Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-020-03853-6

ORIGINAL PAPER

Multiobjective optimization of air-cooled battery thermal

management system based on heat dissipation model
Jiahui Chen 1 & Xiaobo Zhao 1 & Biao Wang 1 & Chenghao Zhang 2 & Dongji Xuan 1

Received: 2 September 2020 / Revised: 16 November 2020 / Accepted: 18 November 2020 / Published online: 7 January 2021
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Battery thermal management system (BTMS) is a key to control battery temperature and promote the development of electric
vehicles. In this paper, the heat dissipation model is used to calculate the battery temperature, saving a lot of calculation time
compared with the CFD method. Afterward, sensitivity analysis is carried out based on the heat dissipation model, and four
structural parameters and inlet airflow rate are selected as design variables. Based on not increasing the volume of the battery
pack, BTMS is optimized with the objective of reducing power consumption, maximal temperature difference, and maximal
temperature. In terms of multiobjective optimization algorithms, the overall performance of the NSGA-III_DE (Non-dominated
Sorting Genetic Algorithm-III_Differential Evolution) algorithm is much better. Therefore, the NSGA-III_DE algorithm is used
to perform multiobjective optimization on the heat dissipation model to obtain the optimal design variables. The optimization
result shows that compared with the original BTMS, the optimized BTMS has a decrease of 16.7% in power consumption, 60.7%
in maximal temperature difference, and 3.4 K in maximal temperature.

Keywords Battery thermal management . Heat dissipation model . Sensitivity analysis . Multiobjective optimization

Introduction Lithium-ion batteries release a large amount of heat during

As the exhaust of traditional automobiles increases, automo-
biles’ resources and environmental problems have become
increasingly severe. Electric vehicles’ development is an im-
portant solution to solve environmental problems because it
can reduce automobile exhaust emissions and non-renewable
resources. The lithium-ion battery has been widely used in
electric vehicles because of its high energy density, stable
discharge voltage, and long service life [1]. The most reason-
able charge and discharge temperature of the battery is be-
tween 25 and 40 °C [2]. If the temperature is too high, the
battery will have the problems of electrode degradation and
electrolyte decomposition, which will accelerate the battery’s
aging process [3].
* Dongji Xuan
xuandongji@163.com
1
Department of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, University of
Wenzhou, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China
2
Institute of Agricultural Equipment, Zhejiang Academy of
Agricultural Science, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
high current discharge, and the accumulation of heat will ex-
acerbate the temperature difference between different batte-
ries. If the battery works in an uneven temperature state for a
long time, the performance consistency of battery will be
destroyed, and in severe cases, accidents such as combustion
and explosion may occur [4]. In order to improve the safety
and reliability of electric vehicles, it is necessary to design a
reasonable Battery Thermal Management System (BTMS) to
improve the temperature uniformity of battery pack and avoid
occurring extremely high temperatures [5].
The battery thermal management system improves electric
vehicles’ overall performance by maintaining the battery at a
reasonable charge and discharge temperature. The cooling
methods of BTMS can be divided into air-cooling [6–8],
liquid-cooling [9–11], and phase-change material cooling
[12–16] according to the heat transfer medium. The air-
cooled BTMS has a simple structure and is easy to implement,
so it is widely used for the heat dissipation of battery pack.
Many previous studies have shown that the structure of
battery pack can affect heat dissipation. Wang et al. [17] stud-
ied the cooling effect of the fan at different positions. It is
found that the fan installs above the battery pack has the best
cooling effect. Mahamud et al. [18] designed a reciprocating
1308
airflow BTMS to avoid the defects of low temperature at the
inlet and high temperature at the outlet. The result shows that
the maximum temperature difference is significantly reduced.
Sun et al. [19] performed simulations on different airflow
channel structures and found that the Z-shaped airflow chan-
nel structure can reduce maximal temperature and temperature
difference.
In order to improve the cooling effect, many methods are
used to optimize the structure of BTMS. Saw et al. [20] used
Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) method to simulate the
battery pack’s heat dissipation at different airflow rates and
established the correlation between the Nusselt and the
Reynolds number. Qian et al. [21] used a neural network model
to optimize the battery spacing, which improved the heat dissi-
pation effect. The result shows that the temperature uniformity
of the optimized battery pack becomes better than before.
In the previous research, the traditional method was used to
optimize BTMS. Chen et al. [22] took reducing the maximum
temperature as the optimization goal. By adjusting the battery
spacing several times, the maximum temperature difference
has dropped by 2.1 K, and the maximum temperature has
dropped by 0.8 K. Liu et al. [23] analyzed the airflow in the
cooling channel. By increasing the battery spacing of the first
cooling channel and reducing other cooling channels’ spacing,
the airflow distribution in the cooling channel is changed, and
the maximum temperature difference in the battery pack is
reduced by 0.39 K. Chen et al. [24] took the air inlet and outlet
widths as variables and the minimum standard deviation of the
airflow velocities as the goal. They used the traditional
Newton method to optimize the flow resistance model. The
maximum temperature of the optimized BTMS dropped by
0.7 K, and the maximum temperature difference dropped by
2.1 K. Later, by reducing the inlet airflow rate, the power
consumption was reduced by 11.4%, but the maximum tem-
perature increased by 0.5 K.
It is necessary to consider performance and energy require-
ment of BTMS at the same time when optimizing the battery
pack. Chen et al. [25] developed a symmetrical system to
improve the heat dissipation effect and reduce the power con-
sumption. Compared with the asymmetrical system, the sym-
metrical system can reduce power consumption by at least
33% and maximum temperature difference by at least 43%.
Li et al. [26] designed a mini-channel cooling system and then
optimized this system by five structural parameters. After op-
timization, the maximum temperature difference is reduced by
5.70%, and the power consumption is reduced by 44.53%.
Chen et al. [27] optimized the positions of the inlet region
and outlet region of the battery pack. Compared to the sym-
metrical BTMS, the optimized BTMS can achieve 1.7 K re-
duction in the maximum temperature difference and 12% re-
duction in the power consumption.
Aiming at the problem that traditional optimization
methods have poor optimization results when the model
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
becomes complex, this paper uses an intelligent algorithm to
optimize BTMS based on sensitivity analysis. At the same
time, this paper takes the volume of the battery pack into
consideration. Besides, the influence of structural parameters
and operating parameters is considered in terms of power con-
sumption. The power consumption of the optimized BTMS
drops by 16.7%, and the maximum temperature difference
drops by 3.7 K, and the maximum temperature drops by
3.4 K. It shows that compared with the original BTMS, the
performance of BTMS after multiobjective optimization is
greatly improved.
In this article, the battery thermal management system is
optimized. The air velocity is solved using the flow resistance
model, and the battery temperature is solved using the heat
dissipation model. Sensitivity analysis is carried out based on
the heat dissipation model, and the parameters affecting
BTMS are selected. After that, the heat dissipation model
and multiobjective algorithms are combined to optimize
BTMS. By comparing the optimization results of three
multiobjective algorithms, it is found that the overall perfor-
mance of the NSGA-III_DE algorithm is more superior, and
the design variables solved by the NSGA-III_DE algorithm
are used. Finally, the CFD method is used to calculate the
optimized BTMS. It is found that the optimized BTMS has a
large drop in maximum temperature, maximum temperature
difference, and power consumption.
Battery pack cooling model
Air-cooled battery pack structure introduction
As shown in Fig. 1, the battery pack is composed of N battery
units, and each battery unit is composed of M battery cells.
The periphery of the battery pack is surrounded by baffles.
Figure 2 a is a top view of the three-dimensional battery pack.
Fig. 1 Three-dimensional parallel air-cooled BTMS
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322 1309

