 −5.03
(𝑇max − 𝑇cell ) was used to represent the uniform of the
temperature distribution; the detailed data can be found Row 2 −1 −3.02 −3.02 −1
in Table 3. The maximum temperature difference in the Row 3 0 −2.01 −2.01 0
baseline design is −6.04∘ C (negative sign indicates that the Row 4 0 −2.01 −2.01 0
temperature is below the maximum temperature); B21 , B28 , Row 5 0 −2.01 −2.01 0
B31 , and B38 exceed the recommended value of 5∘ C in the Row 6 0 −2.01 −2.01 0
literature (BColumn# Row# is the battery cell ID used in the Row 7 −1 −3.02 −3.02 −1
column-row of the pack; that is, B21 is the battery cell in Row 8 −5.03 −6.04 −6.04 −5.03
the second column and the first row). The higher battery
cell temperature will eventually lead to the performance of
the entire pack decreases. Therefore, the next chapter will be 5. Design Optimization
a series of optimized designs to find the ideal location and
shape of cooling air inlet and outlet and the appropriate size The Optimum Design of this study was defined as the total
of the cooling channel. size of the whole pack structure and the total air flow rate

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 9

Inlet

Z X Inlet

Figure 12: Cooling air inlet layout of Type 2.

Inlet

Z X Inlet

Figure 13: Cooling air inlet layout of Type 3.

of the intake fan remains unchanged; that is, the number of Table 4: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of Type 2
air inlet and the dimension of inlet are fixed. Under these (Unit: ∘ C).
constraints, the optimization is to find the ideal locations of 𝑇max = 49.7 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
the inlets and outlets, as well as the gaps between battery cells. Row 1 41.7 40.56 40.56 41.7
Row 2 45.13 46.27 46.27 45.13
5.1. Optimum Design for the Inlet Location. In order to Row 3 46.27 48.56 48.56 46.27
improve the uneven temperature distribution, the first step Row 4 46.27 49.7 49.7 46.27
was adjusting the inlet from the basic position while the outlet Row 5 46.27 49.7 49.7 47.27
position remains unchanged. Type 2 was adjusting the intake Row 6 46.27 48.56 48.56 46.27
fans position toward the middle faced Column 2 and Column Row 7 45.13 46.27 46.27 45.13
3, as shown in Figure 12. Type 3 was adjusting the basic Row 8 41.7 40.56 40.56 41.7
position outwards faced Column 1 and Column 4, as shown
in Figure 13. Two types of the new design and the baseline
design with associated positions are shown in Figure 14. The velocity diagram in Type 2 (Figure 17) shows that the cooling
simulation assumptions of Type 2 and Type 3 are the same as air with higher flow rates (6.37 m/s) met B21 , B28 , B31 , and
in the baseline design. B38 and exhausted upwards toward the outlet directly, causing
Type 2 simulation results are as shown in Figure 15. The the other cells to have slower cooling air, especially the four
maximum cell surface temperature is 46.27∘ C, and the maxi- cells situated in the center position of the entire module (B24 ,
mum internal temperature of the cell is 49.7∘ C. The tempera- B25 , B34 , and B35 ), which only received a flow rate below 1 m/s
ture difference is 3.43∘ C between the surface and the core. The causing a result of an uneasy heat dissipation.
front view of Figure 16 which shows that the four cells (B21 , The maximum temperature (occurring at the core) of
B28 , B31 , and B38 ) faced the inlet was the coldest cells (surface each cell in Type 2 is drawn, as shown in Figure 18. The cell
temperature of 35.99∘ C) inside the pack. The observation of temperature is rendered to be a symmetrical distribution;

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

10 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Symmetric

Type 3 Baseline Z=0

Type 2
Z3 = 495 Z1 = 330 Z2 = 165

Unit: (mm)

Z
X Y
Symmetric

Figure 14: The three designs of inlet placement.

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
49.70 49.70 Max temp. of core = 49.7∘ C
48.56 Max temp. of surface = 46.27∘ C 48.56
47.42 47.42
46.27 46.27
45.13 45.13
43.99 43.99
42.85 42.85
41.70 41.70
40.56 40.56
39.42 39.42
38.28 38.28
37.13 37.13
35.99 35.99
34.85 34.85
33.71 33.71
32.56 Y 32.56 Y
31.42 31.42
30.28 Z X 30.28
29.14 29.14 Z X
27.99 27.99
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 15: The simulation results of Type 2.

