Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

The electric vehicle energy management: An overview of the energy system

and related modeling and simulation
Amier Ibrahim a, b, Fangming Jiang a, *
a
Laboratory of Advanced Energy Systems, Guangdong Key Laboratory of New and Renewable Energy Research and Development, CAS Key Laboratory of Renewable
Energy, Guangzhou Institute of Energy Conversion, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Guangzhou, 510640, Guangdong, PR China
b
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Transition into the electrified transportation sector is being investigated among the feasible technological res­
Electric vehicle olutions to tackle the mounting climate change issues. Such a transition also comes with the prospect of smart
Energy storage system vehicles and shared transportation schemes. An electric vehicle relies solely on stored electric energy to propel
Lithium-ion batteries
the vehicle and maintain comfortable driving conditions. This dependence signifies the need for good energy
Battery thermal management system
Electric vehicle air conditioning
management predicated on optimization of the design and operation of the vehicle’s energy system, namely
Modeling and simulation energy storage and consumption systems. Through the analysis of the relevant literature this paper aims to
Equivalent circuit model provide a comprehensive discussion that covers the energy management of the whole electric vehicle in terms of
the main storage/consumption systems. It describes the various energy storage systems utilized in electric ve­
hicles with more elaborate details on Li-ion batteries. It then, focuses on the detailed analysis of the prevalent
intercalation batteries but also offers a limited discussion on new-generation batteries and their development
path. Furthermore, it discusses electric vehicle energy consumption and points out the major energy consump­
tion systems within a typical electric vehicle. It first unpacks the cabin cooling system in terms of its types and
energy consumption. Then it proceeds to unpacks the battery thermal management system and classifies it ac­
cording to working fluid, thermal cycle and power consumption. It discusses as well the widely adopted cooling
systems in terms of advantages, disadvantages and describes related studies. Finally, it puts together the relevant
state-of-the-art numerical models with special attention focused on equivalent circuit models and discusses
associated simulation resources and software packages. It also presents an illustrative case-study to elaborate on
the thermal modeling and simulation of Li-ion batteries using the equivalent circuit model.

1. Introduction transportation scheme based largely on private motorized vehicles ac­

Transportation is arguably among the most important human ac­
tivities of present-day Societies. It is also one of the main pillars of these
Societies’ economies and operates as one of its foundation, support, and
service provider. Growth in transportation and its subsequent energy
demand is driven to a great extent by economic development, popula­
tion increase as well as hypermobility within the transportation system.
These factors combined rendered transportation as the fastest-growing
energy demand and greenhouse gas (GHG) producer. Transportation
consumption of petroleum fuels incurs many socio-environmental
challenges that can be noticed at the local scale in terms of air pollu­
tion from vehicle exhausts, also at the global scale as (GHG) emissions,
mostly in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) [1]. The current
counts for more than half of the world’s liquid fossil fuel consumption
and nearly a quarter of the world’s energy-related (CO2) emissions [2].
Transportation emissions are primarily comprised of CO2, CH4 and NO2
but globally, CO2 accounts for 95% of transportation (GHG) emissions
[1]. Between 2010 and 2015, transportation emissions grew annually by
2.5% and the sector has experienced the quickest growth in the past
century [3]. In 2009, road transportation was responsible for 23% of
global CO2 emissions of which automobiles and light trucks generated
well over 60% of emissions in high-income countries [1,4]. Road
transport also books about 80% of air pollution in developing cities
(WHO 2009) [5]. In the year 2000, it accounted for 22.5% and 21.2% of
total global NOx and particulate matter (PM) emissions, respectively [6].
The transportation sector is largely oil-dependent and is the least

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fm_jiang2000@yahoo.com (F. Jiang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111049
Received 28 August 2019; Received in revised form 2 May 2020; Accepted 23 March 2021
Available online 3 April 2021
1364-0321/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
diversified among all energy end-use sectors, it consumed 65% of global
oil final energy demand with 92% consisting of oil products suggesting
key challenges for deep decarburization [3,7].
In its fourth assessment report (AR4), Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) recognized human’s influence on climate to have
a net heating effect that has manifested itself in many aspects of climate
such as ocean warming, continental average temperatures, temperatures
extremes, and wind patterns. One of the significant drivers of climate
change was found to be the rise in anthropogenic GHG concentrations to
levels beyond that of the pre-industrial era that could be determined
from ice-core concentrations spanning thousands of years [8,9]. A recent
analysis confidently suggested that such anthropogenic influences could
incur temperature changes due to enhanced natural greenhouse effects
[10]. Some of the projected health risks due to climate-change-related
extreme weather conditions (i.e. Intense heatwaves) include degrada­
tion in air quality, which in 2018, accounted for around 2.9 million
premature death globally [11]. Other risks include temperature-related
morbidity and mortality, undernutrition, reduced labor productivity and
occupational health concerns [12]. To balance these adverse effects,
IPCC called for action in the form of a human intervention known as
“mitigation of climate change” to reduce the sources or enhance the
sinks of GHGs [13]. One approach of mitigation is a dramatic reduction
of energy demand presented by (Grubler et al., 2018 [14]) describing a
low energy demand scenario. Another approach is the electrification of
transportation and manufacturing sectors to a point that renders
non-electric fuel use insignificant [3]. In its article 2, United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) adopted mitiga­
tion, together with adaptation to climate change to stabilize atmo­
spheric GHG concentrations at low levels within a timeframe adequate
for ecosystems to adapt [13,15]. The Paris agreement on climate change
represented a consensus of the parties attending the united nations
climate change conference in 2015 and became international law in
2016 [16].
Countries such as UK, France, Germany, Netherlands and other
countries have adopted the Paris agreement goals and pursued devel­
oping strategies predicated on electrification of the transportation sector
by revealing a schedule to stop producing internal combustion engine
vehicles (ICEVs) by 2040 [17]. Electric vehicles show comparable and
sometimes lower life cost per km to that of ICEVs, and can still undergo
more improvements by the development of more durable EVs [18].
Some of the challenges that confront efforts to facilitate complete
adoption of EVs are the range and price of electric vehicles [19]. These
factors are interrelated since a big battery pack enables for a longer
range but would increase the vehicle’s price and design complexity of
battery cooling systems required to manage the temperature of the
battery pack. Travel electrification indicated by the percentage of
vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) powered by electricity instead of fossil
fuel greatly influences the environmental effects of the adoption of such
means of commute [20]. It is mainly affected by the range of the battery
pack [21]; smaller battery would increase range anxiety and limit travel
distance [22,23], while larger battery would increase the cost [24]
which makes balancing incurred design tradeoffs a major challenge to
future adoption of all-electric vehicles (AEV). These challenges can be
balanced by good energy management established on the optimization
of the design and operation of the electric vehicle energy system.
The energy storage system is the most important component of the
electric vehicle and has been so since its early pioneering days. This
system can have various designs depending on the selected technology
(battery packs, ultracapacitors, etc.). Out of these technologies, the
battery cell is by far the most widely utilized energy storage technology
in EV applications. Today, several battery chemistries are available
commercially but the most prevalent chemistries are variations of the Li-
ion chemistry [19]. This market advantage rests largely on the relative
superiority of Li-ion chemistries when it comes to energy density,
thermal tolerance and some other characteristics. Nevertheless, Li-ion
cells suffer from a variety of adverse effects that would limit their
2
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
applications if not addressed properly. Such adverse effects might occur
when operating these cells outside their temperature and voltage limits.
In later sections this paper will discuss in more detail such effects as well
as highlight some of the measures being deployed to prevent/counteract
any unwanted effects that may arise.
This review was motivated by the pressing need for action to balance
the part of the global warming problem that is associated with the
transportation sector’s GHG emissions. Such a need has already driven a
substantial increase in research related to electric vehicles. It is envi­
sioned that this paper would fill an existing gap for new or experienced
scientists opting to join this endeavor and choosing to research Li-ion
batteries within the context of their utilization in macro-scale applica­
tions as in energy storage systems (ESS) for electric vehicles. It is ex­
pected that this paper would offer a comprehensive understanding of the
electric vehicle energy system and highlight the major aspects of energy
storage and energy consumption systems. Also, it is expected that it
would provide a practical comparison between the various alternatives
available to each of both energy systems to optimize energy manage­
ment to yield an improved EV driving range. To do this, the paper is
structured into six sections. The next section (Section 2) introduces the
electric vehicle and its general architecture with a short timeline of their
history of evolution. After that, the energy storage options utilized in a
typical electric vehicle are reviewed with a more targeted discussion on
the widely implemented Li-ion batteries. The Li-ion battery is then
introduced in terms of its structure, working principle and the adverse
effects associated with high temperatures for the different Li-ion
chemistries. Then, the energy consumption is discussed in terms of the
major consumers within a typical EV. A discussion in Section 5 is pre­
sented to introduce and elaborate on the modeling and simulation
approach utilized a means of researching Li-ion batteries with a more
detailed analysis allocated to the equivalent circuit model (ECM) used in
such macro-scale applications. Also, a short case-study is prepared and
discussed before presenting the paper’s concluding remarks in Section 6.
2. Electric vehicle
Electric vehicles were developed in the early days of the industrial
revolution. The intention for them was to serve as a means of private
commute during the first years of the automotive industry in addition to
steam cars (Locomobile). However both electric vehicles and steam cars
lost the consumer market to the rapidly progressing ICE vehicles. In
1996, Cowan and Hultén discussed the possibility of escaping a lock-in
situation in the case of electric vehicles. Their paper highlighted four
phases to be a history of technological lock-in with ICEVs becoming
more entrenched, namely, (1) the formative years of the automobile
industry (1885–1905), (2) establishment of gasoline car as a dominant
option (1905–1920), (3) consolidation of its leading position
(1920–1973), (4) questioning the gasoline car (1973–1998) and a fifth
which could represent an escape or (partial escape) from technological
lock-in by the legislated introduction of large manufacturing of EVs after
1998. According to their research some of the factors that could assist in
overcoming the lock-in include technological as well as production and
marketing solutions. However, the conclusion was that an escape from
the lock-in was highly unlikely to happen due to inferior EVs at that time
and an inability to compete with ICEVs under conditions established by
users at the time [25]. Electric vehicles are generally characterized by
their use of an electric traction motor for propulsion of the vehicle [26].
These motors are powered from an efficient energy storage device such
as contemporary Li-ion batteries or ultra-capacitors [27]. Currently, EV
models include electric spacecraft or aircraft, rail or road vehicles, ships
or submarines [28]. A main feature of EVs is the utilization of some
additional electrical components such as electric machines, power
electronics and embedded powertrain controllers more than typical
ICEVs. The significant advances in such components have contributed to
the enhancement of electric vehicle drivetrain designs [29,30].
Currently, drivetrain design of road electric vehicles would either follow
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

a comparable approach to that of a conventional ICEV with a main
electric motor replacing the ICE and then connected via transmission to
the EV wheels, or adopt a different design approach that is unique to EVs
based on having electric motors integrated directly into the rims of all
the wheels [31]. Currently, road EVs include hybrid electric vehicles
(HEV), pure electric vehicles (PEVs) also known as (plug-in electric
vehicles (PEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEV), battery plug-in electric
vehicles (BPEVs) or all-electric vehicles (AEVs)) and fuel cell electric
vehicles (FCEVs) also known as hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs)
[32]. This spectrum of electric vehicle’s drive train is bounded on its
opposite extremes by none-plug-in hybrid vehicles (i.e. series hybrid
electric vehicles (SHEVs)) and battery plug-in electric vehicles (BPEVs)
with plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) somewhere in between
[33]. A SHEV is composed of an ICE that is exclusively used to power an
electric motor while a BPEV relies only on energy stored by charging a
battery pack from an external power source [34]. None plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles can be classified into mild hybrid vehicles designed of
battery packs with small energy and power capabilities mostly of Ni-MH
cells. Such vehicles have demonstrated 10%–15% fuel saving. Another
classification is full hybrid vehicles with high enough energy and power
capabilities that allow an all-electric drive mode for a small range. Full
hybrid vehicles show fuel saving of 30%–40% [35,36]. In comparison, a
PHEV uses a battery pack that can be charged from an external power
source to provide propulsion for short distances until power is depleted
then an on-board ICE is engaged to recharge the battery pack [33]. All
PHEV types utilize Li-ion battery cells and could be considered as full
hybrid vehicles [36]. A widely researched subject when it comes to
HEVs is the ride-comfort studied in terms of noise vibration and
harshness of the vehicle [35]. Table 1 shows the general characteristics
of various types of electric vehicles.
A dramatic change in outlook towards EVs began in the 1990s. This
was manifested by the development of government agencies and aca­
demic institutions to intense R&D programs connected to electric ve­
hicles as well as the initiation of aggressive commercialization programs
for electric vehicles by major automotive manufactures [30]. The most
important battery characteristics include ampere-hour capacity, specific
power, energy density, discharge rate, cost and safety of the technology.
Such characteristics have a significant influence on the performance,
safety and efficiency of the electric vehicle [39]. Battery is also the key
challenge to the commercialization of EVs due to its high cost. The
FreedomCAR initiative developed several requirements and tests for
energy storage systems (ESS) for automotive applications. The aim is to
facilitate maximal performance through state monitoring, protection,
management and balancing of the battery pack [40–50]. USABC set
several mid-term and long-term performance targets for battery cells
used in electric vehicle applications. These goals aim to improve battery
performance characteristics such as specific energy, energy density and
life cycle from mid-term to long-term which would impact vehicle
characteristics such as driving range, weight, size and acceleration [39].
Recent technological advances in battery technology have led to the
current recovery of EVs which has been further reinforced by the
mounting pressure of rising atmospheric GHG concentrations [25].
Electric vehicles are now considered the most promising alternative to
ICEVs with null tailpipe emissions contributing to fight localized
pollution. Contemporary progress in battery technology has signifi­
cantly boosted the EV driving range. Today, it is common for a com­
mercial EV such as (BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, and Tesla Model S) to have a
range of 200–300 miles along with other enhanced features such as
acceleration, speed, size and number of seats [51]. In 2017, Andwari
et al. [52] reviewed the readiness level of BEV. Their paper discussed the
various aspects related to electric vehicles in terms of technology
readiness and expected progress as well as techno-economic issues and
policy role. The conclusion was that BEVs are no longer a niche market
due to recent technological advances. Fig. 1 shows a summary of in­
centives and the total EV tally in various countries worldwide.
For the year 2025, Diamler has set a goal for its EVs to reach 15–25%
share of sales while BMW aims for a 15–20% share of sales for the same
year. Honda on the other hand targets reaching 67% share of sales by
2030. Fig. 2 outlines the projected number of EV sales of various car
manufacturers. In EPA automotive trends report of 2018, these manu­
facturers were found to have made significant improvements on fuel
efficiency and CO2 emissions through the adoption of various advanced
technologies related to ICEVs to lower vehicle emissions in addition to a
trend of adopting PHEVs, EVs, and FCVs across all manufactures [51]. In
2019, Sioshansi et al. [19] analyzed various projections of the rate of
transition from conventional ICEVs to EVs among other questions
related to the proximity of peak oil demand. Their resolution focused on
the critical question “will automobile companies invest more in accel­
erating EV development or rather invest in advancing liquid fuel-saving
technology?“. From cited studies, their paper identified several attri­
butes of EVs that could speed up the transition from ICEVs. For instance,
transition to EVs could benefit extensively from accessing similar
economies of scale to that of ICEVs. The advent of transport as a shared
Fig. 1. Total number of EV and the adopted incentive policy for various
countries [19].

Table 1
General characteristics and requirements of various types of electric vehicles.
Type of Battery pack Actual used capacity Power Typical Chemistry and energy Weight of the Operating Reference
electric vehicle capacity (kWh) (maximum %) required (kW) voltage (v) density (Wh/kg) battery pack (kg) range (C)
̊

HEVs <3 – – – (Ni-MH) 40–50 60 – [37]

Mild hybrid 1–2 40 – – (Ni-MH) – - 30 to 52 [37,38]
Full hybrid 0.3 – 10–30 48–200 (Ni-MH) – – [36]
1–2.5 – 60 300–600 (Ni-MH) – – [36]
Plug-in-hybrid 5.6–18 – – – (Li-ion) 90–100 60–200 – [37]
5–12 75 – – (Li-ion) – - 30 to 52 [37,38]
4–10 – 60 300–600 (Li-ion) – – [36]
Full EV 35–54 – – – (Li-ion) 90–100 450 – [37]
22–80 80 – – (Li-ion) – - 40 to 50 [37,38]
15+ – 60 300–600 (Li-ion) – – [36]

3
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 2. Projected number of EV sales of various car manufacturers [19].
service (TaaS) can also further accelerate the transition to EVs. The
conclusion was that EVs are likely to experience price drop due to
cheaper battery costs at the same time ICEVs would undergo a price
increase as fuel efficiency standards are tightened. Furthermore, EVs are
projected to gain additional consumer attention as cost per km travel
declines by adoption of TaaS and similar schemes.
3. Energy storage
This section introduces some of the energy storage systems (ESS)
used in EV applications with particular attention on the battery tech­
nology in terms of the battery cell and the battery pack.
Today, storage systems of electrical energy can be realized from
designs such as flywheel, ultra-capacitor (UC) and various battery
technologies [7,45]. Some of these designs have been adopted for EV
applications. Flywheel energy storage (FES) technology can deliver en­
ergy output either in kinetic form (rotational energy) or in electrical
form. According to Chris Brockbank (business manager from Torotrak),
FES energy conversion efficiency from braking energy to FES can reach
up to 70% which is twice the efficiency of transforming energy from
braking to electric energy and then to FES [53]. Multiple research
agencies have developed ultra-high-speed flywheel systems for EVs. In
comparison to UCs, flywheel systems offer higher energy density and
power density. The main disadvantages are safety issues and gyroscopic
force which might render FES not well suited for transportation [54,55].
Fig. 3. Characteristics of the rechargeable battery [61].
4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
Despite this, FES can still feature in the transportation sector due to
favorable attributes such as long lifetime (more than 15 years), broad
temperature range, low maintenance needs, quick power response and
short recharge time [56]. In 2014, Audi Sport utilized the pioneering
work of Williams Hybrid Power (WHP) to include a flywheel storage
system in their Audi R18. This development was part of a trend of using
hybrid propulsion systems in top tier motorsports that started since the
year 2000 to improve fuel efficiency reducing the required number of pit
stops [57].
Ultra-capacitors (also known as super-capacitors) has the main
feature of producing a substantial amount of energy at low voltage due
to their high capacitance. Their advantages include long lifetime (the
longest among all ESS options), higher power density, fast charging and
discharging response but are burdened with low energy density [58,59].
The main types of UC deployed in the EV industry include electric
double-layer capacitors (EDLC)—carbon/carbon, pseudocapacitors and
hybrid capacitors. Recently, Li-ion UC has been developed showing
higher energy density and wider voltage range [60]. The use of UC in
some commercial vehicles such as Mazda 6 has demonstrated a capacity
to reduce fuel consumption by up to 10%. On the other hand, battery
technology (especially Li-ion technology) can offer significantly higher
energy density promoting it for a premier status within contemporary
energy storage technologies for EV applications [61]. Fig. 3 shows the
characteristics of battery technology while Fig. 4 shows characteristics
of UC. In 2017, Bloomberg new energy finance report (BNEF) showed
that the total installed manufacturing capacity of Li-ion battery was 103
GWh. According to this report, battery technology is the predominant
choice of the EV industry in the present day. It is the most utilized energy
storage system in commercial electric vehicle manufacturers. In its sales
outlook BNEF predicted that annual demand for Li-ion batteries for EVs
would be 408 GWh by 2025 and 1293 GWh by 2030. The report stated
that this demand is generally driven by utilization of batteries in com­
mercial EVs [62].
3.1. The battery cell
A battery cell is an electrochemical device that chemically stores
electrical energy for later use. A battery cell has many characteristics
that influence its applicability to electric vehicles. The two central
characteristics are nominal average charge capacity measured in
ampere-hours (Ah) and nominal discharge voltage in volts (V). Knowing
these values, energy in watt-hours (Wh) stored in the battery can be
calculated as the product of nominal average charge capacity (Ah) and
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