Figure 2b is a side view of the three-dimensional battery pack. where ΔPfriction is the friction loss, and its value is small
As shown in Fig. 2b, the arrow’s direction represents the flow because the flow channel is short. ΔPlocal is the local loss
of air. The cooling air flows into the battery pack from the caused by the diversion and conversion of air, and its value
inlet. After splitting in the wedge-shaped Divergence Plenum is large. Because the flow of air is continuous, according to
(DP), the air enters the Cooling Channel (CC) to take away the Bernoulli’s equation, in the dashed box circuit in Fig. 3, an
heat generated by the battery and then flows out of the battery equation similar to Kirchhoff’s voltage law can be obtained:
pack after converging in the wedge-shaped Convergence
ΔPloss;DP;iþ1 þ ΔPloss;CC;iþ1 −ΔPloss;CP;i −ΔPloss;CC;i ¼ 0 ð2Þ
Plenum (CP). The minimal widths of the battery units
(d0) are the same. The angles of the convergence (θcp) where ΔPloss, DP, ΔPloss, CC, and ΔPloss, CP respectively cor-
and divergence (θdp) plenums, the minimal widths of the respond to the static pressure loss of the divergence plenum,
convergence (wcp) and divergence (wdp) plenums, as the cooling channel, and the convergence plenum.
well as the inlet airflow rate(Q0), affect the temperature The local loss for each channel is calculated as follows
of the battery. When simulating the temperature inside [28]:
the battery pack, the highly accurate CFD method is
usually used. However, it uses millions of meshes for ξDP;i 2
ΔPlocal;DP;i ¼ ρU DP;i−1 ð3Þ
calculation and takes much time to do a simulation. In 2
the process of optimizing the battery pack, the structure ξCP;i 2
of the battery pack needs to be changed multiple times ΔPlocal;CP;i ¼ ρU CP;iþ1 ð4Þ
2
to obtain the optimal battery temperature. The time con-
ξDP→CC;i 2 ξCC→CP;i 2
sumed by a large number of CFD calculations may take ΔPlocal;CC;i ¼ ρU DP;i þ ρU CP;i ð5Þ
2 2
about several weeks, which is unacceptable. Therefore,
the flow resistance and heat dissipation models are used where ξ is the local loss coefficient, U is the average velocity
to calculate the battery unit’s temperature. in each channel , and ρ is the air density.
The local loss coefficient is related to the battery pack’s
Flow resistance model geometric dimensioning and the direction of air. Based on
the research of Basset et al. [29], the local loss coefficient
In the previous study, Liu et al. [23] proposed the flow resis- can be expressed as:
tance model to calculate the air velocity in the battery pack. 3 1
The flow resistance model is shown in Fig. 3. During the flow ξDP;i ¼ q2DP;i − q2DP;i þ ð6Þ
2 2
of air, static pressure loss occurs due to the loss of mechanical