the detailed data can be observed in Table 4. In spite of the air Table 5: The maximum temperature difference of Type 2 (Unit: ∘ C).
inlet facing cells of Column 2 and Column 3, the cooling air
𝑇max = 49.7 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
entered the pack and met B21 , B28 , B31 , and B38 and flew to the
Row 1 −8 −9.14 −9.14 −8
top outlet where the resistance is relatively low, causing these
Row 2 −4.57 −3.43 −3.43 −4.57
two columns to have higher cell temperature than Column 1
Row 3 −3.43 −1.14 −1.14 −3.43
and Column 4. The maximum temperature differences inside
Row 4 −3.43 0 0 −3.43
the pack are shown in Table 5. The maximum temperature
Row 5 −3.43 0 0 −3.43
difference of −9.14∘ C occurred in B21 , B28 , B31 , and B38 , and
Row 6 −3.43 −1.14 −1.14 −3.43
Row 1 and Row 8 have maximum temperature differences
Row 7 −4.57 −3.43 −3.43 −4.57
much higher than other rows. The result shows that Type 2
Row 8 −8 −9.14 −9.14 −8
design causes an extremely uneven temperature distribution.
The simulation results of Type 3 are shown in Figure 19.
The figure shows that the maximum temperature at the cell
surface is 45.79∘ C. The maximum temperature at the core The maximum temperature difference between surface and
is 49.14∘ C, which occurs in eight cells of Column 2 (B23 , core is 3.35∘ C. An orthographic view of the cell temperature
B24 , B25 , and B26 ) and Column 3 (B33 , B34 , B35 , and B36 ). distribution in Type 3 is shown in Figure 20; the coldest

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 11

Column Column Column Column

Temp. (∘ C)
1 2 3 4
49.70 Gap 5
48.56
47.42
46.27
45.13
43.99 Gap 4
42.85
41.70 Y
40.56 X Z Front view
39.42 Gap 3
38.28
37.13
35.99
34.85 Row Row Row Row
33.71 Gap 2
32.56 1 3 5 7
31.42
30.28
29.14
27.99 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 16: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Type 2).

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00 Gap 5 10.00
9.55 9.55
9.10 9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 Gap 4 7.75
7.30 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50 Gap 3 Inlet 5.50
5.05 5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 3.70
3.25 Gap 2 3.25
2.80
2.80
2.35 2.35 Y
1.90 1.90
1.45 1.45
1.00 Gap 1 1.00
Z X
Z
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 17: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Type 2).

50
49
48
47
Temperature (∘ C)

46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 18: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Type 2).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

12 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
49.14 49.14 Max temp. of core = 49.14∘ C
48.02 Max temp. of surface = 45.79∘ C 48.02
46.91 46.91
45.79 45.79
44.67 44.67
43.56 43.56
42.44 42.44
41.32 41.32
40.21 40.21
39.09 39.09
37.98 37.98
36.86 36.86
35.74 35.74
34.63 34.63
33.51 33.51
32.39 Y 32.39 Y
31.28 31.28
30.16 30.16
29.04 Z X 29.04 Z X
27.93 27.93
26.81 26.81
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 19: The simulation results of Type 3.

Column Column Column Column

Temp. (∘ C)
1 2 3 4
49.14 Gap 5
48.02
46.91
45.79
44.67
43.56 Gap 4
42.44
41.32 Y
40.21 X Z Front view
39.09 Gap 3
37.98
36.86
35.74
34.63 Row Row Row Row
33.51 Gap 2
32.39 1 3 5 7
31.28
30.16
29.04
27.93 Gap 1
26.81
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 20: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Type 3).

surface temperatures of four cells facing the inlet (B11 , B18 , Table 6: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of Type 3
B41 , and B48 ) are 35.74∘ C. The velocity chart of Type 3 (Figures (Unit: ∘ C).
21 and 22) shows that the higher flow velocity (6.51 m/s) of
𝑇max = 49.14 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
the cooling air met B11 , B18 , B41 , and B48 and flew to the two
Row 1 41.32 43.56 43.56 41.32
outlets above Gap 3; the blank portion in the figure shows that
the cooling air flow rate is below 1 m/s, and the eight cells Row 2 45.79 48.02 48.02 45.79
located at Column 2 (B23 , B24 , B25 , and B26 ) and Column 3 Row 3 46.91 49.14 49.14 46.91
(B33 , B34 , B35 , and B36 ) from the center of the module are Row 4 45.79 49.14 49.14 45.79
only assigned to a slower flow of the cooling air, forming Row 5 45.79 49.14 49.14 45.79
heat concentration in the pack. The maximum temperatures Row 6 46.91 49.14 49.14 46.91
of core of each cell within the pack are shown in Figure 21, Row 7 45.79 48.02 48.02 45.79
the cell temperatures are symmetrically distributed, and the Row 8 41.32 43.56 43.56 41.32
detailed data can be found in Table 6. Table 7 shows that
the maximum temperature difference of the core is −7.82∘ C
occurring at the four cells (B11 , B18 , B41 , and B48 ) facing the position of intake fan facing the cooling channels (Gap 2
inlet of cooling air. and Gap 4), allowing the cooling air flow into the pack, and
According to the simulation results of baseline design, effectively reduced the maximum temperature of the battery
Type 2 and Type 3, the baseline design is to adjust the pack and minimized the temperature difference between the

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 13

Table 7: The maximum temperature difference of Type 3 (Unit: ∘ C). Table 11: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of Type 5
(Unit: ∘ C).
𝑇max = 49.14 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
𝑇max = 46.47 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Row 1 −7.82 −5.58 −5.58 −7.82
Row 1 42.55 42.55 42.55 42.55
Row 2 −3.35 −1.12 −1.12 −3.35
Row 2 46.47 45.49 45.49 46.47
Row 3 −2.23 0 0 −2.23 Row 3 46.47 44.51 44.51 46.47
Row 4 −3.35 0 0 −3.35 Row 4 46.47 43.53 43.53 46.47
Row 5 −3.35 0 0 −3.35 Row 5 46.47 43.53 43.53 46.47
Row 6 −2.23 0 0 −2.23 Row 6 46.47 44.51 44.51 46.47
Row 7 −3.35 −1.12 −1.12 −3.35 Row 7 46.47 45.49 45.49 46.47
Row 8 −7.82 −5.58 −5.58 −7.82 Row 8 42.55 42.55 42.55 42.55