Fig. 4. Characteristics of the ultra-capacitor [61].

nominal voltage (V). Other derivable quantities include the battery state
of charge (SOC) in the percentage of the fully charged state of the bat­
tery. The minimum and maximum voltage limits of the tested battery
cell determine the corresponding SOC limits. Operating a battery cell
frequently-enough out of its voltage limits is showed to have a detri­
mental effect on the cell operating life. The C-rate of a battery cell de­
termines the discharge current value to completely deplete the cell
charge capacity in 1 h starting from a fully charged SOC. This renders
the C-rate to be proportional to the charge capacity of the battery cell i.e.
1C means the cell is depleted in 1 h and the corresponding discharge
current will be equal to the cell’s capacity in amperes; while 2C means
the cell is depleted in half an hour and the corresponding discharge
current will be equal to double that of the 1C rate. The maximum current
that a cell can withstand depends on its chemistry and the corresponding
heat generated [63]. Today, available battery technology that is suitable
for vehicle application include lead-acid, Li-ion, Ni-MH, Ni–Zn, and
Na–S [64]. The lead-acid chemistry is already deployed in ICEVs and has
reached a mature stage of development and incurs low cost for its
application. These advantages present lead-acid batteries as a candidate
for HEVs applications. However, it has disadvantages such as having a
heavyweight and a negative environmental footprint as well as short
lifecycle and low specific energy (20–40 Wh/kg) and low power density
which would mandate a huge mass to provide requirements for EV ap­
plications [61,65–68]. Nickel-based battery cells include
nickel-cadmium, nickel-iron, nickel-zinc and nickel-metal-hydride. The
nickel-cadmium (Ni–Cd) cell shows high specific energy (40–60 Wh/kg)
and high power density (80–350 W/kg) but is limited to low discharge
rate and is less favored for automobile applications due to its memory
effect, high cost and high toxicity. Nickel-zinc cells are more relatively
environmentally friendly with high specific energy and high peak power
but troubled by short life cycle. Nickel-metal-hydride (Ni-MH) cells have
been utilized in HEV applications in vehicles such as Toyota Prius. These
cells are environmentally friendly with a long life cycle (600–2000 cy­
cles) and high energy density (50–80 Wh/kg) but have disadvantages
such as higher self-discharge rate, longer charging time and generating a
large amount of heat during charging, which all complicate the charging
process resulting in a need for intricate charging algorithms and
expensive chargers [61,69].
Battery cells utilizing lithium chemistry are widely adopted in EV
applications due to characteristics such as high efficiency, long lifecycle,
low toxicity, lightweight, high specific energy, high energy density
(90–200 Wh/kg) and high power density(500–2000 W/kg) [61,70,71].
Their main disadvantages include safety issues due to low tolerability to
overcharge, and high production cost [72,73]. Current commercialized
Li-ion cells of different cathode materials are based on intercalation
chemistry and considered to be the most promising choice among the
various lithium-based battery cells which rendered them the most
studied in detail in recent reports [63,74,75]. Battery cells based on
(LixCoO2) (LCO) were the first developed commercial cells in early 1990
and offer good power and energy densities but are limited by safety
concerns and high cost. Other cells developed after LCO include Lix(Ni,
Mn, Co)O2 cells (NMC) that are safer and less expensive and LixMn2O4
(LMO) which are burdened by poor thermal stability. Other lithium-ion
cells such as NCA cells (Lix(Ni, Co, Al)O2) have the highest energy
density while LFP cells (LixFePO4) has the advantage of improved safety
properties due to enhanced thermal and chemical stability but has low
energy density and short calendar life [76–78]. Fig. 5 summarizes per­
formance level of some commercialized Li-ion chemistries.
New generation lithium batteries stem from a variety of innovative
R&D efforts that aim to satisfy the electric vehicle requirement of the
largest energy storage capacity with the smallest associated weight
through development endeavors investigating new high capacity cath­
ode and anode as well as new electrolyte with high oxidation potential.
Some of the development paths that are adopted to improve energy
density are shown in Fig. 6. For instance, Li-ion batteries can deploy
more than one type of Li-insertion cathode or utilize novel separators
that are fabricated to allow for better wetting by the electrolyte solution
[79,80]. Furthermore, these efforts also include the use of ionic liquids
Fig. 5. Performance level of various commercial Li-ion chemistries [36].

5
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 6. Status and prospect of automotive batteries [93].
(IL) solvents to develop new electrolyte solutions which would widen
the electrochemical window and offer enhanced safety features as well
as the development of solid-state Li-ion batteries utilizing different
electrolytes i.e. Gel and polymeric [81–87]. However, it remains to be a
difficult task to find a replacement for the currently used alkyl carbonate
solvents. It is worth noting that it has been proven to be not useful to use
ILs as co-solvents to alkyl carbonate solvents. Despite this, ILs remains
full of potential and can open new horizons when further improvements
are achieved (i.e. in their physical properties) [88]. New generation
batteries also include those based on conversion chemistry such as (Li–S
and Li-air) which would significantly improve energy density beyond
the current intercalation chemistry of Li-ion cells. For instance, con­
version anodes such as (Li) have 10 times greater specific capacities to
that of graphite while conversion cathodes such as sulfur (S) and oxygen
(O2) demonstrate a six-time superiority in specific capacities [89]. Li–S
cells and Li–O2 cells are estimated to have a theoretical specific energy
of approximately 1168 Wh/kg and 1752–2691 Wh/kg respectively [90].
However, such cells are challenged by short lifespan and severe safety
concerns greatly hinder their practical application [91,92].
3.1.1. Configuration of the intercalation Li-ion cell
Commercial Li-ion cells in EV applications accounted for nearly all of
the storage capacity in the market with cylindrical shape Li-ion cells
booking almost half of the total number of cells. Fig. 7 shows cylindrical
as well as prismatic shapes of Li-ion cells. The prismatic shape has a
higher space utilization efficiency while the cylindrical shape is easier to
manufacture. Ciez and Whitacre [94] compared cylindrical and pris­
matic cells costs using a process-based cost model. Their conclusion
showed that the cell chemistry plays a key role in determining the per
kWh cost of the batteries. The cylindrical cell format was too small for
low specific energy batteries such as LMO which limited the thickness of
the electrodes inviting the need for additional cells to meet energy re­
quirements for EV application. On the other hand, prismatic LMO cells
offered an opportunity for large cell formats with thicker electrodes and
reduced cost per kWh. NMC and NCA cylindrical cells are less expensive
per kWh to manufacture than LMO cells. The main components of a
typical Li-ion cell are positive and negative electrodes (intercalation
electrodes), non-aqueous electrolyte, separator layer, two current col­
lectors and a container case. Electrodes have a key role in establishing
energy density and capacity of the cell. The widespread intercalation
electrodes were first developed in 1978 [95,96]. Such electrodes are
developed from materials structured to allow for easy insertion and
discharge of lithium ions. Positive electrode material can be of layered
structure (LCO) commonly used for portable electronics, NMC, NCA and
LiNiO2 (LNO); spinal structure (LMO) and olivine structure (LFP) and
LiMnPO4 (LMP) [97]. Negative electrode material is usually of carbo­
naceous origin such as graphite (most popular), coke, and mesocarbon
microbeads (MCMB) [98]. The electrolyte is a non-aqueous solution of a
6
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
Fig. 7. Shapes of commercial Li-ion cell (a) Prismatic cell [102] (b) Cylindrical
Cell [36].
lithium-containing salt (LiPF6) dissolved in an organic liquid mixture
such as ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), diethyl
carbonate (DEC) or ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) [99]. The separator
functions as a safety fuse that melts down in case of high temperature in
addition to electrically insulating negative and positive electrodes
allowing only for Li-ions to pass through [100,101]. The current col­
lector is a sheet metal attached to the surface area of electrodes. Its
function is to collect generated current from both electrodes and is
usually made of copper for the negative electrode and aluminum for the
positive electrode. The container case (usually aluminum or steel) is
meant to provide structural integrity to the cell and improve
thermo-physical properties [97].
3.1.2. Working principle of the intercalation Li-ion cell
During charge, electrical energy provided from an external source
causes an oxidation reaction at the anode electrode releasing positive
lithium ions and an equal amount of electrons at the surface of the
electrode. Electrons are collected by the Aluminum current collector
then directed to flow through the charging equipment to the cathode
electrode. Simultaneously, a reduction reaction at the cathode electrode
takes place when positive lithium ions (Cations) that diffuse through the
electrolyte react with charging electrons. Reduction products are
eventually intercalated into the electrode materials. This intercalation
process is limited by the single-electron reaction [103]. During
discharge, the process is reversed by directing electrons to flow from the
copper current collector through the external load. The separator only
allows for lithium ions flow, forcing electrons through the external cir­
cuit. This charge/discharge process is continuously repeated for the life
cycle of the battery cell. This process along with associated reaction at
each electrode is depicted in Fig. 8 for LCO cells.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

Fig. 8. Working principle of intercalation Li-ion cell [104].

3.2. The battery pack and adverse effects of un-regulated high (high or low) reveal the need for an effective battery thermal manage­
temperature ment system (BTMS). For a Li-ion battery pack, temperature beyond
acceptable range and temperature non-uniformity both are detrimental
Electric vehicles use a battery pack (also known as a battery) of tens to the battery pack performance and could result in a safety problem.
of thousands of battery cells to provide necessary energy and power Fig. 9 shows the working range of Li-ion cells. The ambient environment
requirements. These packs need to satisfy several requirements to be is an essential feature in temperature regulation dynamics, however,
used in electric vehicles. Common requirements set by most original dreadful ambient conditions (extreme hot or cold temperatures) are
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) include about 10 service years and impractical to avoid which presents a key challenge to battery pack
safety against fire [105]. A battery pack is made of several electrically temperature regulation and thermal management [113–119]. Here the
interconnected battery modules, a battery module is comprised of paper briefly discusses deteriorations due to unregulated high temper­
multiple groups of individual Li-ion cells. For the module or the battery atures such as performance degradation, thermal runaway and tem­
pack, connecting in parallel increases the energy capacity by increasing perature mal-distribution.
the charge/discharge (Ah) capacity, while connecting in series results in
an increased power capacity by increasing charge/discharge current. An
example of this could be the battery pack of Tesla Model S which is put
together by arranging 7104 cylindrical 18650 NCA-based Li-ion cells
(18 is the diameter in mm; 65 is the height in mm; 0 is the code for
cylindrical cell) in 16 modules [106]. Each module has 6 groups of 74
individual cells connected in parallel and then all 6 groups are con­
nected in series to form the battery module [107]. The ‘‘mSnP’’ deno­
tation can be used to indicate the series-parallel combination within a
battery module, where (m) is the number of cells connected in series and
(n) is the number of cells connected in parallel. Today, battery packs
show an apparent variability in energy capacity and subsequently
driving range for various commercial EV models such as BMW Mini e,
Ford Focus EV, Mitsubishi IMIEV and Tesla model S. For instance, the
Tesla Model S battery pack has a total energy capacity of 85 kWh while
BMW Mini e, Ford Focus EV, Mitsubishi IMIEV have energy capacities of
35, 23 and 16 kWh respectively [61]. Currently, battery packs for
commercial EVs are designed mostly from lithium cells with negative
electrodes that are carbon-based, but using LTO (Li4Ti5O12) as a nega­
tive electrode is a promising option that is demonstrating significance
due to its capability to enhance cells durability and fast charging per­
formance; while positive electrodes used include LMO, LFP, NCM, and
NCA. Within the battery pack, each Li-ion cell experiences temperature
rise during the discharge process but it does not well tolerate neither
temperatures beyond its operation range nor the non-uniform distribu­
tion of temperature [108]. The temperature range (safety range) differs
according to the chemistry used from - 40 to 60 ̊C [109]. However to get
optimum output, the battery temperature needs to be regulated within a
desired operating range specific for EV application between 15 and 35 ̊ C
[109–111]. When frequent temperature miss-regulation occurs for an
extended period, it causes some adverse effects that are shown to be
harmful to the cell performance, lifecycle and could even result in safety
problem, which would affect the overall efficiency and performance of
the cell and subsequently the battery pack and the electric vehicle [112].
For a battery pack, the adverse effects of unregulated temperature Fig. 9. Working range of the Li-ion cell [127].

7
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Performance degradation, cyclic based (due to charge/discharge
cycles) or calendar life based (due to storage without use), refers to a
drop in capacity and power qualities of Li-ion battery (also known as
capacity fade and power loss) [120]. Power loss is generally more severe
at sub-zero temperatures which would call for larger battery packs to be
deployed to perform the intended application i.e. engine cold-cranking
for hybrid EVs [118]. Capacity fade can be attributed to the loss of
active material inside the battery cell through transformation into an
inactive phase (lithium loss) [40]. Capacity fade can be due to the
overcharge of Li-ion cells while power loss can be a result of increased
internal impedance [116,121,122]. The current number of combina­
tions of electrode materials and electrolyte solvent/salts is over­
whelming which makes it difficult to put together a coherent and
comprehensive picture of all mechanisms associated with capacity fade.
However, operating temperature as well as storage temperature appears
to have a clear influence on performance degradation for nearly all
electrode materials and electrolyte chemistries [40]. Ramadass et al.
[111] and Shim et al. [113] showed a reduction in capacity by (22.5%
and 26.46%) and (4% and 65%) respectively for different types of bat­
teries under various temperature and cycle number conditions. Other
studies investigating capacity fade include Ehrlich who reported 9%
capacity fade for (C/LiMnO4 and C/LiCoO2) cells after 500 cycles at 1C
rate [123] and Liu et al. (2010) who reported 7.5%, 20.1%, and 22.1%
capacity loss after 2628 cycle, 757 cycle and 1376 respectively for
(C/LiFePO4) under various temperatures and voltages [124]. Research
on calendar life degradation e.g. Wu et al. reported a 20 mAh drop in
capacity due to storage at 60 ̊C for 60 days, while Jiang and Zhang listed
the requirements of storage of Li-ion batteries to lessen degradation
possibility when storing them without use [125,126].
Thermal runaway is the chain effect that ensues when a high-
temperature state induces a series of exothermic reactions that are
enhanced and increased via yet more elevated temperature until an
irreversible incident happens [40,128]. It could be caused by lithium
plating (the deposition of Li on the graphite anode in dendritic struc­
tures) due to the high overcharge of Li-ion cells or charging at sub-zero
temperatures [129]. To avoid such consequences, a variety of abuse tests
have been designed to measure the thermal stability and abuse tolerance
of a Li-ion cell, e.g. oven exposure [130], short-circuit [131], overcharge
[132], nail penetration [133] and crush tests [134]. A typical path for
thermal runaway starts at about 90 ̊C by the exothermic decomposition
of the SEI (solid electrolyte interface) layer of the negative electrode;
then an even highly exothermic reaction between the exposed negative
electrode and the electrolyte occurs at about 100 ̊C; next, the polymer
separator melts down at the temperature around 130 ◦ c leading to po­
tential short-circuit between the electrode. If temperature continues to
rise to more than 200 ̊C, a chain reaction may occur as the positive
electrode (lithium metal oxide material) decomposes giving out free
oxygen which may react to the solvent in the electrolyte or the positive
electrode materials. All these aforementioned reactions generate
gaseous products which in combination with high-temperature increase
internal pressure resulting in swelling of the battery cell or could even
lead to explosions [40]. The potential hazards of thermal runaway could
be lessened by deploying a variety of safety mechanisms including
thermal fuses, self-resetting devices, shutdown of separators, additives
of electrolyte, thermal retardant electrolytes and electrodes, and also the
development of an efficient battery thermal management system [135,
136]. Temperature mal-distribution in a battery pack is a result of the
unequal dissipation of heat caused by the decrease of heat transfer co­
efficient value from a maximum at external boundary cells to a mini­
mum at the inner cells of the battery pack. This could lead to vast
variations between cells in performance indicators that strongly depend
on temperature such as the capacity of individual cells. A well designed
BTMS could be utilized to regulate inter-cell temperature deviation and
keep the temperature deviation below a recommended value of 5 ̊C
[137,138]. Another concern is temperature imbalance within a cell
which is caused by a difference in heat generation rate between different
8
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
locations within the cell. Some research showed that the positive elec­
trode of LiCoO2 generates four times more heat than the rest of the cell
[139]. This would cause local deteriorations impairing the overall per­
formance of the cell and may result in a failure to the battery. Electrode
modification can enhance intra-cell temperature uniformity, as well as
using an intra-cell cooling method such as using the electrolyte as the
coolant [140,141].
4. Energy consumption
Energy consumption of a mid-size vehicle is about 165 Wh/km for
urban driving and 137 Wh/km for highway driving according to the U.S.
urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS) and the highway fuel
economy driving schedule (HWFEDS). Hence, the vehicle’s driving
range would depend significantly on the amount of onboard energy set
forth by the type of energy source and its energy density and bounded by
design considerations such as overall weight [39]. Evaluating the energy
consumption of EVs has a significant role in assessing and quantifying
their environmental benefits. Such efforts include measurements of
comparative energy consumption for prototype, pre-production and
production passenger vehicles on a like-for-like basis that were con­
ducted during the Brighton to London future car challenge (BLFCC)
organized by Britain’s royal automobile club (RAC) in 2010 and again in
2011. Drivers were free to decide which combination of eco-driving
techniques to use to navigate the 57 mile urban/extra-urban route in a
predefined time window using as little energy as possible. In 2010, a
comparative study conducted during this challenge by presenting the
energy consumption of different types of vehicles (AEV, HEV, ICEV and
HFCV). Results showed that AEV ranked as the least energy consumer
(average 0.62 MJ/km) followed by HEV (average 1.14 MJ/km) then
HFCV (1.2 MJ/km) and lastly ICEV (average 1.68 MJ/km). The paper
also estimated CO2 emissions for the same types of vehicles. Results
showed that HEV ranked as the lowest emitter of CO2 (70 g CO2/km)
followed by the most efficient diesel vehicles (80 g CO2/km) then the
majority of diesel vehicles (surpassed 110 g CO2/km) while AEVs
emitted (70–110 g CO2/km) assuming united kingdom grid average
emissions factor of 542 g CO2/kWh [142]. The stated consumption of
electric vehicles in this study is found to be within the range of energy
consumption for commercial EVs published by some manufacturers as
summarized in Fig. 10 [143]. In 2011, Lorf et al. [144] presented an
analysis of the factors influencing the energy consumption of various
types of vehicle technologies participating in the RAC future car chal­
lenge. The race (a 91.94 km route from Brighton to London in England)
is won by crossing the end line in a predetermined time frame (a min­
imum of 2 h and 45 min and a maximum of 3 h and 30 min, including a
15–30 min stop-over) using as little energy as possible. All legal pas­
senger cars and light commercial vehicles (ICEVs, HEVs, PHEV, AEVs,
etc.) produced after January 1st, 2001 were eligible for this competition.
Fig. 10. Energy consumption of various EV models [143].
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

