Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

The experimental and numerical investigation on a hybrid battery thermal

management system based on forced-air convection and internal
finned structure
Peng Qin a, Mengran Liao b, Wenxi Mei a, Jinhua Sun a, Qingsong Wang a, *
a
State Key Laboratory of Fire Science, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, PR China
b
Science and Technology on Thermal Energy and Power Laboratory, Wuhan Second Ship Design and Research Institute, No.19, Yangqiaohu Avenue, Wuhan, Hubei
430205, PR China

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

Keywords: Thermal management is crucial for the lifespan and safety of lithium-ion batteries, especially for the electro­
Lithium-ion battery safety chemical energy storage which is composed of thousands of battery cells. In this paper, a novel battery thermal
Internal finned structure management system (BTMS) with internal finned structure was first proposed based on forced-air convection for
Forced-air convection
the cylindrical battery pack in the field of electrochemical energy storage. The proposed battery thermal man­
Thermo-electrical model
Structure optimization
agement system combined the advantages of forced-air convection and internal finned structure, capable of well
managing the maximum temperature and the maximum temperature of the cylindrical battery pack. The
experimental results of this study revealed that the internal finned structure improved the temperature unifor­
mity and forced-air convection reduced the maximum temperature. Even though the battery pack operated under
the 4 C rate, the maximum temperature and the maximum temperature difference are well controlled below 48.5
℃ and 4.8 ℃. Moreover, a mathematical model was established. After its results were validated by experiments,
it was used to analyze the effect of the gap space, ambient temperature, and finned material on the cooling
performance. The numerical findings provided insights into the application of the proposed battery thermal
management system. In practice, the gap space of aluminum finned structure should be set as 4 mm, and the
cycling rate should be no more than 3 C at ambient temperature over 25 ◦ C.

reaching several megawatts. Thermal runaway is an internal feature of

1. Introduction
The depletion of fossil fuels and increasing carbon emissions have
boosted the development of renewable energy, such as solar energy,
wind energy, and tidal energy, which are considered conducive to de-
carbonization and alleviating the energy crisis. It is reported that the
share of renewable energy for meeting the world electricity demand has
increased by 5% over the last fifteen years [1]. However, the impact of
renewable energy on the grid cannot be ignored. The electrochemical
energy storage (EES) systems have attracted worldwide attention due to
their capabilities of smoothing the intermittency of renewable energy
and offering solutions for frequency and peak regulation [2]. With a long
lifespan and high energy density, lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) stand out
from various energy carriers and have gained popularity for EES
systems.
An EES system is assembled by thousands of LIBs, with a capacity
LIBs. It can propagate to neighboring cells, causing severe thermal
hazards to EES systems. Wang et al. [3] discerned that thermal runaway
of LIBs was usually correlated with high temperature, and the lifespan of
LIBs would also shrink significantly at high operating temperatures.
After analyzing the decay mechanism of LIBs at high temperature,
Lucille Bodenes et al. [4] ascribed the decay of LIBs operating at high
temperature to disappeared carbonate species and increased inorganic
species. The maximum temperature and temperature uniformity are two
critical indicators of the thermal performance of a BTMS. For an effec­
tive BTMS, the optimum temperature ranges from 20 to 50 ◦ C, the
maximum temperature difference between cells should be no more than
5 ◦ C, and the safety temperature is 60 ◦ C [5]. Different from electrical
vehicles (EVs), EES systems are stationary LIBs packs with a larger
format, which have higher requirements for BTMSs but demand mod­
erate energy space density. Tremendous efforts have been made to
investigate BTMSs applicable to EVs, but effective BTMSs for EES

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pinew@ustc.edu.cn (Q. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117212
Received 16 January 2021; Received in revised form 24 March 2021; Accepted 12 April 2021
Available online 12 June 2021
1359-4311/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Nomenclature Greek letters

ε emissivity
a temperature propagation [m2 s] εs,i active volume fraction
Cdl electrical double layer capacitance [F/m2] εl electrolyte volume fraction
cs the concentration of lithium in the active material [mol/ σ eff the electronic conductivity of the solid phase [S/m]
s.i
m3] φs solid phase potential [V]
cl the concentration of lithium in the electrolyte [mol/m3] φl liquid phase potential [V]
de equivalent hydraulic diameter [mm] β equivalent convection heat transfer coefficient [W/K/m2]
Cp heat capacity [J/kg/K]
σ eff
l the electronic conductivity of the electrolyte [S/m]
eff
Dl diffusion coefficient of lithium in the electrolyte [m2/s] α charge transfer coefficient
eff
Ds,i diffusion coefficient of lithium in the solid phase [m2/s] σ eff
s,i the electronic conductivity of the solid phase [S/m]
D diameter of battery [mm] ηi overpotential [V]
Db gap distance between adjacent batteries [mm] ρ density [kg/m3]
E electric density [V/m] ρi density of components inside the cell [g/cm3]
F Faraday’s constant [C/mol] λ heat conductivity [W/m/K]
f average molar activity coefficient σ Stefan-Boltzmann constant [W/m2/K4]
h convection heat transfer coefficient [W/K/m2] νa the dynamic viscosity of air [Pa s]
japp total applied current flux [A/m2]
Jloc,i the local exchange current density [A/m3] Subscripts
i0,i exchanged current density [A/ m2] BS battery surface
ki reaction rate [m/s] i electrodes, positive or negative
m mass weight of battery cells [kg] s solid phase
Q heat generation [W/m3] l solution phase
R gas constant [J/mol/K] n negative
Rs,i the radius of electrode particles [μm] p positive
Sa,i specific surface area [m− 1] sp separator
r radius distance variable of the solid particles [m] cc current collector
x distance [m] CC constant current
t time [s] CV constant voltage
t+ Li+ transference number Al aluminum
T temperature [K] ref reference
Tref refereced temperature [K] max maximum
Tamb ambient temperature [K] ohm ohmic
Uoc,i open circuit potential [V] rev reversible
Vb space ratio of battery cells [–] surf surface
Mi the weight of the aluminum finned structure for one cell irrev irreversible
[kg]
ED energy density per kilogram [Wh/kg]