Table 8: The maximum temperature difference between surface and Table 12: The maximum temperature difference of Type 5 (Unit: ∘ C).
core of cell in three inlet designs (Unit: ∘ C).
𝑇max = 46.47 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Fixed outlet position Baseline design Type 2 Type 3 Row 1 −3.92 −3.92 −3.92 −3.92
Surface temp. 43.96 46.27 45.79 Row 2 0 −0.98 −0.98 0
Core temp. 46.98 49.7 49.14 Row 3 0 −1.96 −1.96 0
Temp. difference 3.02 3.43 3.35 Row 4 0 −2.94 −2.94 0
Row 5 0 −2.94 −2.94 0
Row 6 0 −1.96 −1.96 0
Table 9: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of Type 4
Row 7 0 −0.98 −0.98 0
(Unit: ∘ C).
Row 8 −3.92 −3.92 −3.92 −3.92
𝑇max = 46.71 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Row 1 41.75 41.75 41.75 41.75 Table 13: The maximum temperature difference between surface
Row 2 45.72 44.72 44.72 45.72 and core of cell in three outlet designs (Unit: ∘ C).
Row 3 46.71 43.73 43.73 46.71
Fixed inlet position Baseline design Type 4 Type 5
Row 4 46.71 44.72 44.72 46.71
Surface temp. 43.96 43.73 43.53
Row 5 46.71 44.72 44.72 46.71 Core temp. 46.98 46.71 46.47
Row 6 46.71 43.73 43.73 46.71 Temp. difference 3.02 2.98 2.94
Row 7 45.72 44.72 44.72 45.72
Row 8 41.75 41.75 41.75 41.75
identify the best outlet design of the semitandem ventilation
Table 10: The maximum temperature difference of Type 4 (Unit: ∘ C). system.
𝑇max = 46.71 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Row 1 −4.96 −4.96 −4.96 −4.96 5.2. Optimum Design for the Outlet Location. The cooling
Row 2 −0.99 −1.99 −1.99 −0.99 mode of proposed semiseries ventilation system is similar to
Row 3 0 −2.98 −2.98 0 the series ventilation system. The four fans located at the front
Row 4 0 −1.99 −1.99 0 and rear of battery pack forced the cooling air to flow into the
Row 5 0 −1.99 −1.99 0 pack and exhaust through the outlet on the top of the pack.
Row 6 0 −2.98 −2.98 0 As from Section 5.1, the simulation results analysis shows that
Row 7 −0.99 −1.99 −1.99 −0.99 when the cooling air flows into the gaps between cells, it has
Row 8 −4.96 −4.96 −4.96 −4.96 a better cooling effect; hence the new design concept will fix
the inlet position on both sides of the pack facing Gap 2 and
Gap 4 and adjust the outlet position to achieve an optimized
cell surface and the core (3.02∘ C). The detailed data were design. First of all, the location of the outlet openings will
shown in Table 8. Comparing the velocity figures of three still be allocated at the middle gap (Gap 3) of the pack. The
designs (Figures 10, 17, and 21), one can obtained that most design concept of Type 4 is to adjust the outlet position of the
of the cooling air flow rates are below 1 m/s in the baseline baseline design towards the center. Type 5 is directly merging
design compared to Type 2 and Type 3, but the flow has the two outlet positions to the center of the pack, as a single
the highest air flow rates in the gap and it is surrounded by opening is formed. Considering the outlet area should be
more cells, which can take away the heat effectively; there- the same as baseline design and other designs; therefore the
fore, the baseline design has the lowest value in maximum total area of the single outlet in Type 5 is equal to the duel-
temperature difference among these three designs as well as outlets of the baseline design (5000 mm2 ). Type 4, Type 5,
the most uniform temperature distribution in the pack. In and baseline design with corresponding positions are shown
the next phase of optimization, the study will select the inlet in Figure 23; the CFD simulation setting aspects are the same
fan placement of the baseline design with several outlet types; as the baseline design.

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

14 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s Velocity (m/s)
10.00
10.00 Gap 5 9.55
9.55 9.10
9.10 8.65
8.65 8.20
8.20 7.75
7.75 Gap 4 7.30
7.30 6.85
6.85 6.40
6.40 5.95
5.95 5.50
5.50 Gap 3 Inlet 5.05
4.60
5.05
4.60 4.15
4.15 3.70
3.70 3.25
3.25 Gap 2 2.80
2.35
2.80
2.35 1.90 Y
1.90 1.45
1.45 1.00
1.00 Gap 1 Z X
Z
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 21: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Type 3).

50
49
48
47
Temperature (∘ C)

46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 22: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Type 3).