ICEVs had to satisfy a maximum requirement of emissions of 110 g [148] discussed and reviewed these factors and their influence on
CO2/km (new European driving cycle) [145]. Results showed that ve­ electric vehicle energy consumption during the use phase and classified
hicle’s energy consumption and ensued emissions are greatly influenced them into six groups as shown in Fig. 11. Sub-factors influencing vehicle
by its power train technology, traction ratio (percentage of time used to technology, natural environment and driver-related factors are sum­
accelerate the vehicle relative to total driving time) and regenerative marized in Table 2 along with their impacts. In the same study, the
braking magnitude, and less influenced by the average speed in the authors used real-world data and adopted an empirical approach using a
range 25–70 km/h. Sweeting et al. [143] studied typical liquid fuel Nissan Leaf 2011 to study the impacts of many factors on EV energy
ICEVs and EVs energy consumption. Results showed that EVs can offer consumption. Consequently, several EV energy consumption factors
up to 75% reduction in “tank to wheel” energy consumption and would were highlighted to be statistically more significant. In their results,
offer only about 58% in case of having poor energy management char­ climate and topography showed a significant impact on energy con­
acteristics in terms of vehicle design optimization, driving style and sumption compared to other factors. Results also showed a statistical
auxiliary loads. The energy management referred to in Ref. [143] was insignificance of interaction of topography and climate but high statis­
used to denote the condition of auxiliary power draws (such as heating) tical significance of combined effect of traffic and topography (high
and driving style. However, the energy management of EVs can also traffic means numerous acceleration events which on a slope route
refer to strategies predicated on the use of sophisticated algorithms would demand more energy) as well as traffic and climate, and infra­
based on power electronics and power processors to optimize the overall structure and climate due to longer duration of deployment of HVAC
performance of the electric vehicle. A comprehensive review within system per kilometer when driving through an urban area (it takes more
such context was published in 2013 by Tie and Tan [63]. In their paper, time to drive 1 km in an urban area). Also, the paper derived a numerical
energy management was divided into a low-level component control binary model using data collected from a test vehicle to simulate real
concerned with (i) the different types of arrangements to the various world usage. This simplified model was based on the processed data but
power electronic components and (ii) strategies on controlling energy excluding interactions between factors. The model suggested that HVAC
and power flow. And a high-level supervisory control focused on (i) has the most significant impact on energy consumption dramatically
rule-based control including both (a) deterministic i.e. on-off strategies affecting driving range especially in a hilly high traffic area. Further­
and (b) fuzzy-rule based more sophisticated controllers such as the two more, topography is another factor that was found to greatly impact
fuzzy logic controllers driver’s intention predictor DIP and power bal­
ance controller PBC, and (ii) optimization (analytical or numerical) by
(a) global optimization based on future and past power demands and (b) Table 2
real-time optimization methods (RTO). Impacts of various sub-factors influencing technology, environment and driver
factors [148,152,153].
Another study by Liu et al. [119] utilized deep learning and genetic
algorithm to design an integrated management system for real-time Factor Sub-factors Influenced by Impacts
applications to control the multi-mode powertrain of plug-in hybrid Technology Battery pack Cell chemistry, Battery pack’s total
electric vehicles. This work introduced a hierarchical framework to and vehicle capacity, mass and mass, capacity and
generate the necessary control actions. The presented model has been energy density, energy density
number of cells and
successfully validated and shown a high ability to improve the fuel SOH
economy. BTMS Working mode Cooling/heating
More research was done on electric vehicles to evaluate a variety of (heating or cooling) load
parameters, their correlations, and influences associated with energy HVAC Local climate and HVAC load
driver’s behavior
consumption. Neubauer et al. [146] used NREL’s battery lifetime anal­
Natural Topography –
ysis and simulation tool for vehicles (BLAST-V) to investigate the environment Climate and – HVAC load and
sensitivity of EV utility to driver aggression and climate, cabin heating factors weather driving behavior
and cooling, cabin pre-conditioning, BTMS cooling and heating over conditions
vehicle lifetime. In another study there was an excess of 16 factors that Driver factors Driving style Experience, age, and Acceleration profile
gender
were identified to influence energy consumption [147]. In 2016, Li et al.

Fig. 11. Factors influencing EV energy consumption during the use phase [145].

9
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
energy consumption. Lohse-Busch et al. [149] studied impacts of
ambient temperature on energy consumption for various vehicles (HEV,
PHEV and BEV) by comparing energy consumption at various temper­
atures to a reference value at 72 ̊F. Their results at 20 ̊F, showed the
highest increase in energy consumption (2%–100%) was ensued in cold
climate (due to high powertrain losses) to get powertrain temperature
up to operating levels. At 95 ̊F, the increase in energy consumption (2%–
70%) was ensued due to engaging HVAC system to maintain cabin
temperature at 72 ̊F. It was presented that these reported losses
depended on the HVAC system type, powertrain architecture, power­
train capabilities and drive patterns. It was also highlighted that con­
trolling for powertrain efficiency would maximize impacts of HVAC
energy loss. In their effort to describe a simplified analytical function for
estimating energy consumption for electric vehicles, Yuan et al. [150]
highlighted major losses and subsequent efficiencies of the charged
energy as well as the regenerative braking energy flow path for an
electric vehicle. Zhang et al. [151] recognized the air conditioning
system as the largest energy consumer among auxiliary systems of an
electric vehicle. Their paper studied its total annual energy consumption
and influencing factors across capital cities of 30 provinces in China. The
conclusion made was that energy consumption was influenced by the
geographical location of the city (which would determine its climate) as
well as the intensity of vehicle use within the city. The paper also
showed that heat pump systems are more efficient than simple systems
with PTC (Positive Thermal Coefficient) heaters and were most efficient
in mid-latitude locations.
These studies highlighted various factors impacting the energy
consumption of the electric vehicle. However, factors such as powertrain
efficiency, BTMS, HVAC and driving style were found to be widely
common across most studies. This paper shall review two factors namely
HVAC and BTMS, as discussed in the next two sub-sections.
4.1. Cabin thermal management
The automotive air conditioning system provides necessary heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning to ensure a comfortable environment in
the driving cabin and enough visibility (defogging and deicing) for
purposes of driving safety [154–158]. It is designed to mainly regulate
the cabin’s air temperature and humidity to satisfy passenger’s thermal
comfort [159–161]. Cabin thermal management aims primarily to
minimize energy use without compromising passenger comfort. The
electric vehicle air conditioning system often utilizes a scroll compressor
in place the reciprocating compressor used in the traditional air condi­
tioning system of ICEVs. This would offer the advantages of lower en­
ergy consumption and lightweight. In both cases, the automotive air
conditioning system typically uses a huge amount of the vehicle’s on­
board energy. Orofino et al. [162] showed that operating the HVAC
system increased the fuel consumption of a group of ICE vehicles with
different sizes by 23% up to 41%. Similarly, Torregrosa-Jaime et al.
noted that the absence of waste heat in an electric vehicle led to cabin
heating posing a significant challenge which would negatively impact
vehicle energy management and subsequently its driving range. Heat
pump systems have proved to be a significant improvement for EVs due
to their capability to improve the coefficient of performance (COP)
reducing HVAC energy consumption. HVAC systems that are based on
the vapor compression cycle are dominant in the mobile air conditioning
domain due to advantages such as convenient replacement, low cost and
easy maintenance. It is also the preferred option for adoption in EVs for
their capability to fulfill the manufacturer’s aspiration for a direct
transition from conventional vehicles. In addition to the widely-used
common vapor compression systems, current technology includes
other options that can be classified as non-VCC systems such as mag­
netocaloric and thermoelectric systems [163]. Qi [158] reviewed ad­
vances in air conditioning and heat pump systems for vehicle
applications. The paper by Qi [158] discussed the design and perfor­
mance characteristics of the current options of Air Conditioning (AC)
10
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
and HP technology and classified them into VCC systems and non-VCC
systems. Among VCC systems this paper discussed R134a systems, CO2
systems, other working fluid systems, and AC/HP systems as well as
challenges associated with them. Among non-VCC systems this paper
discussed magnetocaloric effect systems, and thermoelectric effect sys­
tems. A comparison between the three heat pump technologies shows a
variety of advantages and disadvantages related to size, performance
and other criterion as summarized in Table 3. Another review by Zhang
et al. [32] classified HP/AC systems based on vapor compression
refrigeration (VCR) used in conventional vehicles into dedicated heater
systems (DH) and fuel heater (FH) systems while reversible cycle sys­
tems were classified into HP systems and improved HP systems with
demisting. Non-VCC systems include thermal energy storage systems
(TES), thermoelectric (TE) and magnetic effect (ME) systems, waste heat
driven systems (WHD). Integrated thermal management (ITM) systems
combining AC and BTMS include air cooling, evaporative cooling, and
secondary loop cooling. Their paper compared advantages and disad­
vantages of different solutions as summarized in Table 4. The drawn
conclusion was that despite disadvantages of VCR-DH systems (high
electricity consumption or impracticality issues for fuel-operated
heaters), these systems are widely adopted owing to their limited vari­
ations compared to existing systems in conventional ICEVs. Comparably,
VCC-HP systems are more energy efficient as well as able to flexibly
adapt to different EVs making them a more preferred option. Further­
more, the ITM systems are the future of vehicle conditioning and battery
cooling, but are still in need to overcome challenges such as complex
structure, and higher requirement on control of the system.
In an electric vehicle, energy and power demands for heating as well
as the HVAC system are provided exclusively electrically from the bat­
tery pack. This could negatively impact the driving range of the vehicle
depending on outside weather conditions. In real-world scenarios
heating load (due to lack of waste heat) and HVAC transient loads are
important contributors to overall energy consumption [164]. Samadani
et al. [165] showed that HVAC energy consumption of a mid-size Sedan
decreased its driving range by 40%, 49% and 53% for an ambient
temperature of 8 ̊C, - 2 ̊C and - 12 ̊C. The national renewable energy
laboratory (NREL) showed that the energy needed for cabin cooling
loads can reduce PEV range by up to 35%–50% [166]. Fig. 12 shows the
effect of heating on range reduction extracted from a study by Meyer
et al. [28]. It is observable that heating always leads to range reduction
due to large energy needs while the severity of impact depends on the
type of heating technology being used. Various technology solutions
have been explored to reduce energy consumption to increase the
driving range. Tesla, recommends using seat heaters instead of cabin
heating to reduce energy consumption for its Model S users [167].
Thermal energy storage (TES) technology offers another relatively
inexpensive solution to extend the driving range of EVs [32]. Fig. 13
shows the effects of thermal storage on HVAC energy consumption.
Bellocchi et al. [160] showed that air conditioning can consume up to
32% of vehicle’s onboard energy which can decrease range to 72 km
from a base value of 94 km. However, the introduction of a heat pump
reduces energy consumption by 17–52% in heating mode depending on
geographical context and decreases driving range loss to about 6%.
Table 3
Advantages and disadvantages of various heat pump technologies [43].
HP Technology Advantages Disadvantages
MAGNETOCALORIC Compactness, quiet MCM material, poor COP at
EFFECT extreme conditions, complex
design
VAPOR High capacity density, Poor COP under large
COMPRESSION compactness temperature difference,
alternative refrigerant issues
THERMOELECTRIC Compactness, quiet, no Lower COP, less capacity
EFFECT moving parts or density
working fluid
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

Table 4
Advantages and disadvantages of various AC systems [32].
AC Systems Advantages Disadvantages

VCR-DH VCR-EH systems Simplicity, reliability, quiet Low heating COP, associated with alternative refrigerant and
SYSTEMS serious driving range issues
VCR-FH systems Simplicity, reliability, and little influence on the driving range Tailpipe emissions
VCC-HP Compactness, compatible with current AC technology, high Poor COP at extreme conditions, range loss at cold temperatures
SYSTEMS capacity density
NON-VCC TES systems High performance and energy-efficient Low energy density
SYSTEMS
TE or ME AC systems Compactness, quiet, easy mode switch Low COP and capacity density, driving range loss
WHE systems Energy efficient Insufficient waste heat for BEV
Solar assisted AC Energy efficiency, ability to recharge the vehicle battery, Intermittent nature of the sun
systems reduction in cooling load
Air cycle HP systems Free working fluid, simplicity and cheapness, environmentally Low heating effect, poor energy efficiency, noisy
friendly
ITM SYSTEMS Air cooling Simplicity, space-saving, low cost Dust deposit, high air mass flow, bad heat transfer performance
Evaporative cooling Compactness, good heat transfer performance Battery descaling, heating the battery is a challenge in winter
Secondary loop Energy efficient Complex system, battery descaling
cooling

day environmental conditions, geographic location, and trip start time.

Fig. 12. Effects of heating on EV driving range [28].
Fig. 13. Effects of thermal storage on HVAC energy consumption [28].
Their paper also studied trends of increased range due to cabin
pre-conditioning and quantified its predicted increase depending on
geographic location. The presented results showed a strong influence of
local ambient environment conditions on HVAC energy consumption, as
well as a pronounced difference in EV range subject to trip start time and
ambient conditions (95 km–128 km). Cabin pre-conditioning effects are
found to be relatively minor for trips starting in the early portion of the
day due to low contrast between thermal comfort and ambient condi­
tions. On the other hand, trips starting later in the day experience high
thermal “soak” increasing the transient power required to establish
thermal comfort conditions. Meyer et al. [28] investigated various so­
lutions developed and approved by Hanon systems, Hyundai America
technical center, Inc. (HATCI) and the national renewable energy lab­
oratory (NREL) for Kia soul BEV range extension. The research vehicle (a
Kia soul, BEV) is usually equipped with either a PTC heater or an R134a
HP using ambient air and waste heat of vehicle components for its heat
source with PTC heater combination [175]. Results demonstrated the
effect of thermal storage (TS) incorporation to be 5%–22% range
extension at ambient temperatures ranging from 5 ̊ C to – 18 ̊ C
respectively.
In 2019, Marshall et al. [154] reviewed vehicle thermal management
focusing on the cabin, electronics (batteries and insulated-gate bipolar
transistors), and exterior components of vehicles. The paper indicated
that the main challenges to the cabin thermal management are related to
the HVAC system with improvement efforts generally focused on two
key areas, namely, minimizing HVAC load by reducing heat absorption
through various technologies (i.e. Surface glazing and tinting and also
photovoltachromic devices) and improving the efficiency of the cooling
system by technologies such as zoned cooling. Furthermore, the paper
also highlighted the difference in handling HVAC improvements for EVs.
For instance, power demands for EVs can be reduced by the imple­
mentation of heat pumps and thermal batteries.

Other methods that are investigated to reduce the energy consumption
of the HVAC system include zonal heating/cooling [168,169],
solar-reflective glazing [170,171] and cabin thermal isolation [172].
Cabin pre-conditioning has also been studied as another viable solution
to increase the range of EVs, but its benefits showed a strong dependence
on time of the day [173,174]. Generally, it aims to regulate and maintain
the cabin environment during charge time reducing transient power
requirements. In US, Kambly and Bradley [174] utilized a system-level
approach of HVAC energy consumption in EVs and its correlation to
transient environmental parameters to develop a model to study and
simulate effects of various factors impacting driving range such as day to
4.2. Battery thermal management
Thermal control of the battery pack is one of the main requirements
of the battery management system (BMS) to prevent undesirable con­
sequences. Regardless of the size and various types of EVs for road
transport, all of them require a BMS [176]. Broadly, a BMS is any system
(mechanical, electronic or any possible device or technology) that
manages the battery (a single cell, a module or a battery pack)
rechargeable or non-rechargeable [177,178]. A BMS is typically
comprised of sensors, multiple algorithm controllers, actuators, signal
wires and computation algorithms to decide the optimum charge/di­
scharge current characteristics from estimations of SOC and SOH of the