systems are rarely discussed. Hence, it is necessary to develop an
effective battery thermal management system (BTMS) that can dissipate
the heat released by operating batteries and maintain the optimum
temperature range of EES systems.
Conventional BTMSs for EVs are generally divided into four types: air
cooling, liquid cooling [6], phase change material (PCM) cooling [7,8],
and a hybrid of these approaches [9–11]. However, these BTMSs are not
suitable for a large-format battery pack in EES. For instance, liquid
cooling and heat pipes have high construction and operation costs [12].
PCM has a leakage problem and combustible quality. Therefore, these
two types of BTMSs with the above-mentioned unavoidable imperfec­
tions are infeasible for EES. Naturally, air cooling has become the focus
of attention. It is successfully integrated into industrial EV application
due to its fantastic reliability, low cost, and easy fabrication. For
example, BYD Tang and Song cars and Denze cars driven by lithium iron
phosphate (LFP) cells all adopt the design of natural convection. Toyota
Pirus and Honda Insight preferred to taking advantage of forced-air
convection, and they showed more admirable heat dissipation perfor­
mance. These air-cooling type BTMSs are proven to be effective in
practice. Meanwhile, the application of forced-air convection in BTMSs
has been extensively explored. Yu et al. [13] compared natural con­
vection with forced-air convection based on air cooling in the staggered
structure, and the results suggested that forced-air convection had much
better thermal performance than natural convection, and the air supply
velocity of 0.8 m/s was recommended in the actual application.
Following preliminary inquiry into the influence of the battery volume
ratio in the dense cylindrical battery stack on the thermal performance
of BTMS based on forced-air convection [14], Lu et al. next compre­
hensively analyzed the effect of various parameters on the cooling effect
of forced-air convection with a staggered arrangement [15]. They
concluded that the 1 mm for 18,650 cylindrical battery pack was an
appropriate channel size considering the maximum temperature, space
utilization, and energy efficiency factor. Lip Huat Saw et al. [16] probed
into the cooling performance of forced-air convection using the method
of computational fluid dynamics, and established the correlation of
Nusselt number and Reynolds number in the field of forced-air con­
vection based on the steady-state numerical simulations. Their simula­
tion results revealed that the 30 g/s air flow rate was able to ensure
suitable thermal condition for the specific battery pack within 3 C rate
while not feasible at the 5 C rate especially from the terms of the tem­
perature homogeneous. Non-uniform distribution of temperature caused
by low thermal conductivity of air is a major barrier to the populariza­
tion of forced-air convection.
Researchers have made attempts to improve temperature uniformity
through various cell arrangements or different airflow channels. For
example, Mahiamud et al. [17] developed a kind of BTMS based on

2
P. Qin et al.
reciprocating airflow, which could reduce the temperature difference of
the battery system by about 4 ℃ within a reciprocation time period of
120 s. After analyzing the effect of cell arrangements on the cooling
effect of forced-air convection, Wang et al. [18] concluded that a 5 × 5
cubic structure contributed to the largest cooling capacity of the system
while a hexagonal structure with 19 cells made a good compromise
between space utilization and the cooling efficiency. Liu et al. [19]
designed a J-type air-based BTMS through surrogate-based optimiza­
tion, and found that the optimized J-type structure could adjust to
different working conditions and be adaptively controlled to satisfy the
cooling requirement. However, these modifications were aimed at EVs.
Furthermore, a high cycling rate and pure forced-air convection could
result in non-uniform distribution of temperature. To improve the
cooling performance, some hybrid BTMSs combining the forced-air
convection with other methods have been recently proposed. Both
Ling et al. [20] and Qin et al. [21] developed a hybrid BTMS integrating
PCM cooling and forced-air convection, whose thermal performance met
the requirements even at high cycling rates. Wu et al. [22] presented a
hybrid BTMS that integrated heat pipes with high conductivity, PCM,
and forced-air convection. The hybrid BTMS could control the highest
temperature under 50 ℃ even if the battery pack operated at 3 C cycling
rates. Nevertheless, new problems arose from the added components.
The finned structure has high heat conductivity and a large heat
exchange area, so it would be the best choice for air-cooling BTMSs and
can meet the requirements of EES systems. Previously, researchers
focused on the thermal performance of BTMSs employing finned struc­
ture and PCM. Weng et al. [23] compared the thermal performance of
BTMSs adopting PCM cooling and different finned structures at high
temperature. The comparison result showed that the X-shape exhibited
the best heat dissipation ability among V, Y, and X shapes by restraining
the cell under 47 ◦ C with the environmental temperature at 40 ◦ C. In
addition to a single battery, Ping et al. [24] proposed a novel BTMS
relying on PCM and finned structure for the prismatic battery module.
Their BTMS was able to keep the maximum temperature on the battery
surface under 51 ℃ even at a high discharge rate of 3C. In order to
improve the mechanical properties of the cylindrical battery pack, Lv
et al. [25] employed the composite PCM made from expanding graphite,
Fig. 1. The sketch of the experimental system.
3
Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212
paraffin wax, and polyethylene, and introduced low fins and forced-air
convection into the pack. The coupled BTMS was demonstrated to be
effective even at an extremely high discharge rate of 3.5 C. Notwith­
standing, PCM does not apply to BTMSs in the EES because of its flam­
mability. A BTMS combining forced-air convection with finned structure
is suitable for EES. Only a few scholars [26,27] have carried out a
relevant study on prismatic battery. Mohammadian et al. [26] designed
a novel hybrid BTMS employing pin–fin heat sinks and forced-air con­
vection for prismatic battery modules and optimized it through simu­
lations. T.D.Nguyen [27] et al. designed a cell-integrated, tapered
channel heat sink concept for prismatic battery cells. Their proposed
BTMSs were found to not only reduce the bulk temperature inside the
battery but also improve the temperature homogeneity. But till date,
there is still a research gap on how to ensure a suitable thermal envi­
ronment for the EES which is composed of thousands of cylindrical
battery cells.
The novelty and objective of this study are that it develops a novel
BTMS for cylindrical battery packs used in the EES. Integrating forced-
air convection and internal finned structure is a feasible solution of
BTMS for the EES, which has never appeared in other literature.
Experimental results showed that the proposed BTMS was effective at a
cycling rate from 1 C to 4 C. Meanwhile, a validated mathematical
model was established to analyze the parameters, and the results pro­
vided some useful insights into the actual application.
2. Experimental method
The experimental system used to evaluate the cooling performance
of the proposed BTMS is illustrated in Fig. 1. Four commercial 18,650
LIBs with LiNixCoyMnzO2 (x:y:z = 1:1:1) as the cathode were connected
in parallel by nickel belts. The battery pack was linked to the cycling
system, which consisted of a computer and a cycler (Shenzhen Neware
Electronic 137 Co., Ltd, Shenzhen, China). As shown in Fig. 1, three pairs
of K-type thermocouples I/I′ , II/II′ , and III/III′ with a sampling fre­
quency of 1 s were affixed 5 mm away from the upper and lower surfaces
of batteries. The list of sensor names, their range, and their accuracy are
given in Table 1. Meanwhile, the uncertainties of the temperature and
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Table 1 Table 2
The range and accuracy of sensors. The statistic of operating conditions.
Sensor name Range Accuracy (σ) Operating conditions Cycling rates