Table 14: Details of three optimum designs. Table 15: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of
Optimum Design I (Unit: ∘ C).
Optimum design I II III
Size of Gaps 1 and 5 (mm) 22.5 22.5 22.5 𝑇max = 49.48 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Size of Gaps 2, 3, and 4 (mm) 10 10 10 Row 1 41.56 40.43 40.43 41.56
Inlet position Baseline Baseline Baseline Row 2 44.96 43.82 43.82 44.96
Outlet position Baseline Type 4 Type 5 Row 3 46.08 46.08 46.08 46.08
Row 4 47.22 49.48 49.48 47.22
Row 5 47.22 49.48 49.48 47.22
Row 6 46.08 46.08 46.08 46.08
The simulation results of Type 4 are shown in Figure 23; Row 7 44.96 43.82 43.82 44.96
it shows that the maximum temperature is 46.71∘ C occurring Row 8 41.56 40.43 40.43 41.56
in the core portion, and the surface temperature is 43.73∘ C
(Figure 24). The temperature distribution presents a sym-
metrical distribution; the detailed data is shown in Table 9.
Comparing the orthographic view of Type 4 temperature dis- closer to the cooling air inlet; thus not only the temperature
tribution (Figure 25), the velocity of cooling air (Figure 26) is lower, but also the heat is concentrated in the twelve cells
and the maximum core temperature (Figure 27), not only the (B12 ∼B17 and B42 ∼B47 ), resulting in the fact that the cooling
cells from the head and rear rows (Row 1 and Row 8), are air flow rates from above Column 1 and Column 4 and from

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 15

Outlet position

Inlet Inlet

Z Type 5 Unit: (mm)

X=0
X Y

Type 4
X = 180

Baseline
X = 360

Figure 23: The corresponding position and dimensions of Type 4, Type 5, and baseline design.

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
46.71 46.71
45.72 Max temp. of surface = 43.73∘ C 45.72 Max temp. of core = 46.71∘ C
44.72 44.72
43.73 43.73
42.74 42.74
41.74 41.74
40.75 40.75
39.76 39.76
38.77 38.77
37.77 37.77
36.78 36.78
35.79 35.79
34.79 34.79
33.80 33.8
32.81 32.81
31.82 Y 31.82 Y
30.82 30.82
29.83 29.83
28.84 Z X 28.84 Z X
27.84 27.84
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 24: The simulation results of Type 4.

Gap 1 and Gap 5 are lower than 1 m/s. As to Column 2
and Column 3, the cell temperature is relatively low, because
the outlet position is allocated at the gap between the two
columns; the cooling air flow to the outlet has less resistance
and higher flow rate, which can easily exhaust the heat from
the cells. Table 10 shows that the maximum cell temperature
difference is −4.96∘ C; it shows that outlet design of Type 4
can effectively improve the uniformity of the temperature
difference.
Figure 28 shows the simulation results of Type 5; the
core temperature and surface temperature are 46.47∘ C and
43.53∘ C, respectively. The cells temperature presents a sym-
metrical distribution; the detailed data is shown in Table 11.
From the orthographic view of the temperature distribution
inside the pack of Type 5 (Figure 29), velocity of cooling
air flow (Figure 30), and the maximum core temperature
(Figure 31), one can obtain that single outlet design can
effectively reduce the cooling air flow resistance, increasing
flow rates, and hence exhausting more heat. The maximum
temperature differences of each cell are shown in Table 12, the
maximum temperature difference is −3.92∘ C (lower than the
literature suggested value).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

16 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Column Column Column Column

Temp. (∘ C)
1 2 3 4
46.71 Gap 5
45.72
44.72
43.73
42.74
41.74 Gap 4
40.75
39.76 Y
38.77 X Z Front view
37.77 Gap 3
36.78
35.79
34.79
33.80 Row Row Row Row
32.81 Gap 2
31.82 1 3 5 7
30.82
29.83
28.84
27.84 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 25: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Type 4).

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00 10.00
9.55 Gap 5 9.55
9.10 9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 7.75
7.30 Gap 4 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50
5.05
Gap 3 Inlet 5.50
5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 3.70
3.25 Gap 2 3.25
2.80 2.80
2.35 2.35
1.90 1.90 Y
1.45 1.45
1.00 Gap 1 1.00
Z Z X
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 26: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Type 4).

50
49
48
47
Temperature (∘ C)

46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 27: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Type 4).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 17

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
46.47 46.47
45.49 Max temp. of surface = 43.53∘ C 45.49
44.51 44.51 Max temp. of core = 46.47∘ C
43.53 43.53
42.55 42.55
41.57 41.57
40.59 40.59
39.60 39.60
38.62 38.62
37.64 37.64
36.66 36.66
35.68 35.68
34.70 34.70
33.72 33.72
32.74 Y 32.74
31.76 31.76
30.77 Z X 30.77 Y
29.79 29.79
28.81 28.81
27.83 27.83 Z X
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 28: The simulation results of Type 5.

Column Column Column Column

Temp. (∘ C)
1 2 3 4
46.47 Gap 5
45.49
44.51
43.53
42.55
41.57 Gap 4
40.59
39.60 Y
38.62 X Z Front view
37.64
36.66 Gap 3
35.68
34.70
33.72 Row Row Row Row
32.74 Gap 2
31.76 1 3 5 7
30.77
29.79
28.81
27.83 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 29: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Type 5).