11
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
battery [39]. Some of its objectives include protection against damage,
ensuring proper operating range and prolonging battery life cycle. These
goals are realized by monitoring the battery, estimating its state,
balancing it, reporting data, etc. [179] Thermal control is achieved by
the battery thermal management system (BTMS). The BTMS is based on
a variety of conventional and emerging thermal management system
(TMS) strategies [180]. It performs cooling/heating to keep the tem­
perature within the operating range and below a maximum value
pre-specified as a safety limit for different battery chemistry [109–111].
The BTMS’s desired features include ease of installation, ease of oper­
ation and maintenance, lightness of weight and freedom from emissions
of harmful gases [181]. Ambient environment plays an essential role in
temperature regulation dynamics, however, dreadful ambient condi­
tions (extreme hot or cold temperatures) are impractical to avoid which
presents a key challenge to battery pack temperature regulation and
thermal management [113–119]. Some of the ways to provide the
necessary thermal management under cold conditions include the wide
utilization of external heating methods in addition to various novel and
advanced technologies. For instance, in 2017 Wang et al. [118] reported
a novel Li-ion structure called the “all-climate-battery” (ACB) that can
-without external heating-heat itself up from sub-freezing temperatures.
Results of their study showed the ability of heating this battery to zero
degree Celsius in 20 s and 30 s from – 20 ̊C and – 30 ̊C respectively while
only consuming about 3.8% and 5.5% of the cell capacity respectively.
In a subsequent study, the same research group went on to demonstrate
the fast charging capability at sub-freezing temperatures that can be
reaped through the use of the same ACB structure for over 500 cycles
without Li plating [129]. For the high-temperature thermal manage­
ment, Fig. 14 shows some of the various classification methods for TMS
deployed in BTMS designs. Today, a well-known classification based on
power consumption classifies BTMSs into active systems that utilize
additional sources such as liquid flow and forced air to enhance heat
transfer, and passive systems such as heat pipe and phase change ma­
terials (PCMs). Siddique et al. [182] reviewed some of the promising
passive and active BTMSs, and discussed the general advantages and
Fig. 14. Various classification methods for TMSs deployed in BTMS designs.
12
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
disadvantages of passive and active systems. Then, the PCM-based
BTMSs for rectangular and cylindrical batteries were extensively
reviewed embracing relevant literature on topics such as synthesis, types
and properties of PCMs, and the performance of PCM-based BTMSs. For
active systems the same paper [182] reviewed the technology of ther­
moelectric cooler (TEC) and the relevant literature. It also briefly dis­
cussed the limitations and challenges of PCM-BTMS and TEC-BTMS. It
concluded that the rectangular based PCM-BTMS system slightly out­
performed their cylindrical based counterpart. Also, a research gap
could be established regarding PCM systems by considering existing
limitations and challenges such as supercooling, availability, and flam­
mability. Their review of TEC based BTMS highlighted a lack of litera­
ture in this area of research since 2003. Smith et al. [183] proposed a
BTMS system for high power battery of 8 prismatic cells based on heat
pipe technology. The system was designed of heat extraction module for
cell level thermal control, heat dissipation module of liquid cooled cold
plates for system level thermal control, and heat transfer module to
transfer heat between them. The system was tested for a heat load of up
to 400 W/module and demonstrated satisfactory performance.
Another classification based on thermal cycle options organizes
BTMS systems into VCC systems, non-VCC systems and a hybrid mix of
both systems. Kim et al. [184] reviewed BTMS systems for EVs in terms
of their maximum temperature and maximum temperature difference as
well as discussing an effective design that would complement the dis­
advantages of each system. The paper categorized BTMS systems as
shown in Fig. 15 into VCC based systems such as cabin air cooling,
second-loop liquid cooling, and direct refrigerant two-phase cooling,
and non-VCC based systems such as phase change material cooling, heat
pipe cooling, and thermoelectric element cooling. It also showed that
BTMS systems based on VCC are widely adopted in EVs due to their
advantage of utilizing prevailing mobile AC systems. Furthermore, It
discussed the advantages and disadvantages of VCC systems and various
studies related to their performance enhancement.
In 2018, Cen et al. [185] experimentally studied the cooling of a
battery pack of BAK 18650 cylindrical Li-ion cells by direct utilization of
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 15. Various battery cooling systems [184].
AC refrigerant in a fin and tube heat exchanger configuration without
considering applicability to heating or defrost. In their results, the pro­
posed system showed acceptable thermal control by keeping the pack
temperature below 35 ̊ C under high ambient temperature as high as 40 ̊
C. Furthermore, temperature non-uniformity was within 1.5 ̊ C under
road drive test conditions and remained below 4 ̊ C under constant
discharge rate of 1.5 C. Also, configuration of the refrigeration circuit
was shown to have a significant impact on temperature non-uniformity
which inferred potential improvement through further optimization.
Krüger et al. [186] used thermal battery and heat exchanger simulation
models to evaluate the effects of additional cooling demand imposed by
battery cooling on the refrigeration cycle of a hybrid electric vehicle.
Their results showed that the energy consumption of the refrigeration
cycle was increased by up to 11% depending on weather conditions and
drive cycle. Also, in hot weather conditions battery cooling negatively
affects thermal comfort of the passenger as it increases evaporator outlet
temperature by 1 K. Classifying BTMS systems according to the working
fluid (air, liquid, PCMs, and hybrid systems) would give a broader view
and contrast the performance of each cooling medium regardless of the
adopted thermal cycle. Air systems offer advantages such as simplicity
and low maintenance costs but is limited by disadvantages such as noisy
operation and low heat capacity of air [187,188]. It can be subdivided
according to the source of air into three categories: (i) utilizing outside
air, (ii) utilizing outside air plus preconditioned cabin air, and (iii) uti­
lizing cooled air from evaporator [189]. Studies on air cooling investi­
gate the enhancement of various major design variables, namely
geometry of airflow channel investigated by Park (2013) [190], Xu and
He (2013) [191], Sun and Dixon (2014) [192]; cell layout investigated
by Xie et al. (2017) [193], Hong et al. (2018) [194], Fan et al. (2013)
[195], Wang et al. (2014) [196] and Yang et al. (2015) [197]; and
airflow path investigated by Mahamud and Park (2011) [198], Yu et al.
(2014) [199] and Lu et al. (2016) [200]. Secondary loop liquid cooling
(an indirect liquid cooling method) is widely utilized in commercialized
electric vehicles. It can overcome the drawbacks associated with air
13
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
cooling when it comes to the huge heat extraction capabilities required
for high-performance electric vehicles. Studies related to mini channel
cold plate cooling include investigating the geometry of the cooling
channel such as those carried out by Jarrett and Kim (2011) [201] and
Jarrett and Kim (2014) [202]. And investigating the number of channels
and flow direction was researched by Jin et al. (2014) [203], Huo et al.
(2015) [204], Zhao et al. (2015) [205], Qian et al. (2016) [206] and Lan
et al. (2016) [207]. Commercial vehicles utilize a variety of battery
cooling concepts, e.g. Tesla Model S uses an indirect liquid cooling
system, Nissan leaf uses an air cooling system and BMW i3 uses a
refrigeration cooling system. Current BTMS categories are summarized
in Table 5 in terms of the pros and cons associated with each category.
Arora et al., 2018 [180] reviewed existing and emerging TMSs with the
goal of identifying prospective candidates for implementation in
modular architecture of electric vehicles battery pack. Their paper
concluded that a hybrid system of at least two different TMSs would
offer a robust modular option for thermally managing the battery pack.
It also inferred that the PCM-TMS is a promising candidate to be an
integral part of the TMS hybrid design considering factors such as
integration, cost, technical risk, and energy efficiency. Thermoelectric
based TMS is another promising candidate due to acceptable COP and
superior state of development.
5. Modeling and simulation
Behavior and performance of a number of components of previously
discussed EV energy systems have been numerically modeled and
simulated using several open-source/commercial numerical simulation
software packages. Despite a slight discrepancy with experimental re­
sults, the simulation approach is widely adopted in the process of EV
development and manufacturing because it offers many advantages such
as presenting a more comprehensive result (it could estimate the result
of all points unlike that of experimental testing), flexibility (ability to
investigate multiple variations of a specific design or lab test scheme),
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

Table 5
Pros/cons of various BTMS systems [185].
Air-based Indirect liquid Dielectric liquids Refrigeration circuit TEC PCM

General aspects
Ease of use ++ – + + ++ ++
Flexibility of package integration + ++ – + + ++
a
Space needed – – + + o
Weight + – – o + o
Thermal management efficiency
Max. Cooling power – + o ++ – –
Integration of heating + + – +/− ++ +
Conditioning uniformity – + + ++ + ++
Interference with other components o – + – ++ ++
Economic considerations
Initial costs ++ o – – o +
Maintenance efforts + – – – + ++
Lifetime + o o – ++ ++
Eligibility for special use cases
Battery swapping ++ – + – ++ ++
Fast charging – ++ – ++ – +
Extreme climate – + – ++ – +

++ clearly superior + superior o neutral - inferior – clearly inferior.

a
Only as a secondary system assisting the main thermal management.

internal insight (ability to estimate e.g. core temperature of the battery

Table 6
cell), and time/cost saving (reduced number of physical models manu­
Comparison between model types [209].
factured for testing). Next and within this context, this paper will discuss
numerical modeling and simulation of battery cell and battery pack Model Accuracy Complexity Physical Suited
interpretability application
(simulating electric and thermal behavior as well as TMS performance),
and total EV simulation (related to total energy consumption and range Physical Very High (>50 High Battery system
high parameters) design
estimation).
+++ – ++
Empirical Medium Low (2–3 Low Predictions of
5.1. Modeling parameters) lifetime and
– – – efficiency
Abstract Medium Medium to low Limited to Real-time
The battery cell can be modeled to investigate its behavior and (2 up to 30 acceptable monitoring and
response during charge/discharge process as well as estimating values parameters) diagnosis
descriptive of the battery cell/pack present operating states such as state – + +
of charge (SOC) and instantaneous available power in addition to other
quantities. The estimation procedure of such quantities must be able to
low level (micro-scale) structural details and associated electrochemical
adapt to the change in cell/pack characteristics that are incurred during
phenomena of the battery cell (thermodynamics, active species kinetics
operation. Battery models can be categorized into various groups ac­
and transport phenomena) which enables them to offer significant
cording to criteria such as the perspective of modeling, depth of
analytical insight as well as producing the highest predictive accuracy
modeling, modeling approach and time scale of the modeling process.
among all model types [40,210]. The main disadvantage of these models
The different perspective of modeling gives rise to electrochemical
is the huge number of parameters involved (sometimes more than 50
models, thermal models, electrical models, mechanical models, molec­
parameters such as diffusion coefficients and other material related
ular models and a combination of interdisciplinary models e.g. electro-
characteristics), and the sizable configuration effort required to estab­
thermal models. The different level (depth) of modeling gives rise to
lish the physical model [209,211]. For Li-ion batteries, the
system-level models, pack level models, stack and module-level models,
physics-based approaches available to generate battery models include
full cell models, half-cell models and material level models. The various
molecular-scale partial differential equations (PDEs), micro-scale (par­
modeling techniques give rise to physical-based models, empirical
ticle-scale) PDEs, continuum cell-scale PDEs (obtained by volume
models, analytical or mathematical models and hybrid models. Models
averaging of particle scale PDEs) and cell scale ordinary differential
that vary according to their time scale include short term models that are
equations (ODEs) obtained via model order reduction. Current electro­
useful for the dynamic behavior of the cell and partial charge and
chemical models include a number of models established from the P2D
discharge. Also, medium-term models that can be used for full-cycle
(pseudo-two-dimensional) model firstly presented by Newman’s group
modeling and finally long term models applied to multiple cycles and
based on electrochemical kinetics and the theories of the porous elec­
complete lifetime analysis [208]. Saidani et al. reviewed battery models
trode and concentrated solution as well as general conservation laws of
available in literature by grouping them into physical models, empirical
charge, mass, and energy [42,212]. In 2013, Fang et al. [213] developed
models and abstract models [209]. These three types offer a wide range
and validated an electrochemical-thermal model for LiFePO4/graphite
of accuracy (how close is the model’s result to the correct value),
battery describing several charge/discharge related heat phenomenon
complexity (according to the number of variables involved in the model,
such as entropic heat, joule heat, ionic migration heat. Li et al. (2018)
which would affect simulation time/resources and real-time applica­
[214] developed and investigated an electrochemical-thermal coupled
bility), and physical interpretability (analytical insight provided by the
model for LiFePO4/graphene hybrid cathode lithium-ion batteries.
model). These models are usually coupled to an appropriate thermal
However, recent advances in contemporary computing power made it
model (selected expressions for heat generation, energy balance and
realistic for researchers such as Song et al. [215] and Xu et al. [216] to
thermal boundary conditions) to investigate the thermal and heat
develop and investigate higher-order (3D) electrochemical based
transfer behavior of battery cell or battery pack. A comparison between
models.
all three types of models is summarized in Table 6.
Empirical models (also known as black boxes) are based on empirical
Physical models (also known as white boxes) are concerned with the

14
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049

parameters that often have no physical meaning and offer no valuable an unscented Kalman filter (UKF) algorithm and used it to estimate the
insight into the system [210,217]. The mathematical approach used to battery SOC. Their model accounts for impacts on the battery internal
develop the function transferring inputs into outputs is what facilitates resistance due to different/C-rates and SOCs, as well as impacts on the
the quick response in predictions of such models as well as their ease of battery capacity due to different temperatures and C-rates. Their work
configuration. Generally, these models have limited accuracy especially compared model results to experimental data and showed that their
for oversimplified cases but could experience further enhancement if proposed model can simultaneously ease computational cost and
combined with physical-based models [217]. However, more sophisti­ improve SOC estimation. Fig. 17 depicts (a) terminal voltage and (b)
cated empirical models such as those based on stochastic models have maximum error and it shows that their presented model can adequately
shown improved performance and ability to deliver better battery simulate the battery’s terminal voltage with a maximum error less than
parameter results. For instance, stochastic models in the microstructure 3%. Fig. 18 shows the model simulation of SOC and subsequent pre­
domain can be fitted to real tomographic image data and used to diction error.
generate virtual 3D microstructures which would help to overcome is­ Baccouche et al. [230] reviewed various model-based SOC estima­
sues of high-cost imaging and low sensibility [218–221]. Hein et al. tion approaches for NMC batteries at 25 ◦ C that utilize various OCV and
[222] used 3D virtual images generated by the stochastic model and 3D ECM models. The reviewed ECM battery models included several 1st
real images of anode microstructure to investigate differences between order models and a single 2nd order ECM model. The OCV models
various electrochemical quantities. These differences were found to be covered a variety of models that include linear, exponential, and poly­
negligible at low currents while a more pronounced effect for small nomial while SOC estimation algorithms included among others the
differences was identified at large currents. Also, their qualitative and extended Kalman filter (EKF) and PI observer. This paper also proposed
quantitative analysis indicated comparable behavior of real and virtual a model for OCV estimation that was integrated with the 1st order ECM
structures under simulation. Westhoff et al. [223] presented a para­ model and EKF for SOC estimation. It compared the performance of the
metric stochastic 3D microstructure model to simulate the morphology suggested model to other reviewed models as depicted in Fig. 19 and
of battery cell anodes. In Refs. [223–226], the researchers used models concluded that this OCV model presents the best compromise and it has
from contemporary publications to propose a significantly simplified reduced computation and memory cost by utilizing simplified functions
framework for modeling 3D microstructure of battery electrodes while and only five coefficients for computations. It showed a reliable fit with
providing a decent fit to tomographic image data for several kinds of experimental data (RMSE is about 0.01V) and the best SOC estimation
electrodes [223–226]. Fig. 16 shows the 3D visualizations of (a) cutout precision (error is less than 3%). All of which prompted its applicability
from tomographic image data and (b) model realization for the power in BMS of electric vehicles for online SOC estimation. The paper sug­
cell anode. Comparison of characteristics of tomographic image data gested as well its model to be validated at temperatures other than 25 ◦ C
and corresponding model realizations showed small differences in vol­ to further prove its reliability.
ume fraction, specific surface area, mean sphericity, specific integral of
mean curvature and specific Euler characteristic.
Abstract models (also known as grey boxes) are somewhere between
white and black box models. Abstract models provide an equivalent/
alternative but dissimilar representation of the physical phenomena
[210]. Among the various possible forms of abstract models, equivalent
circuit models (ECM) that replaces complex electrochemical processes
by simple electrical circuit representations remain the more popular
choice due to conservation of the correlation with battery dynamics and
other advantages such as simplicity, practicality and adequate accuracy
[227]. Furthermore, abstract models also have a reduced configuration
cost, but still require a calibration scheme to compute model’s circuit
parameter values from experimental data (e.g. lookup-tables that are
used to calculate the OCV as a function of SOC for most ECM model
types). ECM has been used to describe and investigate various processes
that take place during a battery cell operation (charge/discharge elec­
trical response, thermal behavior, etc.) as well as estimating a number of
important quantities such as (SOC, SOH, etc.). Dubarry et al. [228]
established the positive impact of the accurate estimation of parameters
of the cell ECM model on the modeling of the battery pack performance.
Lu et al. [127] discussed many algorithms utilized for estimation of SOC,
SOH and other parameters. Among integrated algorithms for SOC esti­
mation which utilizes two or more classic SOC estimation algorithms,
namely simple correction, weighted fusion in addition to Kalman
filtering (or extended Kalman filtering, EKF). All of which can be com­
bined with several ECM-models that may or may not include hysteresis
voltages. Tian et al. [229] presented a modified ECM model enhanced by

Fig. 16. Tomographic image and model realization of cell anode [224]. Fig. 17. Terminal voltage [229].