Thermocouple − 100 ~ 1200 ℃ 0.1 ℃ 1C 2C 3C 4C

Electronic balance 0–9 kg 0.01 g
Battery cycler Voltage: 0–30 V Voltage: 0.1 V
Current: 0–50 A Current: 0.01 A
mass are reached ±0.5% and ±1.5% according to the uncertainties
calculation equation[23]. Each pair of the thermocouples were used to
discern the temperature difference along the axial direction. Another
thermocouple (Ⅳ) was used to measure the ambient temperature. The
battery pack and a fan were both placed in the accelerating rate calo­
rimetries (ARC) with a constant temperature of 25 ◦ C. The physical
geometry of the battery pack is presented in Fig. 2. The 6061 aluminum
ingot was subject to wire cutting to prepare the internal finned structure.
Four acrylic glass plates were fixed by eight screws so as to eliminate the
contact heat resistance between cells and finned structure. It should be
mentioned that the assembly battery pack was wrapped with insulation
material to see that the heat was only taken away from the designed
BTMS.
Under the conditions entailed with forced-air convection, an
anemometer was placed at the upwind of the battery pack to detect the
wind velocity. The cooling performance of the BTMS at five different
operating conditions was compared. The five conditions were natural
convection, internal finned structure with natural convection, forced-air
convection, internal finned structure with forced-air convection (the
wind velocity on the head face of the battery pack was 1 m/s), and in­
ternal finned structure with forced-air convection (the velocity on the
head face of the battery pack was 1.5 m/s). Meanwhile, the battery pack
underwent three cycles under one specific working condition.
The experimental conditions are listed in Table 2 and the procedures
are summarized as following:
(i) Weld the Nickel tab onto the anode and cathode, and then attach
the thermo-couples to the specific location;
(ii) Install the internal finned structure between the battery cells,
place four acrylic glass plates outside and then tighten eight
screws;
(iii) Put the integrated battery cell into the ARC and then fix the fan.
(iv) Link the integrated battery pack to the cycler and carry on the
test.
(v) Collect the data and then carry on analysis.
Natural convection √ √ – –
Internal finned structure √ √ √ –
Air forced convection (1.5 m/s) √ √ √ –
Finned structure + air-forced convection (1 m/s) √ √ √ √
Finned structure + air-forced convection (1.5 m/s) √ √ √ √
Despite of the irregular and hybrid load on the EES, the effectiveness
of the proposed BTMS was still assessed by the general charge–discharge
cycling test. The BTMS experienced several charge–discharge cycles at
each of the five experimental conditions under different cycling rates.
Each cycle involved the following four stages (Fig. 3), starting from the
100% state of charge (SOC) cells:
(1) Constant-current (CC) discharge until the voltage dropped under
2.75 V;
(2) Laying-aside: suspending the charge/discharge for 3 min;
(3) Constant-current (CC) charge until the voltage reached 4.2 V;
(4) Keep constant-voltage (CV) charging when the current dropped
below 2.6 mA.
Fig. 3 (b) demonstrates the variation of voltage with time in one
cycle. It should be noted that the cycling rate refers to the constant
current charge/discharge rate, which remains identical at stage and
stage in a cycle.
3. Mathematical model
The mathematical model used to describe the performance of BTMS
contains two components: three dimensions (3D) heat transfer model
and a pseudo-two-dimensions (P2D) electrochemical model. The
coupling relationship between the electrochemical model and the heat
transfer model is demonstrated in Fig. 4. A two-way method based on
the segregated approach is applied to bridge the electrochemical and
thermal solvers. At each time step, the temperature field is computed via
keeping the electrochemical variables constant; and second, the elec­
trochemical parameters are updated based on the calculated tempera­
ture field; and finally, the time does not switch to the next step until the
tolerance for all variables is less 0.001. In the process, heat generation Q
is firstly derived through the Joc, i, φi, and η i and then passed to the heat
transfer model to computed T. The obtained temperature then passed to
the electrochemical kinetic equations and charge conservation in the
electrolyte phase and further influence the electrochemical model. The
above established mathematical relationship is solved by the finite
element method, which is packed by commercial software COMSOL
Multiphysics 5.2.

3.1. Electrochemical model

Fig. 5 presents the dynamic process of charging/discharging. The

specific chemistry reactions are given as following equations. Here, M
denotes the transition-metal element like Ni, Co, or Mn.
The cathode half-reaction is:
charge
LiMO2 ⟷ discharge Li1− x MO2 + xLi+ + xe−

The anode half-reaction is:

charge
nC + xLi+ + xe− ⇄ Lix Cn
discharge

Full cell reaction is:

Fig. 2. The physical geometry of the proposed BTMS structure.

4
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Fig. 3. The operating process in one cycle.

Fig. 4. The coupling relationship between the electrochemical model and heat transfer model.

charge the radius of the particle, and time respectively. The concentration
LiMO2 + nC ⟷ discharge Li1− x MO2 + Lix Cn
gradient of lithium-ion is assumed to be zero in the center of the solid
In the interior of the lithium-ion battery, charging/discharging particles while the value of that on the surface is related to the local
behavior is correlated with five parts: positive/negative current collec­ exchange current Jloc, i. The boundary conditions are presented as
tor, positive/negative electrode, and separator. The pseudo-two- follows:
dimensional (P2D) model, which is put forward by Newman et al. ⃒ ⃒
∂cs ⃒⃒ ⃒
eff ∂cs ⃒ Jloc,i
[28,29] and based on the theory of porous electrode and concentrated Deff = 0, D = (2)
solution, has been proved to be adequately accurate to present the
s,i
∂r ⃒r=0 s,i
∂r ⃒r=Rw Sa,i F
process of charging/discharging. The P2D model, as its name implies, is
Sa, i refers to the specific surface area and F is the Faraday constant. Sa, i
involved with two different coordinates: spherical and 1-D coordinate.
is calculated by the Solid-phase volume fraction εs, i and the radius of the
The electrode is composed of identical sized spherical particles
electrode particles Rs, i as it is presented in Eq. (3)
immersed in the electrolyte according to the porous theory. Thus, the
process of mass transfer in the active particles is presented in the Sa,i = 3εs,i /Rs,i (3)
spherical coordinate while other conservation relationships are solved
under 1-D coordinate. 3.1.2. 1D coordinate domain
As it is shown in Fig. 7, three major differential governing equations
3.1.1. Spherical coordinate domain are solved under 1D coordinate: charge conservation of solid phase,
As for the lithium-ion transfer in the solid spherical particles, the charge conservation of electrolyte phase, and mass conservation of the
second Fick law [30] was used to determine the behavior of lithium-ion. electrolyte phase. Although the mass transfer is solved under the
Fig. 6 gives the demonstration of the mass transfer of lithium-ion in the spherical coordinate, the charge conservation of the solid-phase is
active solid particles. described under the 1-D coordinate. The charge conservation of the solid
( ) phase was determined by Ohm’s law as follows [31]:
∂cs 1 ∂ 2 ∂cs
= 2 Deff
s,i r (1) ( ) ( )
∂t r ∂r ∂r ∂ ∂φs ∂φs ∂φl
σ eff
s,i = Jloc,i + Sa,i Cdl − (4)
In the Eq. (1), cs, Deffs, i, r, and t denote the concentration of lithium in
∂x ∂x ∂t ∂t
the active material, the diffusion coefficient of lithium in the solid phase,

5
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Fig. 5. The schematic figure of lithium-ion battery.