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00
9.55 Gap 5 10.00
9.10 9.55
8.65 9.10
8.20 8.65
7.75 Gap 4 8.20
7.30 7.75
6.85 7.30
6.40 6.85
5.95 6.40
5.50 Gap 3 Inlet 5.95
5.05 5.50
4.60 5.05
4.15 4.60
3.70 4.15
3.25 Gap 2 3.70
2.80 3.25
2.35 2.80
1.90 2.35
1.45
Gap 1 1.90 Y
1.00 1.45
Z 1.00
Z X
X Y Outlet
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 30: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Type 5).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

18 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

50
49
48
47

Temperature (∘ C)
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 31: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Type 5).

Gap 5
22.5

Gap 4
10

Outlet position
Gap 3
Inlet 10 Inlet

10
Gap 2

22.5
Gap 1

OPT III
X=0
Unit: (mm)
Z
X Y OPT II
X = 180

OPT I
X = 360

Figure 32: The corresponding position and dimensions of Optimum Designs I, II, and III.

By the above analyses, one can understand that when
the inlet position is fixed and the outlet position adjusts to
the middle of the pack, this reduces not only the maximum
temperature of the cell but also controls the maximum
temperature difference below the expected value effectively.
It can also reduce the cell temperature difference between
the surface and the core, from the baseline design of 3.02∘ C
reduced to 2.94∘ C; the detailed data is shown in Table 13.
5.3. The Optimum Design for Gaps among Cells. From the
previous analysis, the results show that when the cooling air
inlet is allocated facing Gap 2 and Gap 4, numerous cooling
air with high flow rates will traverse from these two gaps
to the outlet above Gap 3, exhausting the heat from the
cells; whereas the cooling air with slower flow rates will flow
through the outermost cooling paths (Gap 1 and Gap 5) in the
pack, resulting in the temperature of the outermost two rows

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 19

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
49.48 49.48 Max temp. of core = 49.48∘ C
48.35 Max temp. of surface = 46.09∘ C 48.35
47.22 47.22
46.09 46.09
44.96 44.96
43.82 43.82
42.69 42.69
41.56 41.56
40.43 40.43
39.30 39.30
38.17 38.17
37.03 37.03
35.90 35.90
34.77 34.77
33.64 33.64
32.51 Y 32.51 Y
31.38 31.38
30.24 Z X 30.24 Z X
29.11 29.11
27.98 27.98
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 33: The simulation results of Optimum Design I.

Temp. (∘ C) Column Column Column Column

1 2 3 4
49.48
48.35 Gap 5
47.22
46.09
44.96
43.82 Gap 4
42.69
41.56 Y
40.43 X Z Front view
39.30
38.17 Gap 3
37.03
35.90
34.77 Row Row Row Row
33.64 Gap 2
32.51 1 3 5 7
31.38
30.24
29.11
27.98 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 34: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design I).

Lower than 1 m/s

Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s) Velocity (m/s)
10.00 Gap 5 10.00
9.55 9.55
9.10 9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 7.75
7.30 Gap 4 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50 Gap 3 Inlet 5.50
5.05 5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 Gap 2 3.70
3.25 3.25
2.80 2.80
2.35 2.35 Y
1.90 1.90
1.45 1.45
1.00
Gap 1 1.00
Z Z X
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 35: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Optimum Design I).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

20 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

50
49
48
47

Temperature (∘ C)
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 36: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design I).

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
46.59 46.59 Max temp. of core = 46.59∘ C
45.60 Max temp. of surface = 43.63∘ C 45.60
44.61 44.61
43.63 43.63
42.64 42.64
41.65 41.65
40.67 40.67
39.68 39.68
38.69 38.69
37.70 37.70
36.72 36.72
35.73 35.73
34.74 34.74
33.76 33.76
32.77 32.77
31.78 Y 31.78 Y
30.80 30.80
29.81 29.81
28.82 Z X 28.82 Z X
27.84 27.84
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 37: The simulation results of Optimum Design II.

Table 16: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of Table 17: The maximum temperature of each battery cell of
Optimum Design II (Unit: ∘ C). Optimum Design III (Unit: ∘ C).

𝑇max = 46.59 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 𝑇max = 45.21 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Row 1 41.65 41.65 41.65 41.65 Row 1 41.54 41.54 41.54 41.54
Row 2 44.61 44.61 44.61 44.61 Row 2 45.21 45.21 45.21 45.21
Row 3 45.6 44.61 44.61 45.6 Row 3 45.21 45.21 45.21 45.21
Row 4 45.6 46.59 46.59 45.6 Row 4 44.29 45.21 45.21 44.29
Row 5 45.6 46.59 46.59 45.6 Row 5 44.29 45.21 45.21 44.29
Row 6 45.6 44.61 44.61 45.6 Row 6 45.21 45.21 45.21 45.21
Row 7 44.61 44.61 44.61 44.61 Row 7 45.21 45.21 45.21 45.21
Row 8 41.65 41.65 41.65 41.65 Row 8 41.54 41.54 41.54 41.54

of the pack being higher, creating an uneven temperature middle of the pack (Gap 2, Gap 3, and Gap 4) from an initial
distribution for the entire pack. Therefore, the final design 15 mm to 10 mm (based on [22] for recommended minimum
concept is to adjust the three gaps between the cells in the value for cooling channel), enlarging the outermost gaps (Gap

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 21

Temp. (∘ C) Column Column Column Column

1 2 3 4
46.59 Gap 5
45.60
44.61
43.63
42.64
41.65 Gap 4
40.67
39.68 Y
38.69 X Z Front view
37.70
36.72 Gap 3
35.73
34.74
33.76 Row Row Row Row
32.77 Gap 2
31.78 1 3 5 7
30.80
29.81
28.82
27.84 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 38: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design II).