15
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 18. SOC estimation [229].
On the other hand, modeling the whole electric vehicle can be used
to estimate overall energy consumption as well as instantaneous energy
consumption (power consumption) under various driving conditions
and identify influencing factors. Overall energy consumption can be
estimated using statistical data distributions (often detached from
vehicle dynamics and drivetrain behavior), but instantaneous energy
consumption would better be estimated using analytical models (linked
to drivetrain performance) to minimize computation time as well as
allowing for a more confident identification of drivetrain parameters
and their influences on energy consumption [231,232]. A simple way to
evaluate the vehicle’s energy consumption and its relevant character­
istics is through the use of macroscopic models such as EMFAC, mobile
and its future replacement moves that are based on a few input pa­
rameters. More sophisticated options include the higher predictive
precision microscopic models such as CMEM and VT-MICRO models
which demand a huge number of input parameters, or the use of
mesoscopic models that require a moderate number of input parameters
but offer moderate predictive precision such as VT-MESO and measure
Fig. 19. Comparison of various estimation models [230].
16
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[233]. Vehicle modeling can be accomplished by either developing a
vehicle analytical model to simulate electrical parameters based on ki­
nematic and dynamic requirements (backward modeling) utilizing
instantaneous acceleration, speed, road grade, friction, and rolling
resistance coefficients or following a statistical approach based on
measurements of the EV consumption either from real-world data or test
cycles [234–239]. The common backward models include the prevalent
VSP model that calculates the mass-specific power required at the
vehicle wheels, in addition to the Virginia Tech Comprehensive
Power-based EV Energy consumption Model (VT-CPEM model) which
calculates a non-mass-specific vehicle power with minor differences
between them in terms of adopted parameters by each model such as
acceleration, wind velocity [240]. Fiori et al. [241] developed a model
to estimate the instantaneous energy consumption as well as instanta­
neous regenerative braking energy of EVs using second-by-second
vehicle speed, acceleration and roadway grade data as input variables.
Their results demonstrated an accurate estimation of energy consump­
tion producing an average error of 5.9% relative to experimental data.
This model can be used in many applications such as smartphone
eco-driving and transportation simulation to quantify fleet energy con­
sumption. Wu et al. [232] proposed an analytical model for power
consumption estimation in real-time and its relationship to vehicle
speed, acceleration and roadway grade (angle of inclination). The pro­
posed model was validated using data collected from a test vehicle
through a system designed to collect in-use data such as SOC, current,
voltage, pack power, velocity, acceleration, and vehicle position (lati­
tude, longitude, and elevation). Results showed that this model can
successfully estimate EV instantaneous power consumption and trip
energy consumption. Zhang et al. [233] developed an extended version
of a VSP based mesoscopic model to calculate EV energy consumption
under real-world driving conditions while taking into account regener­
ative braking and analyzing energy consumption characteristics and
mechanical dynamics from physical and statistical standpoints. Zhang
et al. [242] developed a physics based model for the purpose of
analyzing a mid-size electric vehicle energy consumption and then dis­
cussed and evaluated influences on energy consumption and energy
intensity imposed by factors such as ambient temperature and average
driving speed. Yuan et al. [150] derived a simple linear binary function
from a physical-based statistical model for estimating energy con­
sumption for EVs by using relationship between driving cycle and
vehicle parameters. Their results showed that the model perfectly rep­
resented the energy consumption of electric vehicles under different
driving conditions.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Nowadays, the ECM models are widely adopted in research related to
electric vehicles, e.g. battery research and EV energy consumption.
These models play a key role in the multi-level simplification of the
modeling and simulation of associated processes and operation dy­
namics as well as the estimation of a number of the various key pa­
rameters for the purpose of design enhancement or real-time monitoring
and control. This multi-level simplification can be achieved due to the
various fidelity levels characterizing the ECM model types. The
following of this sub-section will further unpack the ECM model.
Generally, for the Li-ion battery cell the various ECM model types
can be used to represent static performance without hysteresis being
considered and dynamic performance considering hysteresis. In 2012,
Hu et al. [243] reviewed a selected 12 types of reported state-of-the-art
ECM models for two types of Li-ion batteries, LFP and NMC. The
simplest ECM model that can be used to describe the dynamics of a
battery cell under time-variant input current is the internal resistance
“R-int” model. This model is composed of a constant voltage source and
an internal resistance (Ohmic resistance) connected in series to simulate
the polarization of the cell discharge voltage. In this model, the modeled
voltage is the difference between the open-circuit voltage as a function
of the state of charge and the voltage drop across the internal resistance
[244]. The R-int model does not consider the voltage diffusion process
that takes place after each discharge step. This limits its applicability to
only simple electronics. A more suitable model for the large-scale bat­
tery pack applications would be the 1st order RC model, also known as
the Thevenin model. The RC model configuration connects a single
resistor-capacitor sub-branch in series to the voltage source and the
internal resistance [228,245,246]. The model’s fidelity can be enhanced
by increasing the number of RC sub-branches giving rise to variations
such as 2nd order [247–249] and 3rd order [250] RC models. Fig. 20
shows the R-int model, RC model and the enhanced-self-correcting
(ESC) model.
Johnson et al. [251] summarized the battery modeling capabilities of
ADVISOR. Their work compared/validated the R-int model and 1st
order RC model for the SAFT 6 Ah Li-ion battery over fifteen 100 s
US06-derived power cycles. Voltage results for one cycle as shown in
Fig. 21 indicated the superior performance of the RC model to the R-int
model with a maximum error of 1% and 7% respectively. SOC com­
parison/validation for 15 cycles in Fig. 22 shows little contrast between
various methods for the initial cycles (e.g. <200 s) but after that it is the
RC model that shows a better fit to experimental SOC.
Ideally, if the cell is left to rest long enough diffusion voltages would
decay to zero which means that model voltage would decay to a
particular OCV value. In a real battery cell, hysteresis would result in a
stable range of values of open-circuit voltage -instead of a single value-
Fig. 20. Various ECM types.
17
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
for every state of charge, and ignoring it would muddle SOC modeling
and cause significant prediction errors. Mathematically, overall hyster­
esis can be represented as a sum of two terms for instantaneous and
dynamic hysteresis. The ESC model developed by Plett [244] is a
comprehensive representation of the battery cell comparable to the 1st
order RC model and includes the effects of hysteresis in addition to
Ohmic resistance and diffusion voltages plus some extra functions for
low pass filters of current. These filters would further improve modeling
accuracy. However, overall hysteresis with no additional filters can be
added to typical RC model types of various fidelities such as 1st order
[252–254], 2nd order [250], 3rd order [255] to minimize prediction
errors, especially when modeling LFP cells that are significantly affected
by hysteresis. In a series of three papers, Plett used an extended Kalman
filtering (EKF) and presented a method to estimate various present
battery parameters including SOC and capacity fade for a lithium-ion
polymer battery pack. This method was also expected to be useful for
other Li-ion chemistries. The topics discussed within these papers
include the required mathematical background, cell modeling and sys­
tem identification requirements, and the final solution, together with
published results. The first paper discussed the necessary mathematical
background and presented the basic method in a way to help generate
some intuitive feel to the necessary computational steps and also illus­
trative examples showing types of results obtained by EKF [256]. The
second paper [244] evolved a suitable model from cell cycling tests
under various temperatures. During this process, two types of cell tests
were performed. The first type comprised a sequence of constant-current
discharge pulses and rests followed by a sequence of constant-current
charge pulses and rests, starting from a fully charged cell as shown in
Fig. 23. The second test was a sequence of 16 urban dynamometer
driving schedule (UDDS) cycles, separated by 40A discharge pulses and
5 min rests, and spread over the 90–10% SOC range as shown in Fig. 24.
The evolved ESC model included terms that describe the dynamic con­
tributions due to open-circuit voltage, Ohmic loss, polarization time
constants, electro-chemical hysteresis, and the effects of temperature.
Also, a comparison was conducted between combined model, simple
model, two hysteresis models and two ESC models with different filters.
Voltage results of pulsed-current tests are shown in Fig. 26 while Fig. 25
shows results from one cycle of the UDDS test. Pulsed-current results
showed significant improvement in estimation performance by addition
of filter states but the paper stated that not much improvement was
noted by increasing the number of filters beyond 4. UDDS test results
showed that the ESC model with 4 filter states has the best fit to true
voltage curves compared to 2 filter states and other ECM model types.
The third paper discussed applications where results from EKF can be
used in typical BMS algorithms [257].
Another common ECM model is the PNGV model developed by the
PNGV team (standard model for “PNGV battery test manual” in 2001
and “freedom car battery test manual” in 2003) and also adopted in
PNGV systems analysis toolkit (PSAT 4.1) [255,258]. Also, there is the
Randles circuit that is inspired by electrochemical principles. The model
is composed of an internal resistance (Rint) to model the electrolyte
resistance, an RC branch resistance (Rct) to model the charge transfer
resistance, a double layer capacitor to model the charge building up in
the electrolyte at the electrode surface, and a frequency-dependent
Warburg element (Warburg impedance Zw) to model the diffusion of
lithium ions in electrodes. This Warburg element has many mathemat­
ical expressions but its effect can be approximated by multiple RC
branches connected in series. At intermediate frequencies, the Randles
circuit would collapse into the typical RC model by substituting the
double-layer capacitor by a typical capacitor, and the Warburg element
by an adequate number of RC branches. This simplification can be
initiated because of the insignificance of impact on the circuit perfor­
mance of the double-layer capacitor at such frequencies, and the
dominant effect of charge transfer dynamics on voltage diffusion [259].
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 21. Voltage estimation of RC and R-int models [251].
Fig. 22. SOC estimation of RC and R-int models [251].
5.2. Simulation and simulation resources
Numerical models related to components of the electric vehicle en­
ergy system are employed in commercial or open-source simulation
software packages such as ANSYS-FLUENT, MATLAB, OCTAVE to
Fig. 23. Pulsed-current test results [244].
18
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
investigate the behavior and performance of such systems. It is one of
the main targets of simulation to investigate heat generation and
transport within an individual battery cell as well as the battery pack
and its thermal management system, because of the huge significance of
thermal balance and temperature regulation for the Li-ion based energy
storage systems. In a battery cell, heat is generated through five mech­
anisms, namely, entropy change and “electrical” resistance in both
electrodes, and electrolyte resistance, which are all encapsulated within
the thermal model as reversible heat (also known as entropic heat) and
irreversible heat that includes active polarization heat and Ohmic heat
(also known as Joule heat) [46,260,261]. It is worth noting that except
for very low current (i.e. C/5 or lower), the cell current remains the main
influential operation variable for heat generation within a given battery
cell. Today, the thermal model can be coupled to different ECM model
types to simulate and perform various studies under several operating
and loading conditions comparable to that of the real electric vehicle.
Published drive cycles -whether as industry benchmark or for research
purposes-are used to stimulate the battery cell/pack to simulate the
transient performance (transient drive cycles that are characterized by
many speed changes) or the non-transient performance (modal driving
cycles that involve prolonged spans of constant speed) [262]. Generally,
drive cycles are a sequence of points representing the relationship be­
tween vehicle speed and time. Drive cycles are established to assess the
vehicle performance (i.e. efficiency and fuel consumption) and are
either generated based on practical tests or have some theoretical basis.
Popular drive cycles include NEDC and ECE15 originated in Europe,
FTP, UDDS, and LA92 originated in the US, and 10–15 mode and JC08
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 24. UDDS test results [244].
originated in Japan [63]. Parameter identification through the least
square method is an important stage in the simulation of different bat­
tery models. It is used to estimate values of the various parameters of the
selected simulation model by utilizing data from battery identification
experiments that are carried out in special testing platforms (e.g. ARBIN
BT2000) according to predefined testing procedures (e.g. USABC or
freedom-car battery test manual) [263].
Battery related simulations can be conducted using commercial
software packages such as ANSYS FLUENT or MATLAB or free software
packages such as OCTAVE, DUALFOIL (developed by Purdue University)
or MODOLICA and DYMOLA engine. Modelica is a non-proprietary
modeling language that offers greater flexibility in modeling battery
pack performance. It is a multi-domain-object-oriented language that
includes integrated packages for thermal models of the battery pack and
components of the thermal management system in its TIL-suite (version
3.4.1.) Library for thermo-fluid dynamic applications [264] and Dymola
(version 2015fd01) is the development environment that can be used to
build, compile, run and simulate Modelica models to solve the model
equations. Martín-Martín et al. [265] presented a system-level model to
assess the thermal performance of a full electric minibus operated in two
modes: free cooling and active cooling. Dubarry et al. [227] used
Modelica and Dymola to simulate their developed equivalent circuit
model for a single cell up to battery pack simulation. Bellocchi et al.
[160] used Modelica to set a dynamic model to analyze a reversible heat
pump HVAC system equipped with a regenerative heat exchanger to
assess air conditioning loads and subsequent effects on driving range.
According to MATHWROKS, its main software MATLAB is increasingly
adopted by EV manufacturers and battery researchers for tasks such as
battery characterization, SOC estimation, degradation and real-time
simulation. This is because of their continuous effort to relatively
simplify the configuration and simulation process by developing the
SimScape-Simulink platform. In 2009, Plett of the University of Colo­
rado and Jackey of MATHWROKS company presented a semi-automated
parameterization process to calculate parameter values for the ESC
model using Simulink parameter estimation tool. Simulation results of a
number of UDDS based cycles displayed satisfactory performance with
around 1% error in voltage prediction [266]. Dagmar et al. [267] pre­
sented a Simulink based model of two parts to simulate overall battery
capacity and transient response for lib hybrid power system on utilizing
a completely automated approach. Daowd et al. [268] developed a new
method for parameter estimation for three models, Thevenin model,
second-order ECM model and PNGV model, based on Simu­
link/MATLAB parameter estimation tool. Their results indicated the
accuracy of the Simulink parameter estimation tool and its validity for
all three models’ parameter estimation. Johnson [251] summarized the
capabilities of the MATLAB based ADVISOR for battery modeling and
simulation. Their paper presented 6 models available in ADVISOR,
namely, R-int model, RC model, PNGV model, lead-acid neural network
19
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
model, fundamental lead-acid model and the saber’s lead-acid electrical
RC model which is not based on MATLAB but can be linked to ADVISOR.
These models represented a variety of chemistries and approaches
(electrical representation, neural networks, etc.). Total electric vehicle
simulation can be used to evaluate energy flow and losses across the
various components of many vehicle types as well as corresponding
emissions. For this type of simulation, several programs have been
developed such as ADVISOR (vehicle simulator for ICEV, HEV, EV, and
FCV developed in MATLAB environment by the NREL and some other
similar programs developed on various programing environments
[269]. For instance, Butler et al. [270] discussed a simulation package
(V-ELPH) for EV and HEV containing electric motor, ICE, batteries and
support components; the package was developed at Texas A&M Uni­
versity using the Simulink/MATLAB graphical simulation language.
Mierlo et al. [271] presented a vehicle simulation program (VSP) for EV,
HEV, ICEV and FCV that aims to contrast different drivetrain technol­
ogies based on corresponding losses, energy consumption and emissions
by studying drivetrain power flows. The VSP was developed on LabView
environment but authors indicated that it could be developed on
Simulink/MATLAB. Other research efforts related to energy consump­
tion and range extension of electric vehicles included the use of
ADVISOR and AMESIM (a commercial tool for automotive design that
offers a system-level multi-physics approach) to simulate the dynamic
behavior of HVAC system and its energy consumption by Faruque et al.
[272–274].
5.3. Case study: thermal modeling and simulation of Li-ion cells
A case study is prepared and presented here to portray a compre­
hensive view of the thermal modeling and simulation of the Li-ion cells
using the equivalent circuit model. Here the discussion examines a
recently published paper [275] to demonstrate the coupling of ECM with
a thermal model to simulate the thermal performance of an individual
cell as well as a battery stack. This published paper presents a combined
electro-thermal state-space model that can be used to estimate the core
as well as the surface temperature of a battery cell or a battery stack. The
state-space model is a convenient way to estimate the dynamic response
of its state parameters. Further information on the development of a
state-space ECM model can be found in the equivalent circuit modeling
textbook authored by Plett [176]. In this book the author provides a
detailed discussion, derivation and code samples (MATALB and
OCTAVE) of the equivalent circuit model. The book is initiated by dis­
cussing the BMS systems requirements, then it discusses - in separate
chapters-simulation of a battery pack in addition to estimation of SOC
(considering a state-space approach), SOH in and cell balancing. The
published paper [275] examined here presented a coupled
electro-thermal state-space model that has the terminal voltage, the core
temperature and the surface temperature as state parameters. For this
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 25. Result of one cycle of UDDS test [244].
case study, the discussion is set-up to take an evolutionary route from
the electrical model (1st order R–C model) and the thermal model then
combining them into the electro-thermal model for a single cylindrical
cell before eventually introducing the combined model for the battery
stack as well as a concluding summary.
5.3.1. The electrical model for the single cylindrical battery cell
A lower resolution description of the ECM model utilized in the paper
examined here can be expressed as follows. The model estimates the
instantaneous terminal voltage (U̇t) as the difference between the
instantaneous open-circuit voltage ( U̇oc ) and the instantaneous voltage
drop across the R–C branch ( U̇1 ). This can be referred to as the output
equation. This equation can be reached after deriving the dynamic
equation of the terminal voltage (Ut) to be equal to the source voltage
“open-circuit voltage” (Uoc) minus the voltage drop across the R–C
20
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
branch (U1) minus the voltage drop across the internal resistor (UR= R0 x
I). Then differentiating this equation yields the general frame for the
output equation described earlier. The dynamic equation is the corner­
stone on which the ECM model is built. It provides a significant
improvement on the most basic representation of the battery cell as an
ideal voltage source and describes the dynamic response of the terminal
voltage in terms of the source voltage and a sum of various voltage drops
between the source and the terminal. This paper assumes constant
values for the resistor (R) and the current (I) within the dynamic
equation. For that, the voltage drop across the internal resistor (R0)
plays no role in the output equation. The assumption of constant resis­
tance and electrical current can be used to simplify the derivation and
construction of the ECM model. It can limit the number of variables to be
simulated which would reduce simulation cost. A higher-resolution
description that would zoom into the details of the terms constituting
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
Fig. 26. Result for pulsed current test [244].
the previously described output equation can be expressed as follows.
For the open-circuit voltage the paper adopted a mathematical expres­
sion to estimate the open-circuit voltage (Uoc) value corresponding to
the different SOC values. For the different SOC values, the paper used
the Coulombic counting method. Then a new expression was developed
to estimate the voltage drop across the R–C branch (U1) in terms of SOC.
All these terms were differentiated and substituted back into the output
equation to yield an expression for the instantaneous terminal voltage
with various terms that contain a non-linear function of SOC. This non-
linear term would, later on, be incorporated into the state-space of the
combined electro-thermal model.
5.3.2. The thermal model for a single cylindrical battery cell
Heat is generated whenever a battery cell is being charged or dis­