⃒ ⃒
∂φs ⃒⃒ ∂φs ⃒⃒
− σ eff = − σ eff = japp , φs |x=1 = 0 (5)
s,i
∂x ⃒x=1 s,i
∂x ⃒x=6
japp denotes as the applied current density.
⃒ ⃒
∂φs ⃒⃒ ∂φs ⃒⃒
− σeff ⃒ = − σ eff =0 (6)
s,i
∂x x=3 s,i
∂x ⃒x=4
As for the mass conservation, the lithium-ion transfer in the elec­
trolyte phase mainly counts on the diffusion and migration [32]. As it is
presented in Eq. (7), the first term of the right side denotes the mass
diffusion and the second term of the right side represents mass
migration.
Fig. 6. The schematic process under spherical coordinate.
∂cl ∂ ∂cl Jloc,i
εl = Deff + (1 − t+ ) (7)
∂t ∂x l ∂x F
eff
σ s, i, φl, φs, Cdl, and x are referred to as the electronic conductivity of the
εl, cl, Deff
l , and t+ represent electrolyte volume fraction, the concentration
solid phase, liquid phase potential, solid-phase potential, electrical
of lithium in the electrolyte, the diffusion coefficient of lithium in the
double layer capacitance, and distance.
electrolyte, and the Li+ transference number.
The boundary condition of charge conversation was presented as:

Fig. 7. The schematic process under 1D coordinate.

6
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

The corresponding equations are described as

⃒ ⃒ ηi = φs − φl − Uoc,i (12)
∂cl ⃒⃒ ⃒
eff ∂cl ⃒
− Deff = − D =0 (8)
l
∂x ⃒x=1 l
∂x ⃒x=6 (
Uoc,i = Uref ,i + T − Tref
) ∂Uoc,i
(13)
∂T
⃒ ⃒
∂cl ⃒⃒ ∂cl ⃒⃒ Similarly, the exchange current density i0,i is calculated by Eq. (14)
− Deff ⃒ = − Deff (9)
l
∂x x=3 l
∂x ⃒x=4 based on the concentration of solid active material and electrolyte and
The charge conservation in the electrolyte phase is also controlled by reaction rate k.
Ohm’s law [31], as it is presented in the Eq. (10). In the Eq. (10), φl, σeffl, ( )α ( )α
i0,i = Fki cs,max,i − cs,surf ,i a cs,surf ,i c (cl )αa (14)
T, R, and f are liquid phase potential, electronic conductivity of the
electrolyte, temperature, gas constant, and average molar activity Finally, the exchange current density is gained by Eq. (15)
coefficient. ⎛ ⎞
( )
(15)
αFηi βF ηi
( ) Jloc,i = io,i Sa,i ⎝e RT − e− ⎠
2RT σ eff
RT
∂ eff ∂φl ∂lnf
− σl + l +
(1 − t ) 1 + ∇lncl = − Jloc,i (10)
∂x ∂x F ∂lncl
⃒ ⃒ Furthermore, the calculated Jloc, i, which is treated as a given quan­
∂φl ⃒⃒ ∂φl ⃒⃒ tity, is passed to solve differential equations under two coordinates. The
− σ eff
= − σ eff =0 (11)
∂x ⃒x=1
l l
∂x ⃒x=6 electrochemical parameters are given in the Table 3.
The term ∂ ln f/∂ ln cl is obtained through the interpolation function
[33]. 3.2. Heat transfer model

3.1.3. Electrochemical kinetic equations
Fig. 8 gives the role of electrochemical kinetic, which is described by
the Butler-Volmer (BV) kinetic equation[35]. The BV equation builds a
bridge between two different coordinates. By substituting solid poten­
tial, electrolyte potential, and open circuit potential into Eq.(12), the
over-potential ηi would be obtained via φl, φs and open circuit potential
Uoc, i.
A three-dimensional heat transfer model was established and then
solved in this section. As it is shown in Fig. 9, the domain could be
divided into two parts: aluminum finned structure and battery cells. The
geometry details and physical properties are presented in Table 4 and
Table 5, separately.
3.2.1. Governing equation
It is widely acknowledged that the governing equation is described as

Fig. 8. The illustration of the P2D model. Reprinted from Refs. [34] with the permission of Elsevier.

7
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Table 3
Battery electrochemical parameters [31].
∂T ∂T
- λbattey → = − λAl → (21)
∂n ∂n
Parameters anode cathode Electrolyte Cu foil Al foil
(unit) As for the interface between ambient and aluminum, the boundary
Rs,i (μm) 2.5 1.2 – – –
condition is defined as:
Deffs,i (m2/s) 1.4523 × 5 × 10− 13
– – –
∂T
10− 13 − λAl → = β(T − Tamb ) (22)
σi (S/m) 100 100 – – – ∂n
ki (m/s) 2.0 × 10− 11 2.0 × – – – ( )
10− 11
4 4
σε TBS − Tamb
2
japp (A/m , 1 C) 12
β = h+ (23)
TBS − Tamb
εl,i 0.384 0.48 0.37 – –
εs,i 0.444 0.35 – – – hde d2 + 1
ρi (g/cm3) 1.347 1.5 1.00898 8.933 2.702 Nu = = − 1.047 + 9.326 e (24)
λair (de + 1)2
cp,i (J/kg/K) 1437.4 700 1978.16 385 903
α 0.5 0.5 – – – The value of β is different from each boundary. Thus, the boundaries
cmax (mol/m3) 31,507 56,250
are divided into several categories: upwind, downwind, and faces of the
λi (W/m/K) 1.04 5 1.344 398 238
R (J/mol/K) 8.314 internal finned structure as is shown in Fig. 9. As for the upwind and
F (C/mol) 96,487 downwind faces, the values of β are set as 25 W/m2/K and 13 W/m2/K
Tref (K) 298.15 respectively according to the literature[20]. The values of β in the
interior cavity are calculated by Eq. (23), which is made up of the co­
efficient of forced-air convection and coefficient of radiation. Since the
Eq.(16):
small channel and low velocity, the flow could be considered as laminar
∂T flow in the fin structure. The Nusselt number Nu of forced-air convection
ρC p = ∇∙(λ∇T) + Q (16)
∂t could be correlated with the equivalent hydraulic diameter de as it is
For the battery cells, the heat source is calculated from the electro­ presented in Eq. (24) [15,37]. Meanwhile, because the temperature
chemical model. The heat source could be divided into two types[36]: differences between the internal finned structure surfaces are small, the
reversible heat Qre and irreversible heat Qirrev. radiations between the surfaces of the internal finned structure are
ignored. Furthermore, the internal finned structure and the shell of the
Qbattery = Qirrev + Qrev (17)

The reversible heat is obtained from Eq.(18) Table 4

∂Ueq Physical dimension parameters of the battery.
Qrev = − Jloc,i T (18)
∂T Parameters Values

∂Ueq The dimension of battery (L × D) 65 mm × 18 mm

In Eq.(18), is denoted as temperature entropy coefficient.
∂T Gaps between battery cells (Db) 8 mm
As for Qirrev, it is represented in Eq.(19), which is made up of Ohmic The lengthy of finned structure (a × b) 12 mm × 4 mm
heat and react heat. The thickness of the exterior aluminum shell 1 mm

Qirrev = Qohmic + Qreact (19)

{ Table 5
Qohmic = − js ∇φs − jl ∇φl
(20) Thermos-physical properties.
Qreact = Jloc,i ηi
ρ (kg/ Cp (J/kg/ λ (W/m/ σ (W/m2/ ε
m3) K) K) K4 )
4. Boundary conditions
Battery 2055.2 1399.1 29.557 5.67 × 0.2
At the interfaces between battery cells and finned structure, the Aluminum finned 2700 900 154 10− 8
structure
boundary condition is given as:

Fig. 9. The schematic figure of the calculation domain.