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00 10.00
9.55 Gap 5 9.55
9.10
9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 7.75
7.30 Gap 4 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50
5.05
Gap 3 Inlet 5.50
5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 3.70
3.25 Gap 2 3.25
2.80 2.80
2.35 2.35 Y
1.90 1.90
1.45 1.45
1.00 Gap 1 1.00
Z X
Z
Outlet
X Y
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 39: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Optimum Design II).

50
49
48
47
Temperature (∘ C)

46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 40: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design II).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

22 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Temp. (∘ C) Temp. (∘ C)
45.21 Max temp. of surface = 42.45 C ∘ 45.21 Max temp. of core = 45.21∘ C
44.29 44.29
43.37 43.37
42.45 42.45
41.54 41.54
40.62 40.62
39.70 39.70
38.78 38.78
37.86 37.86
36.95 36.95
36.03 36.03
35.11 35.11
34.19 34.19
33.27 33.27
32.36 32.36
31.44 31.44 Y
Y
30.52 30.52
29.60 29.60 Z X
28.69 Z X 28.69
27.77 27.77
26.85 26.85
(a) The surface temperature of the cell stack (b) The core temperature of the cell stack

Figure 41: The simulation results of Optimum Design III.

Temp. (∘ C) Column Column Column Column

1 2 3 4
45.21 Gap 5
44.29
43.37
42.45
41.54
40.62 Gap 4
39.70
38.78 Y
37.86 X Z Front view
36.95
36.03 Gap 3
35.11
34.19
33.27 Row Row Row Row
32.36 Gap 2
31.44 1 3 5 7
30.52
29.60
28.69
27.77 Gap 1
26.85
Y Row Row Row Row Z
Z X 2 4 6 8 Top view
X Y
Side view

Figure 42: The orthographic view of temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design III).

Lower than 1 m/s

Velocity (m/s) Vmax of Gap 5 = 1 m/s
Velocity (m/s)
10.00
9.55 Gap 5 10.00
9.55
9.10 9.10
8.65 8.65
8.20 8.20
7.75 Gap 4 7.75
7.30 7.30
6.85 6.85
6.40 6.40
5.95 5.95
5.50 Gap 3 Inlet 5.50
5.05 5.05
4.60 4.60
4.15 4.15
3.70 3.70
3.25 Gap 2 3.25
2.80 2.80
2.35 2.35
1.90 1.90 Y
1.45 1.45
1.00 Gap 1 1.00
Z Z X
X Y Outlet
(a) Top view (b) ISO view

Figure 43: Flow velocity of cooling air in the pack (Optimum Design III).

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering 23

50
49
48
47

Temperature (∘ C)
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
1 2 3 4
Column

Row 1 Row 5
Row 2 Row 6
Row 3 Row 7
Row 4 Row 8

Figure 44: The maximum temperature distribution in the pack (Optimum Design III).

Table 18: The maximum temperature difference of Optimum Table 20: The maximum temperature difference of Optimum
Design I (Unit: ∘ C). Design III (Unit: ∘ C).

𝑇max = 49.48 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 𝑇max = 45.21 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Row 1 −7.92 −9.05 −9.05 −7.92 Row 1 −3.67 −3.67 −3.67 −3.67
Row 2 −4.52 −5.66 −5.66 −4.52 Row 2 0 0 0 0
Row 3 −3.4 −3.4 −3.4 −3.4 Row 3 0 0 0 0
Row 4 −2.26 0 0 −2.26 Row 4 −0.92 0 0 −0.92
Row 5 −2.26 0 0 −2.26 Row 5 −0.92 0 0 −0.92
Row 6 −3.4 −3.4 −3.4 −3.4 Row 6 0 0 0 0
Row 7 −4.52 −5.66 −5.66 −4.52 Row 7 0 0 0 0
Row 8 −7.92 −9.05 −9.05 −7.92 Row 8 −3.67 −3.67 −3.67 −3.67

Table 19: The maximum temperature difference of Optimum Table 21: The maximum temperature difference of battery between
Design II (Unit: ∘ C). surface and core (Unit: ∘ C).