charged. The thermal model used to describe this behavior is generally a
selection of expressions for (i) the energy balance equation, (ii) the heat
generation equation and (iii) the boundary conditions equation. The
paper used a thermal model that balanced heat energy between three
distinct temperatures for the core, surface and the ambient environment
(Tc, Ts, Ta) with two thermal resistances, one between (Tc and Ts) and the
other between (Ts and Ta). For the boundary conditions the paper
21
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
assumes for the radial direction a uniform heat generation rate and
models the thermal dynamics along that direction by assuming (i) no
heat flux at the center and (ii) the heat generation takes place at the core
of the cylindrical cell. Then it develops a dual-state approximation of the
thermal model in the radial direction in terms of (Tc and Ts) since the
temperature distribution along the longitudinal direction is assumed to
be more uniform due to the higher thermal conductivity in this direc­
tion. This last assumption is widely used and can simplify the simulation
process by reducing the model from 3D to 1D model without greatly
compromising the model’s prediction accuracy. The heat generation
equation normally accounts for the reversible (entropic heat) and irre­
versible (Joule heat) heat terms. It is worth noting that there is a widely
accepted notion that entropic heat can be neglected without compro­
mising the prediction accuracy at high current values. In such a case, the
heat generation equation would include only the Joule heat which is
equal to the product of the square of the electrical current value and the
internal resistance value of the battery cell. Additional discussion on the
thermal model can be found in the review published by Liu et al. [97].
The paper examined here [275] approximated the heat generation as the
product of squared electrical current (I) and the lumped resistance (Rd).
The lumped resistance was calculated as the sum of all resistances in the
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
1st order ECM model, namely the resistance from the R–C branch(R1)
and the internal resistance (R0) for different ambient temperature
values.
5.3.3. Combined electro-thermal model for the single cylindrical battery cell
and the battery stack
The combined model used in this paper [275] was established by
coupling together the previously derived electrical and thermal models.
The state vector of the model contains three parameters, namely ter­
minal voltage, core temperature and surface temperature. The input
vector contains values for electrical current, SOC, heat generation and
the ambient temperature. For the single cell, the output equation is a
scaled-state-vector while the state equation is the sum of (i) the state
vector scaled by a matrix derived from thermal characteristics (resis­
tance and heat capacitance), (ii) the input vector scaled by a matrix
derived from electrical characteristics (R0, R1 & C values) and (iii) the
non-linear SOC expression obtained when deriving the electrical model.
In this coupled model, the electrical model uses the load current (I) and
the electrical model parameters (R0, R1 & C) to compute the terminal
voltage, the open-circuit-voltage and the state of charge. while the
thermal model uses the heat generation (computed from the electrical
current and the lumped resistance Rd) and the ambient temperature to
compute the core and surface temperatures. The surface temperature is
then used to update the temperature-dependent parameters of the
electrical model. For the battery stack, the paper assumes (i) similar heat
generation for each cell in series, (ii) constant core temperature for each
cell, (iii) small difference in surface temperature between any two
neighboring cells. It then conducted an energy balance for the individual
battery cell due to conduction and convection under constant heat
generation and yielded a mathematical expression for the temperature
gain factor (ΔK) in terms of the convective and conduction heat transfer
coefficients, the radius of the battery cell and some other parameters.
This gain factor is then used to compute surface temperature for all cells
in the battery stack. When doing this calculation, the paper assumed that
the surface temperature of cell #1 became the ambient temperature for
cell #2.
5.3.4. Parameterization
After developing the ECM model in the manner described above or in
any other manner there is a parametrization process to estimate the
model parameters. This process requires the collection of experimental
data. For instance, a battery cycling platform such as ARBIN-BT2000 is
often used to collect electrical data necessary to estimate the electrical
model parameters of the selected ECM model. The Voltage data obtained
from such cycling platforms can be used to estimate internal resistance
R0 by applying Ohm’s law to the instantaneous voltage jump while R1
and C parameters can be estimated from the voltage transient during
relaxation. This paper [275] used the approach to determine R0, R1 and
C in a repeated manner until the terminal voltage reached cut-off voltage
under a controlled ambient temperature condition and also accounted
for hysteresis voltages by taking the average between charge and
discharge voltages. For the thermal model, surface and ambient tem­
peratures as well as load current can be used to estimate the parameters
of the thermal model. The ambient temperature control is normally
achieved in a climatic chamber and surface temperature can be
measured using a thermocouple.
5.3.5. Closing notes
The ECM model can be used to solely simulate the electrical per­
formance of the battery cell. The simulation approach of the ECM model
relies on writing computer codes using experimental data from validated
literature or laboratory tests to “ballpark” and optimize circuit-
parameter values for a selected Li-ion chemistry so that the model
behavior in terms of its current and voltage closely resembles that of the
true cell. The ECM model can also be coupled with a thermal model to
attain the additional capability of simulating the thermal performance of
22
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
both an individual cell as well as a battery stack. Likewise, another
parameterization process is used to estimate the parameters of the
thermal model from experimental data. The paper examined [275] used
a parameterized electro-thermal model to investigate the behavior of an
individual battery cell as well as a battery stack. The conclusion put
forward by the paper highlighted an independence of OCV from the
effects of ambient temperatures at SOC between 0.3 and 0.95 at 5 ̊C and
15 ̊C for the individual battery cell. It also showed the degree to which
the convection resistance and core heat capacity influenced variations of
core and surface temperature of the cell in both transient and
steady-state. For the battery stack, the paper showed that the higher
conductive heat transfer that occurs in a battery stack promotes battery
cells to exhibit slightly lower core and surface temperatures.
6. Concluding remarks
Nowadays, transportation plays a key role in contemporary societies
and it is of great importance to investigate practical technology reso­
lutions to manage some of the fundamental challenges facing this sector
such as energy demand and global warming. Road Transport was
responsible for around 80% of air pollution and almost a quarter of the
global GHG emissions with light trucks and automobiles bearing about
60% of this quota. Current technology offers a variety of means to go
about overcoming transportation challenges through paths like
enhanced designs for ICEVs to meet current strict environmental regu­
lations or by the development of the battery electric vehicle. To balance
anthropogenic effects on global warming and mitigate related risks to
human life IPCC introduced a mitigation path that was predicted largely
on electrification of the transportation sector. There is an increasing
trend of picking electric vehicles as a means of commute in a number of
countries due to strategic policies adopting the Paris agreement on
climate change to stabilize global GHG emissions. The development of
the various electric vehicle types can be attributed to the technological
leap in energy storage systems especially rechargeable batteries. These
batteries have various characteristics such as capacity and discharge rate
which makes them suitable for different types of EVs. Long-range battery
electric vehicles have been shown to no longer be a niche market and
various manufacturers have been announcing production plans to in­
crease their electric vehicle share of total sales. Battery electric vehicles
have a life cost per km comparable and sometimes even lower to that of
ICEVs with room for improvements through the development of more
durable EVs, reduction in battery costs and adoption of large-scale
economies similar to that of ICEVs. This price gap is likely to undergo
further changes due to technological advances leading to cheaper bat­
teries and an accompanying increase in ICEVs price due to tightened fuel
efficiency standards.
The energy system of an EV can be subdivided into two main cate­
gories as an energy storage system and an energy consumption system.
There are many technologies suitable for electric vehicle energy storage
systems but the rechargeable battery remains at the forefront of such
options. The current long-range battery-electric vehicle mostly utilizes
lithium-ion batteries in its energy storage system until other efficient
battery options prove their practicality to be used in EVs. Current
commercialized lithium-ion batteries have many characteristics that are
favorable for vehicle applications such as energy capacity, operating
voltage and specific energy but also come with designated challenges
related to heat generation and thermal management. Such cells also
have a relatively expensive cost per kW*hr. However, this cost is ex­
pected to experience further decrease when having access to large scale
manufacturing (Giga-factories). New generation batteries aim to
improve energy density through various paths such as the use of new
electrolytes, multiple lithium insertion cathodes or utilizing conversion
chemistry rather than intercalation chemistry. New generation battery
cells are estimated to have significantly higher specific energy which
could have a significant impact on electric vehicles once commercial­
ized. Battery packs for electric vehicles are mostly designed from lithium
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
cells with carbon-based negative electrodes. However, the emerging use
of LTO negative electrodes can offer better fast charging performance.
These packs are not only required to be kept within a specific temper­
ature range but also to avoid temperature mal-distribution greater than
5 ̊C.
The battery-electric vehicle demonstrated the lowest energy con­
sumption per distance traveled when compared to other vehicle tech­
nologies while their CO2 emissions when calculated assuming a UK grid
average emission factor of 542 g CO2/kWh were found to be 70–110 g
CO2/km which was below the majority of diesel vehicles emissions
which surpassed 110 g CO2/km. EVs were found to be able to offer a
reduction of up to 75% in the tank to wheel energy consumption which
could drop to 58% in case of poor EV characteristics of design and
auxiliary loads. As a general rule, energy consumed in activities other
than propelling the electric vehicle should be reduced as much as
possible in order not to injure its driving range. The energy consumption
of any typical vehicle is being greatly influenced by its powertrain
technology, traction ratio and regenerative braking magnitude. The
energy consumption of a typical electric vehicle can be further studied
according to the factors that may influence the on-board consumption of
various systems. These factors include technical aspects of the electric
vehicle, travel details as well as artificial and natural environments. The
BTMS and HVAC systems were found to significantly influence the en­
ergy consumption of the electric vehicle by impacting the cooling/
heating loads for the battery pack and the driving cabin which in turn
can be influenced by weather conditions and working mode. For any
type of vehicle, cabin cooling serves some additional safety purposes like
defogging and deicing besides providing a comfortable driving envi­
ronment. The electric vehicle HVAC system that is based on the vapor
compression cycle (VCC) is quite comparable to that of other vehicle
types with some additional features to provide the required heating due
to lack of waste heat. VCC systems utilizing R-134a for ICE vehicles can
be adapted for electric vehicles with the required heating be provided
through the use of a designated heater (PTC or fuel heater) or a
reversible heat pump configuration which can facilitate direct transition
into electric vehicles. Designated heater systems utilizing fuel heaters
are not preferable for electric vehicles and PTC heaters were found to
result in serious losses in driving range. Heat pump systems can improve
driving range compared to PTC systems but were found to be challenged
by ice formation on heat exchanger at low temperatures resulting in
range loss which can be balanced by the incorporation of some addi­
tional heat sources. Cabin pre-conditioning can reduce transient power
requirements eventually increasing the driving range. Thermal regula­
tion of the battery pack is very critical for electric vehicles. It aims to
keep the battery pack within an optimal operating range and avoid
safety concerns that can lead to some irreversible consequences. Battery
thermal management systems are designed from a variety of conven­
tional and emerging thermal management strategies which can be
classified according to thermal cycle, working fluid and power con­
sumption. Passive systems such as heat pipes and phase change mate­
rials require less energy input but are less efficient. However, such
systems could be deployed as part of integrated cooling systems to
maximize energy utilization. BTMSs that are based on the vapor
compression cycle could be in the form of direct refrigerant two-phase
cooling, cabin air cooling and secondary loop liquid cooling which is
widely utilized in commercial electric vehicles. These systems offer
greater coefficient of performance and can have an added advantage due
to their utilization of conventional mobile AC systems. Integrated sys­
tems combining AC and BTMS are viewed as the future of vehicle
cooling despite still needing to overcome challenges related to design
and control complexity.
Research related to the operation and thermal management of Li-ion
battery cell/pack can be carried out through numerical simulation uti­
lizing several battery models that describe the micro/macro-scale
behavior and provide a wide range of accuracy and physical interpret­
ability. This approach proved to facilitate a feasible method to collect
23
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
valued information pertaining to a variety of R&D objectives. This
contrast in the accuracy/interpretability gives rise to various uses and
applications suitable for each type of these battery models. High-
resolution battery models (i.e. physical models) can simulate low-level
behavior and can aid in further developments of the design of the bat­
tery cell, while low-resolution battery models (i.e. abstract models) can
be used to estimate driving range and other vehicle design calculations
as well as real-time monitoring. Modeling of the electric vehicle can
facilitate estimation of overall energy consumption which can be
computed using statistical data and instantaneous energy consumption
which is better computed using analytical models simulating electrical
parameters based on kinematic and dynamic requirements (backward
modeling). Modeling can also help identify the most influential factors
on energy consumption. Electric vehicle models range from macroscopic
models offering a simple way to evaluate energy consumption using few
input parameters to more sophisticated microscopic models providing
higher predictive precision with mesoscopic models somewhere in be­
tween. The equivalent circuit model is widely utilized in battery and
electric vehicle simulations. It can provide multiple levels of accuracy in
battery modeling and real-time monitoring and control. The enhanced
self-correcting model can be used to simulate battery dynamic perfor­
mance with hysteresis voltages taken into account. The Randles circuit
can be used to simulate the electrochemical response of a battery cell.
Digital environments that can be used to program such simulation tools
include a variety of commercial and open-source options such as
MATLAB and Modelica. It is through such options that electric vehicle
simulation tools such as ADVISOR and V-ELPH have been developed.
Simulation of the ECM model initially requires computing all model
parameter values. It is possible to perform such estimation by using
experimental data collected when exciting an individual battery cell
according to one of a number of pre-defined battery testing procedures.
However, later simulation of an electric vehicle loading profile would
require the use of drive cycles to provide an analogues performance to
that of an EV.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
Financial support received from the China National Key R&D Project
(2018YFB0905300, 2018YFB0905303), the Guangdong Science and
Technology Department (2017B010120003, 2015A030308019,
2016A030313172), and the Guangzhou Scientific and Technological
Development Plan (201804020020) is gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] Samaras Z, Vouitsis I. Transportation and energy. In: Clim. Vulnerability underst.
Addressing threat. To essent. Resour. Elsevier; 2013. p. 183–205. https://doi.org/
10.1016/B978-0-12-384703-4.00322-1.
[2] IEA. World energy Outlook. 2009.
[3] Rogelj J, Shindell D, Jiang K, Fifita S, Forster P, Ginzburg V, Handa C, Kheshgi H,
Kobayashi S, Kriegler E, Mundaca L, Séférian R, Vilariño MV. Mitigation
Pathways Compatible with 1.5◦ C in the Context of Sustainable Development. p.
95–174. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Portner H-O, Roberts D, Skea J,
Shukla PR, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia W, Pean C, Pidcock R, Connors S,
Matthews JBR, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis MI, Lonnoy E, Maycock T, Tignor M,
Waterfield T, editors. Global Warming of 1.5◦ C An IPCC Special Report on the
impacts of global warming of 1.5◦ C above pre-industrial levels and related global
greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global
response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to
eradicate poverty; 2018.
[4] Olivier JGJ, Janssens-Maenhout G, Peters JAHW, Wilson J. Long Term Trend in
Global Co2 emissions. 2011. http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/C02
Mondiaal_ webdef_19sept.pdf.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
[5] World Health Organization. Global status report ON road safety: time for action.
2009. www.who.int/violence_ injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2009.
[6] Borken J, Steller H, Merétei T, Vanhove F. Global and country Inventory of Road
Passenger and Freight Transportation Fuel Consumption and emissions of Air
Pollutants in Year 2000. 2011. p. 127–36. https://doi.org/10.3141/2011-14.
[7] IEA. Energy Technology Perspectives 2017 - Executive Summary. Int. Energy
Agency Publ.; 2017. p. 371. https://doi.org/10.1787/energy_tech-2014-en.
[8] S.C. Wofsy, X. Zhang, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, U.
Kingdom, couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry,
(n.d.).
[9] D.C. Lowe, N. Zealand, N. Zealand, Changes in atmospheric constituents and in
radiative forcing, (n.d.).
[10] Hansen J, Johnson D, Lacis A, Lebedeff S, Lee P, Rind D, Russell G. Climate
Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. 1981. p. 213.
[11] IEA. World energy Outlook 2018 - Scenarios. 2018. https://www.iea.org/weo/.
[12] K.R Smith, Human health: impacts, adaptation, and Co-benefits, in: Clim. Chang.
2014 impacts, adapt. Vulnerability. Part A glob. Sect. Asp. contrib. Work. Gr. II to
fifth assess. Rep. Intergov. Panel clim. Chang., n.d.: pp. 709–754.
[13] IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change: Working Group III
Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. 2014. https://doi.org/
10.1017/CBO9781107415416.
[14] Grubler A, Wilson C, Bento N, Boza-kiss B, Krey V, Mccollum DL, Rao ND, Riahi K,
Rogelj J, De Stercke S, Cullen J, Frank S, Fricko O, Guo F, Gidden M, Havlík P,
Huppmann D, Kiesewetter G, Rafaj P, Schoepp W, Valin H. A low energy demand
scenario for meeting the 1.5 ◦ C target and sustainable development goals without
negative emission technologies. Nat. Energy. 2018;3:515–27. https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41560-018-0172-6.
[15] UNFCC. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its thirteenth session. 2008.
p. 1–60. held in Bali from 3 to 15 December 2007.
[16] W. Energy, O. Special, Energy and climate change energy and climate change, (n.
d.).
[17] Geels FW. Energy Research & Social Science Disruption and low-carbon system
transformation : progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions
research and the Multi-Level Perspective. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2017:1–8. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.010.
[18] Sioshansi F, Webb J. Transitioning from conventional to electric vehicles : the
effect of cost and Fereidoon Sioshansi. Econ Anal Pol 2019. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eap.2018.12.005.
[19] Høyer KG. The history of alternative fuels in transportation : the case of electric
and hybrid cars, vol. 16; 2008. p. 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jup.2007.11.001.
[20] Hawkins TR, Gausen OM. Environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles
— a review. 2012. p. 997–1014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0440-9.
[21] Martínez CM, Hu X, Cao D, Velenis E, Gao B, Wellers M. Energy Management in
Plug - in Hybrid electric Vehicles : Recent Progress and a Connected Vehicles
Perspective. 2016. p. 9545. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2016.2582721.
[22] Egbue O, Long S. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles : an analysis
of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Pol 2015;48:717–29. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009.
[23] Lim MK, Mak H, Rong Y, Lim MK. Toward Mass Adoption of electric Vehicles :
Impact of the Range and Resale Anxieties Toward Mass Adoption of electric
Vehicles : Impact of the Range and Resale Anxieties. 2015.
[24] Nykvist B, Nilsson M. Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles,
vol. 5; 2015. p. 100–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE2564.
[25] Cowan R. Escaping Lock-in : the Case of the electric Vehicle *. 1996.
[26] Andres D, Ramirez B, Eliecer G, Ochoa V, Peña AR. Bibliometric analysis OF
nearly a decade OF research IN electric VEHICLES : a dynamic. Approach 2018;
13:4730–6.
[27] Gao DW, Mi C, Emadi A. Modeling and Simulation of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles
2007;95:729–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2006.890127.
[28] Meyer JJ, Lustbader J, Agathocleous N, Vespa A, Rugh J, Titov G. Range
extension Opportunities While Heating a Battery electric Vehicle. 2018. p. 10–2.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0066.Abstract.
[29] Muta K, Yamazaki M, Tokieda J. Development of New-Generation Hybrid System