8
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

battery cell are both made from metal. All surfaces were considered gray
bodies with the surface emissivity ε nearly 0.2. Thus, the value β in the
finned structure could be easily obtained. Because of the weak rela­
tionship between Tbs and β, the value of Tbs on all finned structure faces
could be simplified as a constant of 323.15 K (the maximum temperature
in the experiments) in the Eq. (23). Besides, outer boundaries are
considered as adiabatic conditions and the initial temperature is set as
the same as the ambient temperature.
and forced-air convection with internal finned structure (1.5 m/s)). In
the following analysis, it should be noted that the maximum tempera­
ture Tmax mentioned here is the maximum value measured at different
points by thermocouples I/I′ , II/II′ , and III/III′ . That is to say, Tmax = max
{TI, TI’, TII, TII’, TIII, TIII’}. Similarly, the minimum temperature Tmin =
min {TI, TI’, TII, TII’, TIII, TIII’}. The maximum temperature difference
here denotes the difference between Tmax and Tmin, i.e., △Tmax = Tmax -
Tmin.

5. Results and discussion 5.1.1. The maximum temperature Tmax

In this section, the experimental results were discussed and analyzed
firstly to validate the mathematical model. Furthermore, the effects of
gap space between cells, ambient temperature, and finned material on
the cooling performance were investigated using the validated mathe­
matical model.
5.1. The discussion on experimental results
Since both the maximum temperature and the maximum tempera­
ture difference were key indicators of the cooling efficiency of BTMSs,
the experiment results were discussed around these two perspectives.
Besides, quantitative analysis was also carried out to compare the per­
formance of the BTMS under five different conditions (namely, natural
convection, natural convection with internal finned structure, forced-air
convection, forced-air convection with internal finned structure (1 m/s),
The variation trends of the maximum temperature Tmax with time
under five operating modes are compared in Fig. 10. Meanwhile, the
maximum temperatures under different operating conditions are given
in Table 6 for presenting a clear comparison. To improve the reliability
of experimental data, the BTMS experienced three charge–discharge
cycles in each of the five operating modes. It could be clearly seen that
Tmax had two temperature peaks in one cycle. The first temperature peak
occurred when the cycler was switching from the CC discharge state to
the laying-aside state. The second temperature peak was observed when
the cycler was transformed from the CC charge state to the CV charge
state. With the progress of CC charging, the negative electrode got
saturated and a larger over-potential was required to support the CC
charging process, leading to a large amount of heat generated in batte­
ries. In addition, it was intriguing to find that the first temperature peak
was always higher than the second temperature peak under the three
forced-air convection operating modes, while the situation was reversed

45 70
Natural convection Internal fin structure Natural convection Internal fin structure
Pure forced-air convection(1.5 m/s) 65 Pure forced-air convection(1.5 m/s)
40 Fin + forced-air convection( 1 m/s ) 60 Fin + forced-air convection( 1 m/s )
Fin + forced-air convection(1.5 m/s) Fin + forced-air convection(1.5 m/s)
55
35 50
45
TMAX /

TMAX /

30 40
35
25
30
25
20
20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time / min Time / min

(a) 1 C (b) 2 C

70 Internal fin structure 55

Fin + forced-air convection(1 m/s)
Pure forced-air convection(1.5 m/s)
65 Fin + forced-air convection( 1 m/s ) Fin + forced-air convection(1.5 m/s )
50
Fin + forced-air convection(1.5 m/s)
60
55 45

50 40
TMAX /

45
TMAX /

35
40
35 30
30
25
25
20 20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250
Time / min Time / min

(c) 3 C (d) 4 C
Fig. 10. The maximum temperature with the different conditions under four cycling rates.

9
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Table 6 internal finned structure with natural convection condition and 18 ◦ C

The maximum temperature under different operating conditions (unit:℃). higher than that under the internal finned structure with forced-air
Operating conditions Cycling rates convection condition. At the cycling rate of 2 C, the Tmax values of the
1C 2C 3C 4C BTMSs under five operating modes were all within the optimum tem­
Natural convection 37.2 55.7 – – perature range, except that under the natural convection condition.
Internal finned structure 31.5 45.8 59.9 – Comparing the Tmax under the forced-air convection condition and the
Air forced convection (1.5 m/s) 29.2 40.5 54.4 – internal finned structure condition, it was found the former performed
Finned structure + air-forced convection (1 m/s) 26.7 36.2 46.3 49.2 better than the latter. The Tmax values of the BTMSs under the finned
Finned structure + air-forced convection (1.5 m/s) 26.4 36.0 44.5 48.5
structure with forced-air convection (1.0 m/s and 1.5 m/s) conditions
were no more than 40 ◦ C at the cycling rate of 2 C. Furthermore, the
under the two natural convection operating conditions. The reason was cooling performance of the BTMSs under the forced-air convection (1.0
that the heat generated by the CC charging process was more than that m/s and 1.5 m/s) with internal finned structure conditions was evalu­
carried away by natural convection but less than that taken away by the ated at cycling rates of 3 C and 4 C. The results showed that when the
forced airflow. Furthermore, it was concluded from Fig. 10 that the Tmax climbed over 50 ◦ C under the forced-air convection condition or the
variation of Tmax with time at forced-air convection conditions with internal finned structure condition, the proposed hybrid BTMS could
different flow velocities was almost the same, indicating that the heat effectively control the Tmax below 45 ◦ C at the cycling rate of 3 C. Even if
exchange between air and finned structure had nothing to do with the the cycling rate rose to 4 C, the Tmax was still controlled within the
velocity. The reason for that is the calculated Reynolds number dcu/νa optimum temperature range. To evaluate the performance of the BTMSs
was approximately 2000, meaning that the flow state inside the finned under five operating conditions according to the Tmax, it was found that
structure was laminar. the BTMSs under the forced-air convection (1.5 m/s and 1.0 m/s) with
As it was mentioned before, the optimum temperature range was internal finned structure conditions showed the best performance, fol­
between 20 and 50 ◦ C. In Fig. 10 (a), it can be seen that the temperature lowed by the BTMS under the forced-air convection (1.5 m/s) condition,
ranges at five different operating modes all met the demand at the the BTMS under the internal finned structure condition, and the BTMS
cycling rate of 1 C though Tmax differed tremendously. The Tmax under under the natural convection condition successively.
the natural convection condition was 10 ◦ C higher than that under the

Fig. 11. The maximum temperature uniformity under different conditions with various cycling rates.