3
energy. The inlet and outlet of cooling channels are taken as ξDP→CC;i ¼ q2DP→CC;i ψ2DP;i −2cos π qDP→CC;i ψDP;i þ 1 ð7Þ
nodes. The static pressure loss is calculated in sections. The 8
small box on the long arrow represents the static pressure loss. ξCP;i ¼ 1−q2CP;i ð8Þ
The static pressure loss can be divided into friction loss and
local loss: ξCC→CP;i ¼ q2CC→CP;i ψ2CP;i þ 2q2CC→CP;i −1 ð9Þ

ΔPloss ¼ ΔPlocal þ ΔPfriction ð1Þ where ψ is the ratio of the sectional area of the convergence
plenum and the divergence plenum to the cooling channel and

Fig. 2 Schematic of the parallel air-cooled BTMS. a Top view of the BTMS. b Side view of the BTMS
1310 Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322

Fig. 3 Schematic of the flow

resistant model

q is the ratio of the airflow rate in the sub-channel to the main where Re is the local Reynolds number and can be expressed
channel. as:
The friction loss for each channel is calculated as follows
Re ¼ ρDU=μ ð14Þ
[28]:
l DP;i where μ is the dynamic viscosity of the air.
ΔPfriction;DP;i ¼ λDP;i ρU 2 ð10Þ It is assumed that the air is an incompressible fluid; flow
2DDP;i DP;i
conservation is satisfied at each divergence and convergence
l CP;i point, similar to Kirchhoff’s current law. The following equa-
ΔPfriction;CP;i ¼ λCP;i ρU 2 ð11Þ
2DCP;i CP;i tions can be obtained:
l CC;i
ΔPfriction;CC;i ¼ λCC;i ρU 2 ð12Þ U DP;1 ¼ Q0 =ADP;1 ð15Þ
2DCC;i CC;i
U DP;i ADP;i ¼ U DP;iþ1 ADP;iþ1 þ U CC;i ACC;i ð16Þ
where λ is the dimensionless friction factor, l is the length of
U CP;i ACP;i ¼ U CP;i−1 ACP;i−1 þ U CC;i ACC;i ð17Þ
the segment, and D is the equivalent diameter of the segment.
The friction factor is related to the flow state of the air and can where Q0 is the inlet airflow rate, and Ais the average cross-
be expressed as [30]: sectional area of the channel.
8 There are 3 × (N + 1) unknown air velocities in the flow
> 56:96
< ; Re⩽3  103 resistance model. Since there are 2 × (N + 1) nodes, so Eqs.
λ ¼ 0:3164Re ð13Þ
> (16–17) provide 2 × (N + 1) equations. Since there are N di-
: ; 3  10 3
< Re < 105
Re0:25 rected loops, so Eq. (2) provides N equations. The air veloc-
ities in Eqs. (3–14) are related to the solution of Eq. (2).
Therefore, when the inlet airflow rate Q0 is given, the air
velocity in each channel can be obtained.

Table 1 Parameters of battery and air

Parameter Air Battery

Density (kg/m3) 1.1614 5400

Intensity of heat generated (W/m3) _ 264,170
Specific heat capacity (J/(kg K)) 1007 502.35
Thermal conductivity (W/(m K)) 0.0263 1.37x/17.33z
Dynamic viscosity (kg/(m s)) 1.85 × 10−5 ‑

“x” represents the parameter in the radial direction.

Fig. 4 Heat transfer of battery unit and cooling air “z” represents the parameter in the axial direction.
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
Fig. 5 Result of grid
independence (Q0 = 0.04m3/s)
Heat dissipation model
Through the flow resistance model, the air velocity in each
cooling channel can be obtained. The difference in air velocity
can reflect the difference in temperature to a certain extent. In
order to study the effect of air velocity on battery temperature,
the heat dissipation model developed by Chen et al. [22] is
introduced for battery temperature calculation of the BTMS.
In order to reduce the complexity of the model, the following
assumptions are made:
1. This paper ignores the uneven temperature distribution on
battery cells and calculates the volume-averaged
temperature.
2. Due to the complex thermophysical parameters of the
materials of the battery components, the physical proper-
ties of the battery are calculated by the weighted average
method [31, 32]
Fig. 6 Battery unit temperature obtained by heat dissipation model and
CFD method
1311
3. The air and the battery only exchange heat in the cooling
channel.
As shown in Fig. 4, the cooling air enters the cooling chan-
nels on both sides of the battery, taking away the heat gener-
ated by the battery unit, which lowers the temperature of the
battery unit. According to the law of energy conservation, the
following equation can be obtained:
Φi −hi AΔT left;;i −hiþ1 AΔT right;i ¼ 0 ð18Þ
   