THS II - Drastic Improvement of Power Performance and Fuel economy. 2018.
p. 2004.
[30] Chan CC. An Overview of electric Vehicle Technology. 1993. p. 81.
[31] Van Vliet OPR, Kruithof T, Turkenburg WC, Faaij APC. Techno-economic
comparison of series hybrid , plug-in hybrid. fuel cell and regular cars 2010;195:
6570–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.04.077.
[32] Zhang Z, Wang J, Feng X, Chang L, Chen Y, Wang X. The solutions to electric
vehicle air conditioning systems : a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;91:
443–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.005.
[33] Van Vliet O, Sjoerd A, Kuramochi T, Van Den Broek M, Faaij A. Energy use , cost
and CO 2 emissions of electric cars. J Power Sources 2011;196:2298–310.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.09.119.
[34] Chan CC. The State of the Art of electric and Hybrid Vehicles. 2002. p. 90.
[35] Qin Y, Tang X, Jia T, Duan Z, Zhang J, Li Y. Noise and vibration suppression in
hybrid electric vehicles : state of the art and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2020;124:109782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109782.
[36] Miller P. Automotive Lithium-Ion Batteries 2015;59:4–13. https://doi.org/
10.1595/205651315X685445.
[37] Environ E, Etacheri V, Marom R, Elazari R, Salitra G, Aurbach D. Environmental
Science Challenges in the development of advanced Li-ion batteries : a review.
2011. p. 3243–62. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1ee01598b.
24
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[38] INEEL. FreedomCAR Battery Test Manual For Power-Assist Hybrid electric
Vehicles Disclaimer. 2003.
[39] Young K, Wang C, Wang LY, Strunz K. Electric Vehicle Battery Technologies.
2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0134-6.
[40] Bandhauer TM, Garimella S, Fuller TF. A critical review of thermal issues in
lithium-ion batteries. J Electrochem Soc 2011;158:R1. https://doi.org/10.1149/
1.3515880.
[41] Bernardi D, Pawlikowski E, Newman J. A General energy Balance for Battery
Systems. 1970. p. 132.
[42] Doyle M, Fuller TF, Newman J. Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge of
the lithium/. Polymer/Insertion Cell 1993;140:1526–33.
[43] Thomas KE, Newman J. Thermal Modeling of Porous Insertion electrodes. 2003.
p. 176–92. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.1531194.
[44] Newman J. Porous-electrode theory with battery applications, vol. 21; 1975.
p. 25–41.
[45] Lukic SM, Member S, Cao J, Member S, Bansal RC, Member S, Rodriguez F,
Member S, Emadi A, Member S. Energy Storage Systems for Automotive
Applications 2008;55:2258–67.
[46] Williford RE, V Viswanathan V, Zhang J. Effects of entropy changes in anodes and
cathodes on the thermal behavior of lithium ion batteries, vol. 189; 2009.
p. 101–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.10.078.
[47] Lin Q, Yixiong T, Ruizhen Q, Zuomin Z, Youliang D, Jigiang W. General safety
considerations for high power Li/SOC12 batteries. 1995. p. 54.
[48] Nelson RF. Power requirements for batteries in hybrid electric vehicles q. 2000.
p. 2–26.
[49] Saito Y. Thermal behaviors of lithium-ion batteries during high-rate pulse cycling,
vol. 146; 2005. p. 770–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2005.03.089.
[50] Johnson DH, Ayers AD, Zupancic RL, Carbide U, Bailey JC. Design of a safe
cylindrical cell lithium/thionyl chloride 1984;12:61–70.
[51] Emissions GG, Economy F. The EPA Automotive Trends Report. 2019.
[52] Andwari AM, Pesiridis A, Rajoo S, Martinez R. A review of Battery Electric
Vehicle technology and readiness levels. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;78:
414–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.138.
[53] Burke A. Ultracapacitor technologies and application in hybrid and electric
vehicles. Int J Energy Res 2010;34:133–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1654.
[54] Li X, Member S, Williamson SS. Assessment of efficiency Improvement
Techniques for Future Power electronics Intensive Hybrid electric Vehicle Drive
Trains. 2007.
[55] Ehsani M, Gao Y, Emadi A. Modern electric, Hybrid electric, and Fuel cell
vehicles. second ed. CRC Press; 2010.
[56] Salameh Z. Energy storage. Renew. Energy Syst. Des. Elsevier Inc.; 2014. https://
doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374991-8.00004-0.
[57] Cotton A. Audi R18. 2014. n.d. https://www.racecar-engineering.com/cars/au
di-lmp14/. [Accessed 22 July 2019].
[58] Maxwell Technologies. K2 series ultracapcitors datasheet. n.d. https://www.
maxwell.com/images/documents/K2Series_DS_1015370_5_20141104.pdf.
[59] Maxwell Technologies. K2 Ultracapacitors series typical characteristics. n.d, https
://www.maxwell.com/images/documents/K2_2_85V_DS_3000619EN_3_.pdf.
[60] El-kady MF. Laser Scribing of High-Performance and Flexible Graphene-Based
Electrochemical Capacitors 2012;335:1326–30. https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.1216744.
[61] Chellaiah C, Ramesh R. Future renewable energy option for recharging full
electric vehicles. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;76:824–38. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.032.
[62] Curry C. Bloomberg New energy Finance : Lithium-ion battery cost and market.
2017. https://data.bloomberglp.com/bnef/sites/14/2017/07/BNEF-Lithium-ion
-battery-costs-and-market.pdf.
[63] Tie SF, Wei C. A review of energy sources and energy management system in
electric vehicles. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;20:82–102. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.077.
[64] Joseph A, Shahidehpour M. Battery Storage Systems In Electric Power Systems
Ami Joseph and Mohammad Shahidehpour. 2006. p. 1–8.
[65] Khaligh A, Member S, Li Z, Member S. Battery , ultracapacitor , fuel cell , and
hybrid energy storage systems for electric , hybrid electric. Fuel Cell , and Plug-In
Hybrid Electric Vehicles : State of the Art 2010;59:2806–14.
[66] Burke BAF. Batteries and ultracapacitors for electric , hybrid , and fuel cell
vehicles, vol. 95; 2007.
[67] Miller JM. Energy storage system technology challenges facing strong hybrid.
Plug in and Battery Electric Vehicles 2009:4–10.
[68] Offer GJ, Howey D, Contestabile M, Clague R, Brandon NP. Comparative analysis
of battery electric , hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable
road transport system. Energy Pol 2010;38:24–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2009.08.040.
[69] Kopera JJC. Inside the Nickel Metal Hydride Battery Inside the NiMH Battery.
2004.
[70] Scrosati B, Garche J. Lithium batteries : status. prospects and future 2010;195:
2419–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.11.048.
[71] Schuster SF, Brand MJ, Berg P, Gleissenberger M, Jossen A. Lithium-ion cell-to-
cell variation during battery electric vehicle operation. J Power Sources 2015;
297:242–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.08.001.
[72] Faria R, Marques P, Moura P, Freire F, Delgado J, De Almeida AT. Impact of the
electricity mix and use pro fi le in the life-cycle assessment of electric vehicles.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;24:271–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2013.03.063.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
[73] Capasso C, Veneri O. Experimental analysis on the performance of lithium based
batteries for road full electric and hybrid vehicles. Appl Energy 2014:1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.013.
[74] Li Y, Yang J, Song J, crossmark. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;69:652–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.118.
[75] Sabri MFM, Danapalasingam KA, Rahmat MF. A review on hybrid electric
vehicles architecture and energy management strategies. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2016;53:1433–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.036.
[76] Amjad S, Neelakrishnan S, Rudramoorthy R. Review of design considerations and
technological challenges for successful development and deployment of plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles, vol. 14; 2010. p. 1104–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2009.11.001.
[77] Castro TS, de Souza TM, Silveira JL. Feasibility of electric vehicle: electricity by
grid × photovoltaic energy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.099.
[78] Manzetti S, Mariasiu F. Electric vehicle battery technologies : from present state
to future systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;51:1004–12. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.010.
[79] Sivaprakash S, Majumder SB. Cathodes for lithium rechargeable batteries. Solid
State Ionics 2010;181:730–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2010.04.006.
[80] Zhang SS. A review on the separators of liquid electrolyte Li-ion batteries, vol.
164; 2007. p. 351–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2006.10.065.
[81] Markevich E, Baranchugov V, Salitra G, Aurbach D, Schmidt MA. Behavior of
graphite electrodes in solutions based on ionic liquids in in situ Raman studies.
J Electrochem Soc 2008;155:A132–7. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.2811897.
[82] Diaw M, Chagnes A, Carr B, Willmann P, Lemordant D. Mixed ionic liquid as
electrolyte for lithium batteries 2005;146:682–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2005.03.068.
[83] Fang S, Tang Y, Tai X, Yang L, Tachibana K, Kamijima K. One ether-functionalized
guanidinium ionic liquid as new electrolyte for lithium battery. J Power Sources
2011;196:1433–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.08.012.
[84] Passerini S, Technologies ERE. Electrolytes. Ionic Liquids; 2009.
[85] Sharabi R, Markevich E, Borgel V, Salitra G, Aurbach D, Semrau G,
Schmidt Michael A. In situ FTIR spectroscopy study of Li Õ LiNi 0 . 8 Co 0 . 15 Al
0 . 05 O 2 cells with ionic liquid-based electrolytes in overcharge condition.
Electrochem Solid-State Lett 2010;13:A32–5. https://doi.org/10.1149/
1.3292635.
[86] Song JY, Wang YY, Wan CC. Review of gel-type polymer electrolytes for lithium-
ion batteries. 1999.
[87] Stephan AM. EUROPEAN POLYMER Review on gel polymer electrolytes for
lithium batteries 2006;42:21–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
eurpolymj.2005.09.017.
[88] Larush L, Borgel V, Markevich E, Haik O, Zinigrad E, Aurbach D, Semrau G,
Schmidt M. On the thermal behavior of model Li – Li x CoO 2 systems containing
ionic liquids in standard electrolyte solutions, vol. 189; 2009. p. 217–23. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.09.099.
[89] Bruce PG, Freunberger SA, Hardwick LJ, Tarascon J-M. Li – O 2 and Li – S
batteries with high energy storage. Nat Mater 2012;11:19–30. https://doi.org/
10.1038/NMAT3191.
[90] Thackeray MM, Wolverton C, Isaacs ED. Electrical energy storage for
transportation - approaching the limits of, and going beyond, lithium-ion
batteries. Energy Environ Sci 2012;5:7854–63. https://doi.org/10.1039/
c2ee21892e.
[91] Wu F, Yushin G. Conversion cathodes for rechargeable lithium and lithium-ion
batteries. Energy Environ Sci 2016. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6EE02326F.
[92] Obrovac MN, Chevrier VL. Alloy Negative electrodes for Li-Ion Batteries. 2014.
https://doi.org/10.1021/cr500207g.
[93] Kim KS, Automotive, Next-generation battery technology applications, (n.d.).
[94] Ciez RE, Whitacre JF. Comparison between cylindrical and prismatic lithium-ion
cell costs using a process based cost model. J Power Sources 2017;340:273–81.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.11.054.
[95] Whittingham MS. Chemistry OF intercalation COMPOUNDS : metal guests IN
chalcogenide hosts. 1978.
[96] Dahlin GR, Strom KE. In: E LECTRICAL E NGINEERING D EVELOPMENTS series:
lithium batteries research, technology and applications. Nova Science Publishers,
Inc.; 2010.
[97] Liu H, Wei Z, He W, Zhao J. Thermal issues about Li-ion batteries and recent
progress in battery thermal management systems: a review. Energy Convers
Manag 2017;150:304–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.016.
[98] Shen C, Ko T, Liu C, Chiu K, Leu H, Lin P, Lin J. Low temperature process modi fi
ed MCMB for lithium ion batteries. Solid State Ionics 2014;268:282–7. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2014.07.001.
[99] Younesi R, Veith GM, Johansson P, Edstrom K, Vegge T. Lithium salts for
advanced lithium batteries: Li-metal, Li-O2, and Li-S. Energy Environ Sci 2015.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C5EE01215E.
[100] Jiang F, Nie Y, Yin L, Feng Y, Yu Q, Zhong C. Author ’ s accepted manuscript core-
shell-structured nanofibrous membrane as advanced separator for lithium-ion
batteries. J Membr Sci 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.02.067.
[101] Liu Y, Ma H, Hsiao BS, Chu B, Tsou AH. Improvement of meltdown temperature of
lithium-ion battery separator using electrospun polyethersulfone membranes.
Polymer 2016;107:163–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2016.11.020.
[102] Taheri P, Yazdanpour M, Bahrami M. Transient three-dimensional thermal model
for batteries with thin electrodes. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2013.05.175.
[103] Whittingham MS. Lithium Batteries and Cathode Materials. 2004. https://doi.
org/10.1021/cr020731c.
25
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[104] Tsegai B, Jiang F. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials Microstructure
reconstruction and impedance spectroscopy study of LiCoO 2018;2(268):69–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2018.04.001.
[105] The Boston Consulting Group. Batteries for electric Cars, Challenges, Oportunities
and the Outlook to 2020. 2020.
[106] Roper LD. Tesla model S. n.d. http://www.roperld.com/science/teslamodels.htm.
[Accessed 9 January 2019].
[107] Wikipedia. Tesla model S (n.d.), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S.
[Accessed 16 May 2019].
[108] Abada S, Marlair G, Lecocq A, Petit M, Sauvant-moynot V, Huet F. Safety focused
modeling of lithium-ion batteries : a review. J Power Sources 2016;306:178–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.11.100.
[109] Battery University. Advantages and Limitations of the different types of batteries.
n.d. https://batteryuniversity.com/index.php/learn/archive/whats_the_best_ba
ttery. [Accessed 30 March 2019].
[110] Rugh JP. Electric Vehicle Battery Thermal Issues and Thermal Management
Techniques. 2011.
[111] Ramadass P, Haran B, White R, Popov BN. Capacity fade of Sony 18650 cells
cycled at elevated temperatures Part I. Cycling performance 2002;112:606–13.
[112] G. Kim, J. Gonder, J. Lustbader, A. Pesaran, Thermal management of batteries in
advanced vehicles Using Phase-Change Materials, 2 (n.d.) 134–147.
[113] Shim J, Kostecki R, Richardson T, Song X, Striebel KA. Electrochemical analysis
for cycle performance and capacity fading of a lithium-ion battery cycled at
elevated temperature, vol. 112; 2002. p. 222–30.
[114] Sato N. Thermal behavior analysis of lithium-ion batteries for electric and hybrid
vehicles, vol. 99; 2001. p. 70–7.
[115] Broussely M, Biensan P, Bonhomme F, Blanchard P. Main aging mechanisms in Li
ion batteries, vol. 146; 2005. p. 90–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2005.03.172.
[116] Ning G, Haran B, Popov BN. Capacity fade study of lithium-ion batteries cycled at
high discharge rates, vol. 117; 2003. p. 160–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-
7753(03)00029-6.
[117] Macneil DD, Lu Z, Chen Z, Dahn JR. A comparison of the electrode/electrolyte
reaction at elevated temperatures for various Li-ion battery cathodes 2002;108:
8–14.
[118] Wang CY, Zhang G, Ge S, Xu T, Ji Y, Yang XG, Leng Y. Lithium-ion battery
structure that self-heats at low temperatures. Nature 2016;529:515–8. https://
doi.org/10.1038/nature16502.
[119] T. Liu, X. Tang, H. Wang, H. Yu, X. Hu, Adaptive hierarchical energy management
design for a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, (n.d.) 1.
[120] Nunotani K, Yoshida F, Kamiya Y. Development and Performance evaluation of
Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery with Superior Rapid Charging Performance
-Second Report : Evaluation of Battery Capacity. 2011. p. 4–7.
[121] Ouyang M, Ren D, Lu L, Li J, Feng X, Han X. Overcharge-induced capacity fading
analysis for large format lithium-ion batteries with Li y Ni 1/3 Co 1/3 Mn 1/3 O 2
þ Li y Mn 2 O 4 composite cathode. J Power Sources 2015;279:626–35. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.01.051.
[122] Belt JR, Ho CD, Motloch CG, Miller TJ, Duong TQ. Short communication A
capacity and power fade study of Li-ion cells during life cycle testing, vol. 123;
2003. p. 241–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7753(03)00537-8.
[123] T.B. Reddy, ed., Laiden’s handbook of batteries, fourth ed., McGrawHilll, n.d.
[124] Liu P, Wang J, Hicks-garner J, Sherman E, Soukiazian S, Verbrugge M, Tataria H,
Musser J, Finamore P, Deere J, Engineering S, Carolina N. Aging Mechanisms of
LiFePO 4 Batteries Deduced by electrochemical and Structural Analyses. 2010.
https://doi.org/10.1149/1.3294790.
[125] Wu M, Chiang PJ. High-rate capability of lithium-ion batteries after storing at
elevated temperature 2007;52:3719–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
electacta.2006.10.045.
[126] Jiang J, Zhang C. Fundamentals and Applications of Lithiuom-ion Batteries in
electric Drive Vehicles. 2015.
[127] Lu L, Han X, Li J, Hua J, Ouyang M. A review on the key issues for lithium-ion
battery management in electric vehicles. J Power Sources 2013;226:272–88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.10.060.
[128] Shah K, Chalise D, Jain A. Experimental and theoretical analysis of a method to
predict thermal runaway in Li-ion cells. J Power Sources 2016;330:167–74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.08.133.
[129] Wang C-Y, Xu T, Ge S, Zhang G, Yang X-G, Ji Y. A fast rechargeable lithium-ion
battery at subfreezing temperatures. J Electrochem Soc 2016;163:A1944–50.
https://doi.org/10.1149/2.0681609jes.
[130] Peng P, Jiang F. Thermal behavior analyses of stacked prismatic LiCoO 2 lithium-
ion batteries during oven tests. Heat Mass Tran 2015;88:411–23. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.04.101.
[131] Zhao R, Liu J, Gu J. Simulation and experimental study on lithium ion battery
short circuit. Appl Energy 2016;173:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.04.016.
[132] Ye J, Chen H, Wang Q, Huang P, Sun J, Lo S. Thermal behavior and failure
mechanism of lithium ion cells during overcharge under adiabatic conditions.
Appl Energy 2016;182:464–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.08.124.
[133] Hatchard TD, Trussler S, Dahn JR. Building a “ smart nail ” for penetration tests
on Li-ion cells. J Power Sources 2014;247:821–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2013.09.022.
[134] Wang H, Kumar A, Simunovic S, Allu S, Kalnaus S, Turner JA, Helmers JC,
Rules ET, Winchester CS, Gorney P. Progressive mechanical indentation of large-
format Li-ion cells. J Power Sources 2017;341:156–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jpowsour.2016.11.094.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
[135] Shukla A, Kumar TP. Material for next generation lithium batteries. Curr Sci
2008;94.
[136] Balakrishnan PG, Ramesh R, Kumar TP. Safety mechanisms in lithium-ion
batteries, vol. 155; 2006. p. 401–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2005.12.002.
[137] M.R. Cosley, M.P. Garcia, Battery thermal management system, (n.d.) 38–45.
[138] Park C, Jaura AK. Dynamic Thermal Model of Li-Ion Battery for Predictive
Behavior in Hybrid and Fuel Cell Vehicles. 2017.
[139] Huang Q, Yan M, Jiang Z. Thermal study on single electrodes in lithium-ion
battery 2006;156:541–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2005.05.083.
[140] Zhao R, Zhang S, Liu J, Gu J. Review article A review of thermal performance
improving methods of lithium ion battery : electrode modi fi cation and thermal
management system. J Power Sources 2015;299:557–77. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.09.001.
[141] Mohammadian SK, He Y, Zhang Y. Internal cooling of a lithium-ion battery using
electrolyte as coolant through microchannels embedded inside the electrodes.
J Power Sources 2015;293:458–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2015.05.055.
[142] Howey DA, Martinez-botas RF, Cussons B, Lytton L. Comparative measurements
of the energy consumption of 51 electric , hybrid and internal combustion engine
vehicles. Transport Res Part D 2011;16:459–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trd.2011.04.001.
[143] Sweeting WJ, Hutchinson AR, Savage SD. Factors affecting electric vehicle energy
consumption. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2011;4:192–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19397038.2011.592956.
[144] Lorf C, Martínez-botas RF, Howey DA, Lytton L, Cussons B. Comparative analysis
of the energy consumption and CO 2 emissions of 40 electric , plug-in hybrid
electric , hybrid electric and internal combustion engine vehicles. Transport Res
Part D 2013;23:12–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2013.03.004.
[145] Royal Automobile Car Founadtion, Shades of Green. Which low-carbon cars are
the most eco friendly?. 2011.
[146] Neubauer J, Wood E. Thru-life impacts of driver aggression, climate, cabin
thermal management, and battery thermal management on battery electric
vehicle utility. J Power Sources 2014;259:262–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2014.02.083.
[147] Ericsson E. Independent driving pattern factors and their in ‾ uence on fuel-use
and exhaust emission factors, vol. 6; 2001.
[148] Li W, Stanula P, Egede P, Kara S, Herrmann C. Determining the main factors
influencing the energy consumption of electric vehicles in the usage phase.
Procedia CIRP 2016;48:352–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.03.014.
[149] Lohse-Busch H, Duoba M, Gowri V, Rask E, Lohse-Busch H, Stutenberg K,
Slezak L, Anderson D. Ambient temperature (20◦ F, 72◦ F and 95◦ F) impact on fuel
and energy consumption for several conventional vehicles, hybrid and plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles and battery electric vehicle. SAE Tech. Pap. Ser. 2013;1.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-1462.
[150] Yuan X, Zhang C, Hong G, Huang X, Li L. Method for evaluating the real-world
driving energy consumptions of electric vehicles. 2017. p. 141.
[151] Zhang Z, Liu C, Chen X, Zhang C, Chen J. Annual energy consumption of electric
vehicle air conditioning in China. Appl Therm Eng 2017;125:567–74. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.07.032.
[152] Varocky BJ. I. Report. Benchmarking of Regenerative Braking for a Fully Electric
Car; 2011.
[153] Khayyam H, Kouzani AZ, Hu EJ, Nahavandi S. Coordinated energy management
of vehicle air conditioning system. Appl Therm Eng 2011;31:750–64. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.10.022.
[154] Marshall GJ, Mahony CP, Rhodes MJ, Daniewicz SR, Tsolas N, Thompson SM,
Marshall GJ, Mahony CP, Rhodes MJ, Daniewicz SR, Tsolas N. Thermal
Management of Vehicle Cabins , external Surfaces , and Onboard Electronics : An
Overview, Engineering. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2019.02.009.
[155] Chiu C, Tsai N, Lin C. Near-optimal order-reduced control for A/C ( air-
conditioning ) system of EVs ( electric vehicles ). Energy 2014;66:342–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.01.029.
[156] Daanen HAM, Van De Vliert E, Huang X. Driving performance in cold. warm , and
thermoneutral environments 2003;34:597–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-
6870(03)00055-3.