10
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

5.1.2. The maximum temperature difference △Tmax

The changing trend of the maximum temperature difference △Tmax
at various cycling rates with time is presented in Fig. 11. Similar to the
Tmax, the △Tmax grew up as the cycling rate increased since the joule
heat was the square of the current. It could be concluded from Fig. 1 that
the internal finned structure was superior to other cooling methods in
improving the temperature homogeneity of battery packs.
Although the maximum temperature difference under all the five
operating conditions was less than 5 ◦ C at the cycling rate of 1 C, the
temperature distribution differed a lot among these five BTMSs. The
△Tmax under the five operating conditions could reach 3.8 ◦ C, 1.6 ◦ C,
1.1 ◦ C, 1 ◦ C, and 0.4 ◦ C, respectively. As the cycling rate increased to 2 C,
the temperature was distributed unevenly under the natural convection
condition and the forced-air convection condition, while temperature
uniformity was well achieved under the conditions with finned struc­
ture. Under the natural convection condition and the forced-air con­
vection condition, the △Tmax could climb over 10 ◦ C and 5 ◦ C,
respectively. However, the internal finned structure could reduce the
△Tmax to around 3 ◦ C on account of high thermal conductivity of the
aluminum. Meanwhile, according to Fig. 11 (b), the △Tmax of the BTMS Fig. 12. The dissipation heat under different BTMSs with various cycling rates.
with internal finned structure based on forced-air convection condition
was 1 ◦ C higher than that of the BTMS with internal finned structure than the forced-air convection alone and the strategy of combining in­
based on natural convection. The proposed BTMS could meet the re­ ternal finned structure with natural convection.
quirements for battery thermal management even at cycling rates of 3 C
and 4 C (Fig. 11 (c) and Fig. 11 (d)). To conclude, the BTMS with internal 5.2. Model validation
finned structure based on natural convection had the best temperature
uniformity, followed by the BTMS with internal finned structure based In this section, the experimental current in one cycle was taken as the
on forced-air convection (1.5 m/s), the BTMS with internal finned input parameter. Fig. 13 compares the simulation and experimental
structure based on forced-air convection (1.0 m/s), the BTMS based on results. The Tmax presented here was the maximum temperature on the
forced-air convection (1.5 m/s), and the BTMS based on natural con­ battery surface. The results of the experiments was consistent with that
vection successively. of simulation from the perspective of the Tmax. However, there was a
small disparity between experimental and simulation results. The
5.1.3. Energy analysis calculated result was slightly lower than the experimental data. Since
The energy balance equation describing the whole system was used the diffusion resistance was not taken into consideration in the mathe­
to quantitatively analyze the difference among these cooling methods. matical model, the dissipated heat was underestimated in the simula­
The sensible heat causing temperature variance could be the sum of tion. In spite of the fact that the divergence might not be ignorable, the
generated heat and dissipated heat. simulation result could be trusted provided that the deviation was in a
sensible range.
T * − Tinitial
Qsensible = CP m = Qgenerate + Qdissipation (25)
Δt 5.3. Discussion on the parameters
The m and Cp denote the specific heat capacity and total mass of
batteries, respectively. The T*, Δt, Qgenerate, Qdissipation, and Qsensible In this section, the effects of gap space, ambient temperature, and
represent the characteristic temperature, total time in one cycle, finned material on the cooling performance were discussed based on the
generated heat, dissipated heat, and sensible heat in one specific cycle, mathematical model.
respectively. Since the Qgenerate was assumed to be identical at one
cycling rate in all cooling methods, the Qdissipation induced the variance of
Qsensible. Here, T* calculated by Eq. (25) was the average value over the
time and space domain. Thus, the Qdissipation could be obtained through
substituting Eq. (25) into Eq. (26). 35 2C Simulation
∫Δt 30 2C Experiment
TMax /

1 TI + TI’ + TII + TII ’ + TIII + TIII ’

T* = dt (26) 25
Δt 0 6
20
As the cycling rate increased from 1 C to 3 C, the Qsensible augmented 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
45
since the joule heat was the square of the current. However, the Qsensible 40 3C Simulation
decreased as the cycling rate switched from 3 C to 4 C, which was 35 3C Experiment
TMax /

30
attributed to relatively short CC discharging and CC charging time. In
25
Fig. 12, the amount of dissipated heat at cycling rates of 1 C and 2 C was 20
taken as the baseline. It could be seen that at 1 C, the heat released under 0 20 40 60 80 100
50
the internal finned structure with natural convection condition (190.2 J) 45 4C Simulation
and the forced-air convection condition (624.4 J) was less than that 40 4C Experiment
TMax /

35
under the forced-air convection (1.0 m/s and 1.5 m/s) with internal 30
finned structure conditions (1099.6 J). When the cycling rate turned to 2 25
20
C, the same phenomenon was observed and the difference even 0 20 40 60 80
enlarged. The above results suggested that the proposed BTMS inte­ Time / min
grating forced-air convection with internal finned structure was better
Fig. 13. The comparison between the results of experiments and simulation.