ρC p;air Qcc;i T air;i −T 0 ¼ hi A ΔT left;;i þ ΔT right;i−1 ð19Þ
where Φi is the thermal power production by theith battery
unit, hi is the convective heat transfer coefficient between
the cooling air i and the surface of the ith battery unit, Cp, air
is the heat capacity of the air, A is the contact area between the
Fig. 7 Power consumption obtained by heat dissipation model and CFD
method
1312 Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322

battery unit and the cooling air on either cooling channel side, Number of air. Y and y are empirical parameters related
Qcc, i is the airflow rate of the ith cooling channel, T0 is the to the Reynolds number. The convective heat transfer
initial temperature of the battery unit and air, Tair, i is the outlet coefficient can be obtained by taking the velocities
temperature of the air in the ith cooling channel, and ΔTleft, , i solved in the flow resistance model into the calculation
and ΔTright, i are the temperature difference between the bat- of Re. Therefore, the convective heat transfer coefficient
tery unit and either air side. The latter two can be calculated is a key parameter that links the two models and deter-
by: mines cooling performance.

 In the heat dissipation model, there are N equations
  T u;i −T 0
ΔT left;i ¼ T air;i −T 0 =ln ð20Þ for Eq. (18) reflecting the drop of the battery unit tem-
T u;i −T air;i perature, and there are N + 1 equations for Eq. (19)


  T u;i −T 0 reflecting the increase of the air temperature in the
ΔT right;i ¼ T air;iþ1 −T 0 =ln ð21Þ cooling channel. There are N Tu variables and N + 1
T u;i −T air;iþ1
Tair variables, so the temperature of each battery unit
where Tu, i is the volume-averaged temperature of the ith bat- can be obtained by taking the air velocity into the cal-
tery unit. The convective heat transfer coefficient is given by culation of the heat transfer coefficient.
Ref. [30]:
κair Validation of the heat dissipation model
h¼ Y Rey Pr1=3 ð22Þ
dc
In order to verify the accuracy of the proposed flow
where κair is the thermal conductivity of the air, dc is resistance and heat dissipation models, this section es-
the diameter of a battery cell, and Pr is the Prandtl tablishes a battery pack model with 5 × 8 battery cells.

Fig. 8 a–c Influence of inlet airflow rate on BTMS (θdp = 15∘, θcp = 15∘, d0 = 1 mm, wdp = 5 mm, wcp = 5 mm)
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
As shown in Fig. 2b, the plate angles of the divergence
plenum (θdp) and the convergence plenum (θcp) are set
to 15°. The minimum widths of the divergence plenum
(w dp ) and the convergence plenum (w cp ) are set to
5 mm. The minimal width of the battery unit (d0) is
set to 1 mm.
In BTMS, the smaller the power consumed for cooling the
battery pack, the better. The power consumption can be
expressed as:
W p ¼ ðPin −Pout Þ  Q0
where Pin and Pout are the pressure of the inlet and outlet,
respectively.
Since the CFD method has a high calculation accu-
racy, this paper uses it to verify the proposed heat dis-
sipation model. The properties used in the CFD method
and the heat dissipation model are shown in Table 1.
The Realizable k-epsilon model is used to simulate the
calculation of the three-dimensional battery pack. The
air inlet uses the velocity inlet boundary condition,
Fig. 9 a–c Influence of structural parameters on the power consumption (Q0 = 0.04m3/s)
1313
which describes the cooling air’s velocity at the inlet.
The outlet uses the outflow boundary condition. The
computational region is discretized in space by the finite
volume method, and the discrete equation is solved
using the SIMPLE algorithm. The condition for iterative
convergence is that the residual value of the energy
equation is reduced below 10−6, the residual values of
other equations are reduced below 10−3, and the inlet
and outlet flow rates are balanced and stable. In order
to avoid the influence of the number of grids on the
ð23Þ
calculation results, grid independence is conducted.
Figure 5 is the result of grid independence. Too many
grids will lead to a long calculation time. It can be seen
that the temperature basically does not change after the
number of grids exceeds 3.5 million, so 3.5 million
grids are used for subsequent simulations.
The battery-unit temperature obtained by the mathe-
matical model and the CFD method is shown in Fig. 6.
Under the three inlet airflow rates, the maximum errors
of temperature between the two methods are 0.3 K
1314
(Q0 = 0.040), 0.3 K (Q0 = 0.045), 0.5 K (Q0 = 0.050),
respectively. The power consumption obtained by the
heat dissipation model and the CFD method is shown
in Fig. 7, and the maximum errors of power consump-
tion between the two methods are 0.6 W (Q0 = 0.040),
0.5 W (Q0 = 0.045), 0.5 W (Q0 = 0.050), respectively. It
can be seen that the results calculated by the CFD
method and the heat dissipation model are in good
agreement.
Since the CFD method is calculated using nonlinear
partial differential equations, the calculation is very
complicated and CPU-intensive, requiring a large
amount of time for each calculation. In contrast, the
flow resistance model and the heat dissipation model
calculate the battery unit’s temperature much faster, sav-
ing much time in the optimization process that requires
repeated modification of the model parameters.
Therefore, in the next optimization, the flow resistance
and heat dissipation models are used instead of the CFD
method to calculate the battery pack’s temperature.
Fig. 10 a–c Influence of structural parameters on the maximal temperature (Q0 = 0.04m3/s)
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
Sensitivity analysis
The factors that affect the battery cooling system are divided
into operating parameters and structural parameters. The op-
erating parameter is the inlet airflow rate Q0. The inlet airflow
rate affects the air velocity in the cooling channel, which af-
fects the battery unit’s temperature. The structural parameters
are the following: (1) The minimal width of the battery unit
(d0); (2) The plate angle of the convergence plenum (θcp); (3)
The plate angle of the divergence plenum (θdp); (4) The min-
imal width of the divergence plenum (wdp); (5) The minimal
width of the convergence plenum (wcp).
In BTMS, the power consumption, the maximal tempera-
ture, and the maximal temperature difference affect the per-
formance of BTMS. The influence of design variables on the
performance of BTMS is studied by single-factor sensitivity
analysis.
In order to ensure the safe operation of the battery pack, the
maximal temperature difference ΔTmax should meet the fol-
lowing conditions:
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
ΔT max ¼ T max −T min ð24Þ
s.t.
ΔT max ≤ 5K; T max ≤ 313K ð25Þ
where Tmax is the maximum volume-averaged temperature of
the battery unit obtained by the heat transfer model and Tmin is
the minimum volume-averaged temperature.
Impact of operating parameter on BTMS
The influence of the inlet airflow rate on BTMS is shown in
Fig. 8. In Fig. 8a, with the increase of the inlet airflow rate, the
power consumption increases slowly at first and then in-
creases rapidly afterward. In Fig. 8b and c, the maximal tem-
perature and the maximal temperature difference decrease rap-
idly at first but then decrease slowly. It shows that increasing
the inlet airflow rate at the beginning will have a better effect
on the cooling system, but increasing the inlet airflow rate
after about 0.04 m3/s will cause a large increase in the power
Fig. 11 a–c Influence of structural parameters on the maximal temperature difference (Q0 = 0.04m3/s)
1315
consumption, and the cooling effect is not good. It can also be
seen from Fig. 8c that under the original structure, even if the
inlet airflow rate is increased to the maximum, ΔTmax cannot
be within 5 K.
Influence of structural parameters on BTMS
Influence of structural parameters on the power consumption
It can be seen from Fig. 9a that as the minimal width of the
battery unit d0 increases, the power consumption gradually
decreases. In Fig. 9b, with the increase of θcp, the power con-
sumption decreases rapidly, while the increase of θdp makes
the power consumption slightly increase. In Fig. 9c, with the
increase of wcp, the power consumption gradually decreases,
and the increase of wdp makes the power consumption de-
crease slightly and then increase slightly.
Therefore, from the perspective of power consumption, the
larger d0, θcp, and wcp are, the better, but if they are too large,
the battery pack volume will become too large and occupy
1316 Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322