𝑇max = 46.59 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Fixed inlet position

Optimum Optimum Optimum
Gaps 1, 5 = 22.5 mm
Row 1 −4.94 −4.94 −4.94 −4.94 Design Design Design
Row 2 −1.98 −1.98 −1.98 −1.98 I II III
Gaps 2, 3, 4 = 10 mm
Row 3 −0.99 −1.98 −1.98 −0.99 Surface temp. 46.09 43.63 42.45
Row 4 −0.99 0 0 −0.99
Core temp. 49.48 46.59 45.21
Row 5 −0.99 0 0 −0.99
Temp. difference 3.39 2.96 2.76
Row 6 −0.99 −1.98 −1.98 −0.99
Row 7 −1.98 −1.98 −1.98 −1.98
Row 8 −4.94 −4.94 −4.94 −4.94
Figure 33 shows the simulation results of Optimum
Design I; the maximum surface temperature is 46.09∘ C and
the maximum core temperature is 49.48∘ C, both occurring
1 and Gap 5) from 15 mm to 22.5 mm. It is expected to allow in the four cells of Column 2 (B24 and B25 ) and Column 3
more cooling air pass through Column 1 and Column 4 (B34 and B35 ). By comparing the orthographic view of the
and exhaust the heat of cells. Optimum Design I, II and III temperature distribution in Optimum Design I (Figure 34),
have the cell gaps listed above with baseline inlet position the flow rates of the cooling air (Figure 35), and the maximum
but each has baseline, Type 4, and Type 5 outlet positions, temperature distribution of each cell in the pack (Figure 36),
respectively. The detailed configuration is shown in Table 14 the cell temperature presents a symmetrical distribution.
and Figure 32. The simulation assumptions and parameters The detailed data is shown in Table 15. One can obtain that
settings are equivalent to the baseline design. increasing the size of Gap 1 and Gap 5 to increase the air flow

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016

24
Table 22: The simulation results of Optimum Design III compared with baseline design (Unit: ∘ C).
Surface temp. Core temp.
Baseline design 43.96 46.98
Optimum Design III 42.45 45.21
Improve rate 3.4% 3.8%
and velocity can decrease the cell temperature of Column 1
and Column 4. But because the gap size of Gap 2, Gap 3, and
Gap 4 becomes narrower, increasing the flow resistance of the
cooling air, the cooling air cannot reach B24 , B25 , B34 , and B35 ,
and finally the heat cannot be exhausted.
Optimum Design II uses the inlet position of the base-
line design combined with outlet position of Type 4; the
simulation results are shown in Figure 37. The maximum
temperature at the core in the pack is concentrated on four
cells of B24 , B25 , B34 , and B35 and the maximum temperature
at the surface is 43.63∘ C. Comparing the orthographic view
of the temperature distribution (Figure 38), the flow rates of
the internal cooling air (Figure 39), and the maximum tem-
perature distribution of the battery in the pack (Figure 40),
one can observe that the outlet is adjusting towards the center
of the pack, causing the cooling air volume and the flow rates
increase and allowing the maximum temperature to decrease.
The cell temperatures present a symmetrical distribution in
the pack, and the detailed data is shown in Table 16.
In order to reduce most of heat concentrating in the
center of the pack due to decrease in size of the middle
gaps (Gap 2, Gap 3, and Gap 4), the concept of Optimum
Design III is to change the original dual-outlet design into
a single opening with the total area remaining constant. The
simulation results are shown in Figure 41, the maximum
temperature of the cell surface is 42.45∘ C, and the maximum
core temperature is 45.21∘ C. By observing the orthographic
view of the temperature distribution (Figure 42), the flow
rates of the internal cooling air (Figure 43), and the max-
imum temperature distribution of the battery in the pack
(Figure 44), one can obtain that only the temperatures in the
position of cells of two rows close to the cooling air inlet are
lower. However, the temperature from the remaining cells is
uniformly distributed. The detailed data is shown in Table 17.
Tables 18, 19, and 20 are the maximum temperature
distribution for Optimum Design I, Optimum Design II, and
Optimum Design III, respectively. The results show that the
Optimum Design III with increasing the size of Gap 1 and
Gap 5 allows more and faster cooling air pass to improve
the heat concentration problem of Column 1 and Column
4 and reduce the maximum temperature of the battery
pack effectively (𝑇max = 45.21∘ C). The Optimum Design
III results in a much uniformly distributed temperature
field. The maximum temperature difference among all cells
is 3.67∘ C. The maximum temperature difference between
surface and core is the lowest among all designs (Δ𝑇 =
2.76∘ C). Comparing the Optimum Design III to the baseline
design, as summarized in Table 22, the maximum surface
temperature, the maximum core temperature, the maximum
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Max temp. difference Max temp. difference
between surface and core between cells
3.02 6.04
2.76 3.67
8.7% 39%
temperature difference between surface and core, and the
maximum temperature difference between cells have reduced
by 3.4%, 3.8%, 8.7%, and 39%, respectively. The uniformity
of the temperature distribution in the pack has improved
significantly.
6. Conclusion
The study proposes a new kind of air cooling ventilation
system for battery pack of an electric vehicle different from
the traditional series ventilation system, by changing the
locations of cooling air inlets and outlets, shapes of outlet, and
combining with uneven size of gap among cells. According
to simulation results, the design of semiseries ventilation
can effectively reduce the maximum temperature and the
maximum temperature difference below limit in the pack,
the maximum temperature of the cell has reduced by 3.8%,
and the maximum temperature difference between surface
and core of cell has reduced by 8.7%. The uniformity of the
temperature distribution has an improvement of 39% which
eventually extend the service cycles of the battery cells and
enhance the reliability of battery pack. As to the conceptual
design stage, with the help of the CFD simulation technology,
one can quickly predict the result of the ventilation system
design which shortens the development process to achieve
the purpose of cost savings.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
regarding the publication of this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Science Council
of the Republic of China, Taiwan, for financially supporting
this research under Contract nos. NSC 99-2218-E-027-001
and MOST 103-2221-E-027-047.
References
[1] G.-H. Kim and A. A. Pesaran, “Battery thermal management
system design modeling,” in Proceedings of the 22nd Interna-
tional Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium
and Exposition (EVS ’06), Yokohama, Japan, October 2006.
[2] A. A. Pesaran, “Battery thermal management in EVs and HEVs:
issues and solutions,” in Proceedings of the Advanced Automotive
Battery Conference, Las Vegas, Nev, USA, February 2001.
Advances in Mechanical Engineering 25