11
P. Qin et al.
5.3.1. The effect of gap space
The internal finned structure improved the cooling performance of
the BTMS at the expense of the energy density of the battery pack.
Hence, it is necessary to examine the effect of gap space on the cooling
performance. The gap space Db is closely related to the volume ratio of
cells. For a 18,650 battery pack with a large format, the relationship
between the battery volume ratio and gap space Db could be presented
as:
πD2
Vb = (27)
4(D + Db )2
According to Eq.(27), the volume ratio of cells increases with the
decreasing Db. It should be mentioned that the value of Db also has a
lower limit of 4 mm because of the processing restriction. Table 7
compares the parameters of the proposed BTMS with different gap
spaces. As the Db changed from 4 mm to 8 mm, the average battery
volume ratio and the average weight of finned structure for each battery
cell varied from 52.5% to 37.6% and 16.0 g to 0.0 g, respectively. When
the gap space was 8 mm, temperature homogeneity met the demand of
battery thermal management. Moreover, the thermal resistance between
cells would reduce with the declining gap space. Therefore, it could be
concluded that good temperature homogeneity could be achieved when
the gap space was less than 8 mm according to the theory of heat
transfer.
Fig. 14 describes the effect of the gap space on the maximum tem­
perature at cycling rates of 3 C and 4 C. As indicated in Fig. 14(a) and
Fig. 14(b), the cooling performance was not sensitive to the shrinking
gap space even if the heat exchange surface decreased. At cycling rates
of 3C and 4 C, the differences of Tmax among different gap spaces were
only 0.5 ◦ C and 1.2 ◦ C, respectively. The reason was that the increase of
the equivalent convection coefficient β compensated for the decrease of
the heat exchange area. The value of β was made up of convective co­
efficient h and radiation coefficient, and it could be obtained from Eq.
(22). The convective coefficient h was calculated by the Nusselt number
(Nu = hde/λ), which was also related to the equivalent hydraulic
diameter de. As the Db declined, the de monotonically decreased while Nu
varied slightly, so convection coefficient h increased significantly. The
decrease of the heat exchange area was ascribed to the increase of the
convective coefficient. Hence, the cooling performance was not affected
by the reduced gap space. The smallest gap space of 4 mm would be
recommended in the actual application. Even when the wind was un­
evenly distributed in large-format battery modules, there was only a
marginal difference in the maximum temperature between cells
managed by the proposed BTMS with a finned structure based on forced-
air convection.
5.3.2. The effect of ambient temperature
Due to the considerable changes in the ambient temperature in
different seasons, it is essential to analyze the effect of the ambient
temperature on the cooling performance. According to the design code
for the electrochemical energy storage cabin, the ambient temperature
should be controlled within 15 ◦ C to 30 ◦ C. Thus, the cooling perfor­
mance was explored within the temperature range of 15 ◦ C to 30 ◦ C at
cycling rates of 2 C and 3 C in this paper. According to the experimental
results, the Tmax was nearly 50 ◦ C at the cycling rate of 4 C, and the
largest amount of heat was generated. It implied that the temperature
Table 7
The effect of gap space Db on the physical structure of BTMS.
Db/mm 0 4 5 6 7 8
Vb % 78.5 52.5 48.0 44.1 40.7 37.6
Mi/g 0 13.2 13.9 14.6 15.3 16.0
ED/Wh/kg 273.00 205.26 202.59 200.00 197.46 195.32
Mi: the weight of the aluminum finned structure for one battery cell.
ED: the energy density per kilogram of the battery pack.
12
Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212
homogeneity could be achieved at cycling rates under 4 C when the Tmax
was less than 50 ◦ C. Here, the Tmax was deemed as an indicator of the
cooling performance under different ambient temperatures. It could be
concluded from Fig. 15 that at the cycling rate of 2 C, the Tmax was lower
than 45 ◦ C even though the ambient temperature was 30 ◦ C. However,
the Tmax could be over 50 ◦ C when the cycling rate climbed to 3 C and
ambient temperature was over 25 ◦ C. Therefore, a high cycling rate was
not recommended in the high ambient temperature.
5.3.3. The effect of finned material
The effect of finned material was investigated by using the mathe­
matical model. In Fig. 16, it could be seen that the cooling performance
of finned structures made from aluminum and copper was almost the
same, which was better than that of the steel finned structure. The Tmax
of the steel finned structure was 2 ◦ C higher than that of the aluminum
and copper finned structures. To facilitate the comparison among these
materials, the coefficient of thermal diffusivity was introduced, and it
was defined as a = λ/ρc. The thermal diffusivity represented the prop­
agation of temperature. A large thermal diffusivity value means faster
temperature propagation in the material. The calculated values are lis­
ted in Table 8. In the BTMS proposed in this paper, the heat was
generated by battery cells, transferred to the finned structure, and finally
released to the environment. Therefore, materials with higher thermal
diffusivity exhibited better cooling performance. The weight of steel,
aluminum, and copper differs greatly though they all meet the re­
quirements of the BTMS. In practice, we advise that the internal finned
structure should be made of aluminum.
6. Conclusions
A novel battery thermal management system with internal finned
structure based on forced-air convection is put forward in this article,
and the cooling performance is compared under five operating modes.
The maximum temperature and the maximum temperature difference
are discussed to evaluate the performance of the battery thermal man­
agement system. Moreover, a mathematical model is established and the
simulation results are then validated by experiments. Furthermore, the
effects of the gap space, ambient temperature, and finned material on
the cooling performance are investigated using the model. The following
conclusions are drawn:
(1) The proposed battery thermal management system has good
cooling performance at cycling rates of 1 C, 2 C, 3 C, and 4 C.
Even when the cycling rate is as high as 4 C, the Tmax is 49.4 ◦ C at
the ambient temperature of 20 ◦ C, and the maximum temperature
difference is less than 5 ◦ C in one cycle.
(2) From the perspective of the maximum temperature, the battery
thermal management systems with internal finned structure
based on forced-air convection (1.5 m/s and 1.0 m/s) show the
best performance, followed by the battery thermal management
system based on forced-air convection (1.5 m/s), the battery
thermal management system with internal finned structure based
on natural convection, and the battery thermal management
system based on natural convection successively.
(3) In terms of temperature homogeneity, the battery thermal man­
agement system employing the internal finned structure with
natural convection performs the best, followed by the battery
thermal management system employing forced-air convection
(1.5 m/s) with internal finned structure, the battery thermal
management system employing forced-air convection (1.0 m/s)
with internal finned structure, the battery thermal management
system employing forced-air convection (1.5 m/s), and the BTMS
employing natural convection successively.
(4) Based on the analysis results of the validated mathematical
model, several useful pieces of advice are given. The aluminum
finned structure with gap space of 4 mm is recommended in the
P. Qin et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212

Fig. 14. The effect of gap space on the maximum temperature.

50 60
Tambient = 15 Tambient = 15
45 55
Tambient = 20 Tambient = 20
Tambient = 25 50 Tambient = 25
40
Tambient = 30 45 Tambient = 30
35 40
TMAX /
30 35
TMAX /

25 30
25
20
20
15 15
10 10
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Time / min Time / min
(a) 2 C (b) 3C
Fig. 15. The effect of ambient temperature on the maximum temperature.

Fig. 16. The effect of finned material on the maximum temperature.

actual application. When the ambient temperature is above 25 ◦ C,

Table 8
the cycling rate should be no more than 3 C.
The thermos-physical properties of finned material.
λ (W/(m K)) c (J/(kg K)) ρ (kg/m3) a (10− 5⋅m2/s) Declaration of Competing Interest
Aluminum 237 902 2710 9.69
Pure cooper 398 386 8930 11.54 The author declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Steel (wc = 3%) 39.2 470 7570 1.10