valuable space in the car. From the perspective of battery pack
volume, taking the minimum value of θdp and wdp is not only
conducive to volume reduction but also does not increase
power consumption.
Influence of structural parameters on the maximal
temperature
too large and occupy valuable space in the car. The changes of
d0 and θdp cannot make the power consumption, the maximal
temperature, and the maximal temperature difference decrease
simultaneously. Taking the minimum wdp is not only condu-
cive to the volume reduction but also has almost no effect on
power consumption, maximal temperature, and maximal

It can be seen from Fig. 10a that the maximal temperature Start
gradually increases with the increase of d0. In Fig. 10b, as
θcp increases, the maximal temperature decreases rapidly.
When θcp is greater than 13.3°, the maximal temperature is Define inial variables
within 313 K. The change of θdp has almost no effect on the
maximal temperature. In Fig. 10c, as wcp increases, the max-
imal temperature gradually decreases, and the change of wdp
makes the maximal temperature slightly rise first and then Inialize the populaon
slightly decrease.
Therefore, considering the maximal temperature, the larger
θcp and wcp are, the better. Considering the maximal temper- Crossover and mutaon to produce
ature and the volume of the battery pack, the minimum θdp is offspring populaons
not only conducive to the volume reduction but also has little
effect on the maximal temperature. The minimum values of d0
and wdp are suitable for reducing the maximal temperature and Populaon consolidaon
the volume.