[3] A. A. Pesaran, A. Vlahinos, and S. D. Burch, “Thermal per- [21] T. F. Fuller, M. Doyle, and J. Newman, “Relaxation phenomena
formance of EV and HEV battery modules and packs,” in in lithium-ion-insertion cells,” Journal of the Electrochemical
Proceedings of the 14th Internal Electric Vehicle Symposium, Society, vol. 141, no. 4, pp. 982–990, 1994.
Orlando, Fla, USA, December 1997. [22] D. Berndt, Maintenance-Free Batteries, Research Studies Press,
[4] A. A. Pesaran, G.-H. Kim, and M. Keyser, “Integration issues of John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1997.
cells into battery packs for plug-in and hybrid electric vehicles,”
in Proceedings of the 24th International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel
Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS-24 ’09), pp.
1924–1930, Stavanger, Norway, May 2009.
[5] A. A. Pesaran, S. D. Burch, and M. Keyser, “An approach
for designing thermal management systems for EV and HEV
battery packs,” in Proceedings of the 4th Vehicle Thermal Man-
agement Systems Conference, London, UK, May 1999.
[6] A. A. Pesaran, “Battery thermal models for hybrid vehicle
simulations,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 377–
382, 2002.
[7] M. Zolot, A. A. Pesaran, and M. Mihalic, “Thermal evaluation of
Toyota Prius battery pack,” SAE technical paper 2002-01-1962,
2002.
[8] J. Payne, M. Niedzwiecki, S. Ketkar, and I. Isayev, “Thermal
characterization & management of PHEV battery packs,” SAE
Technical Paper 2009-01-3096, 2009.
[9] D. Ghosh, P. D. Maguire, and D. X. Zhu, “Design and CFD sim-
ulation of a battery module for a hybrid electric vehicle battery
pack,” SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-1386, SAE International,
2009.
[10] D. Ghosh, K. King, B. Schwemmin, and D. Zhu, “Full hybrid
electrical vehicle battery pack system design, CFD simulation
and testing,” SAE Technical Paper No. 2010-01-1080, 2010.
[11] Y. Ma, H. Teng, and M. Thelliez, “Electro-thermal modeling of a
lithium-ion battery system,” SAE technical paper 2010-01-2204,
2010.
[12] H. Sun, B. Tossan, and D. Brouns, “Thermal behavior study
on HEV air-cooled battery pack,” SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-
1368, 2011.
[13] K.-T. Lin, “Heat transfer simulation of pure electric vehicle
battery pack,” Journal of the Mechatronic Industry, no. 320, 2009.
[14] Y. Sui, W. Wang, B. Xia, Y. Lou, and Y. Yan, “Optimal analysis
on ventilation structure of Ni-MH battery pack for HEV,”
Automotive Engineering, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 203–208, 2010.
[15] K.-T. Lin, J.-C. Ke, and J.-P. Jian, “The research on heat transfer
of cell gap of cylindrical battery module for electric vehicle,”
in Proceedings of the 16th National Conference on Vehicle
Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, November 2011.
[16] L. Fan, J. M. Khodadadi, and A. A. Pesaran, “A parametric study
on thermal management of an air-cooled lithium-ion battery
module for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” Journal of Power
Sources, vol. 238, pp. 301–312, 2013.
[17] D. Bernardi, E. Pawlikowski, and J. Newman, “A general energy
balance for battery systems,” Journal of the Electrochemical
Society, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 5–12, 1985.
[18] A. Vlahions, K. Kelly, J. Rugh, and A. A. Pesaran, “Improving
battery thermal management using design for six sigma pro-
cess,” in Proceedings of the 20th Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS
’03), Long Beach, Calif, USA, November 2003.
[19] H. Maleki, S. Al Hallaj, J. R. Selman, R. B. Dinwiddie, and
H. Wang, “Thermal properties of lithium-ion battery and
components,” Journal of the Electrochemical Society, vol. 146, no.
3, pp. 947–954, 1999.
[20] T. F. Fuller, M. Doyle, and J. Newman, “Simulation and opti-
mization of the dual lithium ion insertion cell,” Journal of the
Electrochemical Society, vol. 141, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 1994.

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 19, 2016