13
P. Qin et al.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the Key Program of the Joint Fund for Civil
Aviation Research with National Natural Science Foundation of China
(No.U2033204) , the Hubei Province Natural Science Foundation of
China (No. 2019CFB283), the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities (No. WK2320000044) and Fundamental Research
Funds for innovation and entrepreneurship with University of science
and technology of China(No.WK5290000002). Dr. Q.S Wang is sup­
ported by Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS (No.Y201768).
References
[1] M. Peker, A.S. Kocaman, B.Y. Kara, Benefits of transmission switching and energy
storage in power systems with high renewable energy penetration, Appl. Energy
228 (2018) 1182–1197.
[2] D.H. Doughty, P.C. Butler, A.A. Akhil, N.H. Clark, J.D. Boyes, Batteries for large-
scale stationary electrical energy storage, The Electrochem. Soc. Interface. 19
(2010) 49–53.
[3] Q. Wang, P. Ping, X. Zhao, G. Chu, J. Sun, C. Chen, Thermal runaway caused fire
and explosion of lithium ion battery, J. Power Sources 208 (2012) 210–224.
[4] L. Bodenes, R. Naturel, H. Martinez, R. Dedryvère, M. Menetrier, L. Croguennec, et
al., Lithium secondary batteries working at very high temperature: Capacity fade
and understanding of aging mechanisms, J. Power Sources 236 (2013) 265–275.
[5] X. Xu, W. Li, B. Xu, J. Qin, Numerical study on a water cooling system for prismatic
LiFePO4 batteries at abused operating conditions, Appl. Energy 250 (2019)
404–412.
[6] Z. Rao, Z. Qian, Y. Kuang, Y. Li, Thermal performance of liquid cooling based
thermal management system for cylindrical lithium-ion battery module with
variable contact surface, Appl. Therm. Eng. 123 (2017) 1514–1522.
[7] M. Kiani, S. Omiddezyani, E. Houshfar, S.R. Miremadi, M. Ashjaee, Nejad
A. Mahdavi, Lithium-ion battery thermal management system with Al2O3/AgO/
CuO nanofluids and phase change material, Appl. Therm. Eng. 180 (2020),
115840.
[8] H. Li, X. Xiao, Y. Wang, C. Lian, Q. Li, Z. Wang, Performance investigation of a
battery thermal management system with microencapsulated phase change
material suspension, Appl. Therm. Eng. 180 (2020), 115795.
[9] K. Chen, J. Hou, M. Song, S. Wang, W. Wu, Y. Zhang, Design of battery thermal
management system based on phase change material and heat pipe, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 188 (2021), 116665.
[10] H. Behi, D. Karimi, M. Behi, M. Ghanbarpour, J. Jaguemont, M.A. Sokkeh, et al.,
A new concept of thermal management system in Li-ion battery using air cooling
and heat pipe for electric vehicles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 174 (2020), 115280.
[11] D. Dan, C. Yao, Y. Zhang, H. Zhang, Z. Zeng, X. Xu, Dynamic thermal behavior of
micro heat pipe array-air cooling battery thermal management system based on
thermal network model, Appl. Therm. Eng. 162 (2019), 114183.
[12] H. Liu, Z. Wei, W. He, J. Zhao, Thermal issues about Li-ion batteries and recent
progress in battery thermal management systems: A review, Energy Convers.
Manage. 150 (2017) 304–330.
[13] Q. Gao, Y. Liu, G. Wang, F. Deng, J. Zhu, An experimental investigation of
refrigerant emergency spray on cooling and oxygen suppression for overheating
power battery, J. Power Sources 415 (2019) 33–43.
[14] Z. Lu, X. Meng, L. Wei, W. Hu, L. Zhang, L. Jin, Thermal management of densely-
packed EV battery with forced air cooling strategies, Energy Procedia 88 (2016)
682–688.
[15] Z. Lu, X. Yu, L. Wei, Y. Qiu, L. Zhang, X. Meng, et al., Parametric study of forced air
cooling strategy for lithium-ion battery pack with staggered arrangement, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 136 (2018) 28–40.
[16] L.H. Saw, Y. Ye, A.A. Tay, W.T. Chong, S.H. Kuan, M.C. Yew, Computational fluid
dynamic and thermal analysis of Lithium-ion battery pack with air cooling, Appl.
Energy 177 (2016) 783–792.
14
Applied Thermal Engineering 195 (2021) 117212
[17] R. Mahamud, C. Park, Reciprocating air flow for Li-ion battery thermal
management to improve temperature uniformity, J. Power Sources 196 (2011)
5685–5696.
[18] T. Wang, K. Tseng, J. Zhao, Z. Wei, Thermal investigation of lithium-ion battery
module with different cell arrangement structures and forced air-cooling strategies,
Appl. Energy 134 (2014) 229–238.
[19] Y. Liu, J. Zhang, Design a J-type air-based battery thermal management system
through surrogate-based optimization, Appl. Energy 252 (2019), 113426.
[20] Z. Ling, F. Wang, X. Fang, X. Gao, Z. Zhang, A hybrid thermal management system
for lithium ion batteries combining phase change materials with forced-air cooling,
Appl. Energy 148 (2015) 403–409.
[21] P. Qin, M. Liao, D. Zhang, Y. Liu, J. Sun, Q. Wang, Experimental and numerical
study on a novel hybrid battery thermal management system integrated forced-air
convection and phase change material, Energy Convers. Manage. 195 (2019)
1371–1381.
[22] W. Wu, X. Yang, G. Zhang, K. Chen, S. Wang, Experimental investigation on the
thermal performance of heat pipe-assisted phase change material based battery
thermal management system, Energy Convers. Manage. 138 (2017) 486–492.
[23] J. Weng, Y. He, D. Ouyang, X. Yang, G. Zhang, J. Wang, Thermal performance of
PCM and branch-structured fins for cylindrical power battery in a high-
temperature environment, Energy Convers. Manage. 200 (2019), 112106.
[24] P. Ping, R. Peng, D. Kong, G. Chen, J. Wen, Investigation on thermal management
performance of PCM-fin structure for Li-ion battery module in high-temperature
environment, Energy Convers. Manage. 176 (2018) 131–146.
[25] Y. Lv, X. Yang, X. Li, G. Zhang, Z. Wang, C. Yang, Experimental study on a novel
battery thermal management technology based on low density polyethylene-
enhanced composite phase change materials coupled with low fins, Appl. Energy
178 (2016) 376–382.
[26] S.K. Mohammadian, Y. Zhang, Thermal management optimization of an air-cooled
Li-ion battery module using pin-fin heat sinks for hybrid electric vehicles, J. Power
Sources 273 (2015) 431–439.
[27] T.D. Nguyen, W. Tsutsui, A. Williams, J. Deng, B. Robert, W. Chen, et al., Design
and thermomechanical analysis of a cell-integrated, tapered channel heat sink
concept for prismatic battery cells, Appl. Therm. Eng. 189 (2021), 116676.
[28] M. Doyle, T.F. Fuller, J. Newman, Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge
of the lithium/polymer/insertion cell, J. Electrochem. Soc. 140 (1993) 1526–1533.
[29] M. Doyle, J. Newman, A.S. Gozdz, C.N. Schmutz, J.M. Tarascon, Comparison of
modeling predictions with experimental data from plastic lithium ion cells,
J. Electrochem. Soc. 143 (1996) 1890–1903.
[30] R. Xiong, L. Li, Z. Li, Q. Yu, H. Mu, An electrochemical model based degradation
state identification method of Lithium-ion battery for all-climate electric vehicles
application, Appl. Energy 219 (2018) 264–275.
[31] K. Li, J. Yan, H. Chen, Q. Wang, Water cooling based strategy for lithium ion
battery pack dynamic cycling for thermal management system, Appl. Therm. Eng.
132 (2018) 575–585.
[32] F. An, W. Zhou, P. Li, A comparison of model prediction from P2D and particle
packing with experiment, Electrochim. Acta 370 (2021), 137775.
[33] W. Mei, H. Chen, J. Sun, Q. Wang, The effect of electrode design parameters on
battery performance and optimization of electrode thickness based on the
electrochemical–thermal coupling model, Sustainable Energy Fuels 3 (2019)
148–165.
[34] P. Qin, J. Sun, X. Yang, Q. Wang, Battery thermal management system based on the
forced-air convection: a review, eTransportation. 2021;7:100097.
[35] S. Han, Y. Tang, Rahimian S. Khaleghi, A numerically efficient method of solving
the full-order pseudo-2-dimensional (P2D) Li-ion cell model, J. Power Sources 490
(2021), 229571.
[36] B. Mortazavi, H. Yang, F. Mohebbi, G. Cuniberti, T. Rabczuk, Graphene or h-BN
paraffin composite structures for the thermal management of Li-ion batteries: a
multiscale investigation, Appl. Energy 202 (2017) 323–334.
[37] R.K. Shah, London AL. Laminar, Flow Forced Convection in Ducts: A Source Book
for Compact Heat Exchanger Analytical Data, Academic Press, 2014.