Influence of structural parameters on the maximal

temperature difference
Non-dominated sort

It can be seen from Fig. 11a that as d0 increases, the maximal

temperature difference gradually increases. In Fig. 11b, as the Reference-point calculaon
increase of θcp, the maximal temperature difference decreases
rapidly. The maximal temperature difference is within 5 K
when θcp is greater than 17.1°, while the increase of θdp makes Tournament selecon to screen new
the maximal temperature difference slightly decrease. In parent populaons
Fig. 11c, as wcp increases, the maximal temperature difference
decreases rapidly and wcp needs to be greater than 7.9 mm to
make the maximal temperature difference be within 5 K. Crossover and mutaon to produce
While the increase of wdp causes the maximal temperature offspring populaons
difference slightly rises first and then slightly decreases, but
no matter how to change wdp, the maximal temperature differ-
ence cannot be within 5 K.
Therefore, considering the maximal temperature differ-
YES
ence, the larger θdp, θcp, and wcp are, the better. Considering Gen<Maximum iteraon number
the maximal temperature difference and the battery pack vol-
ume, taking the minimum d0 is conducive to reducing the
maximal temperature difference and the volume. Taking the
NO
minimum wdp is not only conducive to the volume reduction
Output opmal soluon
but also has little effect on the maximal temperature
difference.
In summary, the larger θcp and wcp are, the better, because
this can reduce power consumption, maximal temperature, Stop
and maximal temperature difference. However, if θcp and
wcp are too large, the volume of the battery pack will become Fig. 12 NSGA-III _DE algorithm flowchart
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
temperature difference. Therefore, in the optimization of the
next section, wdp takes a fixed minimum value of 5 mm.
Multiobjective optimization
There are currently traditional optimization algorithms
and intelligent optimization algorithms to solve
multiobjective optimization problems. Traditional opti-
mization algorithms include commonly used weighting
algorithms, constraint methods, etc. Traditional optimi-
zation algorithms convert the multiobjective function in-
to a single objective function by assigning weights and
other methods, and then optimize the single objective
function. This type of algorithm is too idealized and
the optimization result is not good. Intelligent algo-
rithms include ant colony algorithms, annealing algo-
rithms, and genetic algorithms. These algorithms can
better reflect the essence of multiobjective optimization
problems and have been widely used in recent years.
The NSGA-III (Non-dominated Sorting Genetic
Algorithm) [33] introduced the concept of reference
points on the basis of the NSGA-II algorithm, which
Fig. 13 Multiobjective
optimization flow chart of battery
thermal management system
1317
improved the convergence of the algorithm and the uni-
formity of the optimal solution distribution. Since the
selection mechanism of congestion distance in NSGA-
II is abandoned, the selection mechanism of the refer-
ence point is used to ensure the diversity of the solu-
tion, which is especially suitable for solving optimiza-
tion problems with 3 or more goals.
DE (Differential Evolution) algorithm [34] is an evo-
lutionary computing technology. DE algorithm uses real
number encoding to enable the global search. Its unique
ability to memorize the population’s optimal individual
makes the algorithm more robust and convergent and
can effectively solve complex nonlinear optimization
problems.
This article uses the NSGA-III _DE multiobjective
optimization algorithm that combines the DE algorithm
and the NSGA-III algorithm to optimize BTMS. The
NSGA-III_DE algorithm inherits the fast non-
dominated sorting of the NSGA-III algorithm and uses
the DE differential method for mutation and crossover
operation, which improves the search ability of NSGA-
III. The basic step of NSGA-III _DE algorithm is
shown in Fig. 12.
1318 Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322

Optimization result the space hypervolume enclosed by the non-dominated solu-

tion set and the reference point. The larger the HV indicator,
The mathematical description of the multiobjective optimiza-
tion problem is as follows:

1. The objective of optimization: reduce power consumption

F1, reduce maximal temperature difference F2, reduce
maximal temperature F3.
8
>
> F 1 ¼ W P ðxÞmin
< F ¼ Diff tem ðxÞmin
2
ð26Þ
>
> F 3 ¼
 Max tem ðxÞmin 
:
x ¼ wcp ; d 0 ; θdp ; θcp ; Q0

2. The ranges of operating parameter and structural parame-

ters are as follows:
8
>
> wcp ∈½5mm; 30mm
> d ∈½0:3mm; 1mm
>
< 0
θdp ∈½10∘ ; 20∘  ð27Þ
>
> ∘ ∘
>
> θ cp ∈ ½
10 ; 20  
:
Q0∈ 0:01m3 =s; 0:05m3 =s

3. Constraint: The volume of the optimized battery pack

does not exceed the volume of the original battery pack.

VoðxÞ≤ 1:8528  10−5 m3 ð28Þ

Figure 13 is the multiobjective optimization flow chart of

the battery thermal management system. There is no unique
solution for the multiobjective function. However, there is a
set of optimal solutions, called Pareto optimal solution set, and
the elements in the solution set are called Pareto optimal so-
lutions or non-dominated solutions. This article uses the
NSGA-II algorithm, NSGA-III algorithm, and NSGA-III
_DE algorithm for multiobjective optimization. The popula-
tion number of the three algorithms is set to 200, and the
iteration number is set to 500 in order to compare the advan-
tages and disadvantages of the three algorithms.
After optimization, 200 non-dominated optimal solutions
corresponding to the three algorithms can be obtained. The
Pareto optimal solution distributions of power consumption
F1 (W), maximal temperature difference F2 (K), and maximal
temperature F3 (K) of the three algorithms are shown in
Fig. 14.
The quality evaluation of solution set is mainly by analyz-
ing the convergence effect and distribution effect of the solu-
tion set. Hypervolume (HV) [35] indicator has become the
most commonly used solution set evaluation indicator be-
cause of its good theoretical support and ideal practicability.
Calculating HV does not require a reference set of
representing the Pareto front, making it suitable for many
Fig. 14 Pareto optimal solutions distribution. a NSGA-II algorithm
practical optimization problems. HV realizes the comprehen- optimization results. b NSGA-III algorithm optimization results. c
sive evaluation of the solution set by calculating the value of NSGA-III_DE algorithm optimization results
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322 1319