[157] D.P. Wyon, Sa E TECHNICAL driver vigilance the effects of compartment, (n.d.).
[158] Qi Z. Advances on air conditioning and heat pump system in electric vehicles – a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:754–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2014.07.038.
[159] O.K.Æ.E.P.Æ.M. Kilic, Thermal comfort during heating and cooling periods in an
automobile. 2005. p. 449–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-004-0558-9.
[160] Bellocchi S, Guizzi GL, Manno M, Salvatori M, Zaccagnini A. Reversible heat
pump HVAC system with regenerative heat exchanger for electric vehicles :
analysis of its impact on driving range. Appl Therm Eng 2018;129:290–305.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.10.020.
[161] J.P. Rugh, V. Hovland, S.O. Andersen, Significant fuel savings and emission
reductions by improving vehicle air conditioning, (n.d.).
[162] Orofino L, Amante F, Mola S, Rostagno M, Villosio G, Piu A. An Integrated
Approach for Air Conditioning and electrical System Impact on Vehicle Fuel
Consumption and Performances Analysis : DrivEM 1 . 0. 2018.
[163] Torregrosa-jaime B, Payá J, Corberan J. Design of efficient Air-Conditioning
Systems for electric Vehicles. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-0864.
[164] Bradley TH, Frank AA. Design , demonstrations and sustainability impact
assessments for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, vol. 13; 2009. p. 115–28. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.05.003.
26
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[165] Samadani E, Fraser R, Fowler M. Evaluation of Air Conditioning Impact on the
electric Vehicle Range and Li-Ion Battery Life. 2020. https://doi.org/10.4271/
2014-01-1853.Copyright.
[166] Farrington R, Rugh J. Impact of Vehicle Air- Conditioning on Fuel economy ,
Tailpipe emissions , and electric Vehicle Range Preprint. 2000.
[167] Tesla Company. Model S owner ’ S manual. 2019.
[168] Jeffers MA, Chaney L, Rugh JP. Climate Control Load Reduction Strategies for
electric Drive Vehicles. Cold Weather; 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-
0262.
[169] Jeffers MA, Chaney L, Rugh JP. Climate Control Load Reduction Strategies for
electric Drive Vehicles in Warm Weather. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-
01-0355. Copyright.
[170] Ozeki Y, Harita Y, Hirano A, Nishihama J. Evaluation on the Solar Reduction
Glass in an electric Vehicle by experimental Measurements in a Climate Chamber.
2014. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-0703. Copyright.
[171] Gasworth S. Reduced Steady State Heating and Air Conditioning Loads via
Reduced Glazing Thermal Conductivity. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2011-01-
0126.
[172] Türler D, Hopkins D, Goudey H. Advanced Thermal Insulation and Window
Technologies Reprinted From : Advances in Automotive Climate Control. 2018.
[173] Kambly KR, Bradley TH. Estimating the HVAC energy consumption of plug-in
electric vehicles. J Power Sources 2014;259:117–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2014.02.033.
[174] Kambly K, Bradley TH. Geographical and temporal differences in electric vehicle
range due to cabin conditioning energy consumption. J Power Sources 2015;275:
468–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.10.142.
[175] Kia Media, 2015 Kia Soul EV Overview, (n.d.). https://www.kiamedia.com/us/
en/models/soul-ev/2015 (accessed February 17, 2019).
[176] Plett GL. Battery Management Systems Volume II: equivalent-Circuit Methods.
Atrech House; 2018.
[177] Wikipedia. Battery management systems (n.d.), https://en.wikipedia.org/w
iki/Battery_management_system. [Accessed 5 March 2019].
[178] D. Andrea, Battery management systems for large Lithium-ion battery packs,
Artech House, n.d.
[179] Electropaedia. Battery and energy technologies. n.d. https://www.mpoweruk.
com/bms.htm#top. [Accessed 25 April 2019].
[180] Arora S. Selection of thermal management system for modular battery packs of
electric vehicles : a review of existing and emerging technologies. J Power
Sources 2018;400:621–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.08.020.
[181] Dinçer I, Hamut HS, Javani N. Thermal Management of electric Vehicle Battery
Systems. Wiley; 2017.
[182] Siddique AR, Mahmud S, Van Heyst B. Review article A comprehensive review on
a passive ( phase change materials ) and an active ( thermoelectric cooler ) battery
thermal management system and their limitations. J Power Sources 2018;401:
224–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.08.094.
[183] Smith J, Singh R, Hinterberger M, Mochizuki M. Battery thermal management
system for electric vehicle using heat pipes. Int J Therm 2018;134:517–29.
[184] Kim J, Oh J, Lee H. Review on battery thermal management system for electric
vehicles. Appl Therm Eng 2018;149:192–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2018.12.020.
[185] Cen J, Li Z, Jiang F. Energy for Sustainable Development Experimental
investigation on using the electric vehicle air conditioning system for lithium-ion
battery thermal management. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2018;45:88–95. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.esd.2018.05.005.
[186] Kruger I, Limperich D, Schmitz G. Energy consumption of battery cooling
inhybrid electric vehicles. In: International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Conference, Purdue, West Lafayette, IN; 2012.
[187] Perner A, Vetter J. Lithium-ion batteries for hybrid electric vehicles and battery
electric vehicles. 2015.
[188] Chen K, Li Z, Chen Y, Long S, Hou J, Song M, Wang S. Design of Parallel Air-
Cooled Battery Thermal Management System through Numerical Study. 2017.
p. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/en10101677.
[189] Huber C, Kuhn R. Thermal management of batteries for electric vehicles. Elsevier
Ltd.; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-78242-377-5.00013-3.
[190] Park H. A design of air fl ow con fi guration for cooling lithium ion battery in
hybrid electric vehicles. J Power Sources 2013;239:30–6. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.03.102.
[191] Xu XM, He R. Research on the heat dissipation performance of battery pack based
on forced air cooling. 2013. p. 240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2013.03.004.
[192] Sun H, Dixon R. Development of cooling strategy for an air cooled lithium-ion
battery pack. J Power Sources 2014;272:404–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2014.08.107.
[193] Xie J, Ge Z, Zang M, Wang S. Structural optimization of lithium-ion battery pack
with forced air cooling system. Appl Therm Eng 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2017.07.143.
[194] Hong S, Zhang X, Chen K, Wang S. Design of flow configuration for parallel air-
cooled battery thermal management system with secondary vent. Int J Heat Mass
Tran 2018;116:1204–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatmasstransfer.2017.09.092.
[195] Fan L, Khodadadi JM, Pesaran AA. A parametric study on thermal management of
an air-cooled lithium-ion battery module for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
J Power Sources 2013;238:301–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2013.03.050.
[196] Wang T, Tseng KJ, Zhao J, Wei Z. Thermal investigation of lithium-ion battery
module with different cell arrangement structures and forced air-cooling
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
strategies. Appl Energy 2014;134:229–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2014.08.013.
[197] Yang N, Zhang X, Li G, Hua D. Assessment of the forced air-cooling performance
for cylindrical lithium-ion battery packs : a comparative analysis between aligned
and staggered cell arrangements. Appl Therm Eng 2015;80:55–65. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.01.049.
[198] Mahamud R, Park C. Reciprocating air flow for Li-ion battery thermal
management to improve temperature uniformity. J Power Sources 2011;196:
5685–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.02.076.
[199] Yu K, Yang X, Cheng Y, Li C. Thermal analysis and two-directional air fl ow
thermal management for lithium-ion battery pack. J Power Sources 2014;270:
193–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.07.086.
[200] Lu Z, Meng XZ, Wei LC, Hu WY, Zhang LY, Jin LW. Thermal Management of
Densely-packed EV Battery With Forced Air Cooling Strategies 2016;88:682–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.06.098.
[201] Jarrett A, Kim IY. Design optimization of electric vehicle battery cooling plates for
thermal performance. J Power Sources 2011;196:10359–68. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.06.090.
[202] Jarrett A, Kim IY. Fl uence of operating conditions on the optimum design of
electric vehicle battery cooling plates. J Power Sources 2014;245:644–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.06.114.
[203] Jin LW, Lee PS, Kong XX, Fan Y, Chou SK. Ultra-thin minichannel LCP for EV
battery thermal management. Appl Energy 2014;113:1786–94. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.07.013.
[204] Huo Y, Rao Z, Liu X, Zhao J. Investigation of power battery thermal management
by using mini-channel cold plate. Energy Convers Manag 2015;89:387–95.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.10.015.
[205] Zhao J, Rao Z, Li Y. Thermal performance of mini-channel liquid cooled cylinder
based battery thermal management for cylindrical lithium-ion power battery.
Energy Convers Manag 2015;103:157–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2015.06.056.
[206] Qian Z, Li Y, Rao Z. Thermal performance of lithium-ion battery thermal
management system by using mini-channel cooling. Energy Convers Manag 2016;
126:622–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.08.063.
[207] Lan C, Xu J, Qiao Y, Ma Y. Thermal management for high power lithium-ion
battery by minichannel aluminum tubes. Appl Therm Eng 2016;101:284–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.02.070.
[208] Gopalakrishnan R, Capron O, Nikolian A, De Hoog J, Coosemans T, Omar N, Van
Mierlo J. How to model a battery. 2020.
[209] Saidani F, Hutter FX, Scurtu R, Braunwarth W, Burghartz JN. Lithium-ion battery
models : a comparative study and a model-based powerline communication.
2017. p. 83–91.
[210] J.P. Schmidt, Verfahren zur Charakterisierung und Modellierung von Lithium-
Ionen Zellen, n.d.
[211] P. Keil, A. Jossen, T.U. München, Aufbau und Parametrierung von
Batteriemodellen, (n.d.).
[212] Fuller TF, Doyle M, Newman J. TECHNICAL papers electrochemical science and
technology Simulation and Optimization of the Dual Lithium Ion Insertion Cell.
1994. p. 141.
[213] Jiang F, Peng P, Sun Y. Thermal analyses of LiFePO 4/graphite battery discharge
processes. J Power Sources 2013;243:181–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2013.05.089.
[214] Li Y, Qi F, Guo H, Guo Z, Wu W. Characteristic investigation of an
electrochemical- thermal coupled model for a LiFePO 4/graphene hybrid cathode
lithium-ion battery. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2018:100387. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.csite.2018.100387.
[215] Song J, Park J, Appiah WA, Kim S, Munakata H, Kanamura K, Ryou M, Min Y.
Nano Energy 3D electrochemical model for a Single Secondary Particle and its
application for operando analysis. Nanomater Energy 2019;62:810–7. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoen.2019.05.087.
[216] Xu M, Zhang Z, Wang X, Jia L, Yang L. A pseudo three-dimensional
electrochemical-thermal model of a prismatic LiFePO4 battery during discharge
process. Energy 2015;80:303–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.073.
[217] Rao R, Vrudhula S, Rakhmatov DN. Battery Modeling For energy-Aware System
Design. 2003.
[218] Gaiselmann G, Neumann M, Schmidt V, Pecho O. Quantitative relationships
between microstructure and effective transport properties based on virtual
materials testing, vol. 60; 2014. p. 1983–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.
[219] P. Biswas, S.R. Elliott, E. Ibarra-garcía-padilla, C.G. Malanche-flores, F.J. Poveda-
cuevas, S. Cook, R. Feres, D. Jauffrès, C.L. Martin, A. Lichtner, Graph-based
simulated annealing : a hybrid approach to stochastic modeling of complex
microstructures, (n.d.). doi:10.1088/0965-0393/21/5/055004.
[220] Thiedmann R, Stenzel O, Spettl A, Shearing PR, Harris SJ, Brandon NP. Stochastic
simulation model for the 3D morphology of composite materials in Li – ion
batteries. Comput Mater Sci 2011;50:3365–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
commatsci.2011.06.031.
[221] Gaiselmann G, Tötzke C, Manke I, Lehnert W. 3D microstructure modeling of
compressed fi ber-based materials. J Power Sources 2014;257:52–64. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.01.095.
[222] Hein S, Feinauer J, Westhoff D, Manke I, Schmidt V, Latz A. Stochastic
microstructure modeling and electrochemical simulation of lithium-ion cell
anodes in 3D. J Power Sources 2016;336:e1191–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2016.10.057.
[223] Westhoff D, Feinauer J, Kuchler K, Mitsch T, Manke I, Hein S, Latz A, Schmidt V.
Parametric stochastic 3D model for the microstructure of anodes in lithium-ion
power cells 2017;126:453–67.
27
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[224] Westho D, Manke I, Schmidt V. Generation of virtual lithium-ion battery electrode
microstructures based on spatial stochastic modeling 2018;151:53–64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.04.060.
[225] Feinauer J, Brereton T, Spettl A, Weber M, Manke I, Schmidt V. Stochastic 3D
modeling of the microstructure of lithium-ion battery anodes via Gaussian
random fields on the sphere. Comput Mater Sci 2015;109:137–46. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.06.025.
[226] Kuchler K, Westhoff D, Feinauer J, Mitsch T, Manke I, Schmidt V. Stochastic
model for the 3D microstructure of pristine and cyclically aged cathodes in Li-ion
batteries Stochastic model for the 3D microstructure of pristine and cyclically
aged cathodes in Li-ion batteries. 2018.
[227] P. A-a Moss PL, Au G, Plichta EJ, Zheng JP, Soc JE, Moss PL, Au G, Plichta EJ,
Zheng JP. An electrical circuit for modeling the dynamic response of Li-ion
polymer batteries service an electrical circuit for modeling the dynamic response
of Li-ion. Polymer Batteries 2008:155. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.2999375.
[228] Dubarry M, Vuillaume N, Liaw BY. From single cell model to battery pack
simulation for Li-ion batteries, vol. 186; 2009. p. 500–7. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.10.051.
[229] Tian Y, Xia B, Sun W, Xu Z, Zheng W. A modi fi ed model based state of charge
estimation of power lithium-ion batteries using unscented. Kalman fi lter 2014;
270:619–26.
[230] I. Baccouche, S. Jemmali, B. Manai, N. Omar, N. Essoukri, B. Amara, Improved
OCV model of a Li-ion NMC battery for online SOC estimation using the extended
kalman filter, (n.d.) 1–22. doi:10.3390/en10060764.
[231] De Cauwer C, Van Mierlo J, Coosemans T. Energy consumption prediction for
electric vehicles based on real-world data. Energies 2015;8:8573–93. https://doi.
org/10.3390/en8088573.
[232] Wu X, Freese D, Cabrera A, Kitch WA. Electric vehicles ’ energy consumption
measurement and estimation. Transp. Res. PART D. 2015;34:52–67. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.10.007.
[233] Zhang R, Yao E. Mesoscopic model framework for estimating electric vehicles’
energy consumption. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019:101478. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scs.2019.101478.
[234] Luin B, Petelin S, Al-Mansour F. Microsimulation of electric vehicle energy
consumption. Energy 2019;174:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2019.02.034.
[235] Dib W, Chasse A, Moulin P, Sciarretta A, Corde G. Control Engineering Practice
Optimal energy management for an electric vehicle in eco-driving applications.
Contr Eng Pract 2014:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2014.01.005.
[236] Badin F, Le Berr F, Briki H, Petit M, Magand S, Condemine E. Evaluation of EVs
energy consumption influencing factors. 2013. p. 1–12.
[237] Shankar R, Marco J. Method for estimating the energy consumption of electric
vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles under real-world driving conditions
2013;7:138–50. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2012.0114.
[238] Neaimeh M, Hill GA, Hübner Y, Blythe PT. Routing systems to extend the driving
range of electric vehicles, vol. 7; 2013. p. 327–36. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-
its.2013.0122.
[239] Wager G, Mchenry MP, Whale J, Bräunl T. Testing energy ef fi ciency and driving
range of electric vehicles in relation to gear selection. Renew Energy 2015;62:
303–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.07.029.
[240] Zhai H, Frey HC, Rouphail NM. A vehicle-specific power approach to speed- and
facility-specific emissions estimates for diesel transit buses. Environ Sci Technol
2008;42:7985–91. https://doi.org/10.1021/es800208d.
[241] Fiori C, Ahn K, Rakha HA. Power-based electric vehicle energy consumption
model : model development and validation. Appl Energy 2016;168:257–68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.01.097.
[242] Zhang C, Shen K, Yang F, Yuan C. Multiphysics modeling of energy intensity and
energy efficiency of electric vehicle operation. Procedia CIRP 2019;80:322–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.01.058.
[243] Hu X, Li S, Peng H. A comparative study of equivalent circuit models for Li-ion
batteries. J Power Sources 2012;198:359–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2011.10.013.
[244] Plett GL. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-
based HEV battery packs Part 2. Modeling and identification 2004;134:262–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.02.032.
[245] Yann B, Nagasubramanian G, Jungst RG, Doughty DH. Modeling of lithium ion
cells — a simple equivalent-circuit model approach, vol. 175; 2004. p. 835–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2004.09.049.
[246] Chiang Y, Sean W, Ke J. Online estimation of internal resistance and open-circuit
voltage of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles. J Power Sources 2011;196:
3921–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.01.005.
[247] Dubarry M, Liaw BY. Development of a universal modeling tool for rechargeable
lithium batteries 2007;174:856–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2007.06.157.
[248] Hu Y, Yurkovich S, Guezennec Y, Yurkovich BJ. A technique for dynamic battery
model identification in automotive applications using linear parameter varying
structures. Contr Eng Pract 2009;17:1190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conengprac.2009.05.002.
[249] Hu Y, Yurkovich S. Linear parameter varying battery model identification using
subspace methods, vol. 196; 2011. p. 2913–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2010.10.072.
[250] Andre D, Meiler M, Steiner K, Walz H, Soczka-guth T, Sauer DU. Characterization
of high-power lithium-ion batteries by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy.
II : Modelling, J. Power Sources 2011;196:5349–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2010.07.071.
A. Ibrahim and F. Jiang
[251] Johnson VH. Battery performance models in ADVISOR. J Power Sources 2002;
110:321–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7753(02)00194-5.
[252] Verbrugge M, Tate E. Adaptive state of charge algorithm for nickel metal hydride
batteries including hysteresis phenomena 2004;126:236–49. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jpowsour.2003.08.042.
[253] Verbrugge M, Koch B. Generalized recursive algorithm for adaptive
multiparameter regression. J Electrochem Soc 2006;153:A187–201. https://doi.
org/10.1149/1.2128096.
[254] Verbrugge M. Adaptive , multi-parameter battery state estimator with optimized
time-weighting factors. 2007. p. 605–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10800-007-
9291-7.
[255] Hu Y, Yurkovich S, Guezennec Y, Yurkovich BJ. Electro-thermal battery model
identification for automotive applications, vol. 196; 2011. p. 449–57. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.06.037.
[256] Plett GL. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-
based HEV battery packs - Part 1. Background. J Power Sources 2004;134:
252–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.02.031.
[257] Plett GL. Extended Kalman filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-
based HEV battery packs - Part 3. State and parameter estimation. J Power
Sources 2004;134:277–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.02.033.
[258] Larsen B, Hardy K, Rousseau A, Pasquier M, Duoba M. Argonne’s hybrid electric
vehicle technology development program. In: Proc. Jt. Advis. Veh. Syst. Model.
User conf. Argonne’s hybrid electr. Veh. Technol. Dev. Progr.; 2001.
[259] Plett GL. Battery Management Systems Volume I: Battery Modeling. Atrech
House; 2015.
[260] Kim G, Pesaran A, Spotnitz R. A three-dimensional thermal abuse model for
lithium-ion cells 2007;170:476–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpowsour.2007.04.018.
[261] A. Eddahech, O. Briat, J. Vinassa, Lithium-ion battery heat generation
investigation based on calorimetric entropy measurements, (n.d.).
[262] X. Zhang, C. Mi, Vehicle power management, springer, n.d.
28
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 111049
[263] Jiang J, Zhang C. Performance modeling. In: Fundam. Appl. Lithium-ion batter.
Electr. Drive veh. First edit; 2015.
[264] Fritzson P. Principles of Object - Oriented Modeling and Simulation with
Modelica. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/9780470545669.
[265] Martín-Martín L, Gastelurrutia J, del Portillo LA, Försterling S. Modeling based on
design of a dual thermal management system for the battery pack of a full electric
minibus. Appl Therm Eng 2017;124:1142–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2017.06.094.
[266] Jackey RA, Plett GL, Klein MJ. Parameterization of a Battery Simulation Model
Using Numerical Optimization Methods. 2018.
[267] N. Dagmar, M. Knauff, J. Mclaughlin, C. Dafis, Simulink model of a lithium-ion
battery for the hybrid power system testbed, (n.d.) 1–8.
[268] Daowd M, Omar N, Verbrugge B, Van Den Bossche P, Van Mierlo J. Battery
models parameter estimation based on matlab/Simulink. Evs25 2010;2:1–6.
[269] Wipke KB, Cuddy MR, Burch SD. Advisor 2 . 1 : a user-friendly advanced
powertrain simulation using a combined backward/forward. Approach 1999;48:
1751–61.
[270] Butler KL, Ehsani M, Kamath P. A matlab-based modeling and simulation package
for electric and hybrid electric vehicle design. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 1999;48:
1770–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/25.806769.
[271] Van Mierlo J, Maggetto G. Innovative iteration algorithm for a vehicle simulation
program, vol. 53; 2004. p. 401–12.
[272] K. Vatanparvar, J. Wan, M. Abdullah, A. Faruque, Battery-aware energy-optimal
electric vehicle driving management, (n.d.).
[273] S. Chakraborty, M. Lukasiewycz, C. Buckl, S. Fahmy, N. Chang, S. Park, Y. Kim, P.
Leteinturier, H. Adlkofer, Embedded systems and software challenges in electric
vehicles, (n.d.).
[274] Abdullah M, Faruque A, Vatanparvar K. Modeling , Analysis , and Optimization of
electric Vehicle HVAC Systems. 2016. p. 423–8.
[275] Ching CS, Gao Z, Zhang CZ. Comprehensive eletro-thermal model of 26650
lithium battery for discharge cycle under parametric and temperature variations.
J. Energy Storage. 2020;28:101222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101222.