Table 2 Solutions of the three

algorithms after screening No. NSGA-III_DE NSGA-III NSGA-II

WP ΔTmax Tmax WP ΔTmax Tmax WP ΔTmax Tmax

(W) (K) (K) (W) (K) (K) (W) (K) (K)

1 5.20 3.0 309.5 5.48 2.9 309.4 5.65 2.9 309.4

2 5.31 3.0 309.4 5.69 2.8 309.3 5.67 2.9 309.3
3 5.37 2.9 309.4 5.70 2.8 309.3 5.82 2.9 309.2
4 5.46 2.8 309.4 5.74 2.9 309.2 5.85 2.8 309.3
5 5.53 2.8 309.3 5.76 2.8 309.2 5.89 3.0 309.1
6 5.56 2.8 309.2 5.77 2.8 309.2 - - -
7 5.64 3.0 309.1 5.78 2.9 309.2 - - -
8 5.66 2.8 309.2 5.80 2.7 309.3 - - -
9 5.74 2.7 309.3 5.86 2.9 309.1 - - -
10 5.80 2.9 309.1 5.90 3.0 309.1 - - -
11 6.00 2.8 309.1 - - - - - -

the better the convergence and diversity of the Pareto solution.
HV can be calculated as:
 ΔTmax ≤ 3K, the maximum temperature Tmax ≤ 310K, and
jSj
HV ¼ λ ∪i¼1 vi ð29Þ
Where λ denotes the Lebesgue measure. vi denotes
the hypervolume formed by the reference point and
the non-dominated individuals, and S denotes the non-
dominated set. Using the nadir point of the Pareto front
as the reference point, the HV values obtained by the
NSGA-II, NSGA-III, and NSGA-III_DE algorithms are
0.825, 0.842, and 0.855, respectively. The HV value
obtained by NSGA-III_DE algorithm is higher than
NSGA-II and NSGA-III algorithms, indicating that the
Pareto solution set obtained by NSGA-III_DE algorithm
is more excellent in convergence and diversity.
It can also be seen from Fig. 14 that the optimized solution
set of NSGA-II (Fig. 14a) is linear and unevenly distributed.
In contrast, the optimized solution sets of NSGA-III (Fig. 14b)
and NSGA-III_DE (Fig. 14c) are flaky, and the distributions
are more even. Therefore, the optimization results of NSGA-
III algorithm and NSGA-III_DE algorithm are more superior.
They are not easy to have many solutions dominated by a
single target, which is very advantageous for solving objective
function with three optimization goals.
Among the 200 non-dominated optimal solutions of the
three algorithms, the maximum temperature difference
the power consumption WP ≤ 6W are used as the conditions
for screening. After screening, the optimization result of
NSGA-II algorithm has 5 solutions that meet the require-
ments, NSGA-III algorithm has 10 solutions, and NSGA-
III_DE algorithm has 11 solutions. These solutions are ar-
ranged in order of power consumption from small to large,
as shown in Table 2.
Among the solutions that meet the screening requirements
of the three algorithms, the solution with the smallest ΔTmax is
selected as the final optimal solution. The performance com-
parison between the original scheme and the three optimiza-
tion schemes is obtained, as shown in Table 3. The power
consumption and maximal temperature difference of the
NSGA-III algorithm scheme are smaller than those of the
NSGA-II algorithm scheme, indicating that the optimization
result of the NSGA-III algorithm is better. The power con-
sumption of NSGA-III_DE algorithm scheme is lower than
that of the NSGA-III algorithm scheme, and the optimization
result of NSGA-III_DE algorithm has more solutions that
meet the screening requirements, indicating that the optimiza-
tion result of the NSGA-III_DE algorithm is more ideal.
Therefore, the NSGA-III_DE algorithm is more suitable for

Table 3 Comparison of original and optimized schemes

 
BTMS wcp (mm) d0 (mm) θcp (°) θdp (°) Q0 m3 =s WP (W) ΔTmax (K) Tmax (K)

Origin 5.0 1 15.0 15.0 0.040 7.20 5.9 312.2

NSGA-II 20.0 0.3 16.9 14.4 0.038 5.85 2.8 309.3
NSGA-III 15.1 0.3 20.0 14.9 0.038 5.80 2.7 309.3
NSGA-III_DE 16.2 0.3 20.0 14.3 0.038 5.74 2.7 309.3
1320
Table 4 The original and optimized results obtained by the CFD
method
BTMS WP (W) ΔTmax (K) Tmax (K)
Origin 7.8 6.1 312.3
NSGA-III_DE 6.5 2.4 308.9
optimizing the heat dissipation model. The optimization
scheme of the NSGA-III_DE algorithm is selected as the final
design variable. Compared with the original BTMS, wcp and
θcp of the optimized BTMS have increased, and θdp, d0, and
Q0 have decreased, which is consistent with the trend of sen-
sitivity analysis.
In order to more accurately evaluate the improvement of
the performance of the optimized BTMS, the CFD method is
used to calculate original and optimized schemes. The battery
unit temperatures calculated by CFD method before and after
optimization are shown in Fig. 15. It shows that the maximal
temperature of the optimized BTMS drops by 3.4 K, while the
minimal temperature increases by 0.5 K, which makes the
temperature consistency of the optimized BTMS become bet-
ter. The performance comparison between the original scheme
and the optimization schemes is obtained by the CFD method,
as shown in Table 4. It indicates that the power consumption
drops by 16.7%, the maximum temperature reduces by 3.4 K,
and the maximum temperature difference drops by 60.7%
after optimization. Therefore, the heat dissipation model can
be used to guide the design of the BTMS and save a lot of
optimization time.
Fig. 15 Comparison of the battery unit temperature obtained by CFD
method before and after optimization
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
Fig. 16 Comparison of air velocity in the cooling channel obtained by
CFD method before and after optimization
The air velocity in each BTMS cooling channel is
shown in Fig. 16. It can be seen that the air velocities
near the inlet are low. The faster the air velocity in the
cooling channel, the more heat the air can take away,
which causes the temperature of the battery units near
the inlet to be higher than the temperature of the battery
units near the outlet. Compared with the original
BTMS, the minimum air velocity of the optimized
BTMS is higher and the maximum air velocity is lower,
which reduces the air velocity difference in the opti-
mized battery pack. Therefore, the maximum tempera-
ture and the maximum temperature difference in the
optimized battery pack in Fig. 15 are reduced.
Conclusions
In this paper, the flow resistance model and heat dissi-
pation model are established, and then the CFD method
is used to verify the heat dissipation model. Based on
the heat dissipation model, sensitivity analysis is used to
select the appropriate variables. Aiming at the problems
of power consumption, maximal temperature, and max-
imal temperature difference of BTMS, three
multiobjective algorithms are used to optimize the heat
dissipation model. The following conclusions can be
obtained:
1. To save calculation time, the heat dissipation model is
used to estimate the battery unit temperature. The battery
unit temperatures obtained by the heat dissipation model
and the CFD method are in good agreement. Compared
with the CFD method, the heat dissipation model can save
a lot of time and improve optimization efficiency.
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
2. The problem of power consumption, maximal tem-
perature, and maximal temperature difference of bat-
tery thermal management system is studied through
sensitivity analysis. It is found that using large θcp
and wcp is conducive to the three targets decreasing
at the same time, but will occupy a large volume
and changes of d0, θdp, and Q0 cannot minimize the
three targets simultaneously.
3. After optimization of the three algorithms, it is found
that NSGA-III_DE algorithm has more solutions that
meet the requirements than NSGA-II algorithm and
NSGA-III algorithm, and the hypervolume value ob-
tained by NSGA-III_DE algorithm is also higher,
indicating that the comprehensive performance of
N S G A - I I I _ D E a l go r i t h m is m o r e ex c el l e n t .
Compared with the original BTMS, NSGA-III_DE
algorithm optimized BTMS can reduce power con-
sumption by 16.7%, maximal temperature difference
by 60.7%, and maximal temperature by 3.4 K.
Funding This work is financially supported by the Whenzhou Scientific
and Technological Project (Grant No.2018ZG007).
References
1. Scrosati B, Garche J (2010) Lithium batteries: status, prospects and
future[J]. J Power Sources 195(9):2419–2430
2. Pesaran AA (2002) Battery thermal models for hybrid vehicle sim-
ulations. J Power Sources 110:377–382
3. Feng X, Fang M, He X, Ouyang M, Lu L, Wang H, Zhang M
(2014) Thermal runaway features of large format prismatic lithium
ion battery using extended volume accelerating rate calorimetry[J].
J Power Sources 255:294–301
4. Kizilel R, Lateef A, Sabbah R, Farid MM, Selman JR, al-Hallaj S
(2008) Passive control of temperature excursion and uniformity in
high-energy Li-ion battery packs at high current and ambient
temperature[J]. J Power Sources 183(1):370–375
5. Kizilel R, Sabbah R, Selman JR, al-Hallaj S (2009) An alternative
cooling system to enhance the safety of Li-ion battery packs[J]. J
Power Sources 194(2):1105–1112
6. Ou K, Wang YX, Li ZZ, Shen YD, Xuan DJ (2015) Feedforward
fuzzy-PID control for air flow regulation of PEM fuel cell system.
Int J Hydrogen Energ 40:11686–11695
7. Yang Y, Xu X, Zhang Y et al (2020) Synergy analysis on the heat
dissipation performance of a battery pack under air cooling[J].
Ionics:1–10
8. Wan C (2020) Battery space optimization to limit heat transfer in a
lithium-ion battery using adaptive elephant herding optimization[J].
Ionics:1–17
9. Yang XH, Tan SC, Liu J (2016) Thermal management of Li-ion
battery with liquid metal. Energy Convers Manag 117:577–585
10. Smith J, Hinterberger M, Hable P, Koehler J (2014) Simulative
method for determining the optimal operating conditions for a
cooling plate for lithium-ion battery cell modules. J Power
Sources 267:784–792
11. Qian Z, Li Y, Rao Z (2016) Thermal performance of lithium-ion
battery thermal management system by using mini-channel cooling.
Energy Convers Manag 126:622–631
1321
12. Rao ZH, Wang SF, Zhang YL (2012) Simulation of heat dissipation
with phase change material for cylindrical power battery[J]. J
Energy Inst 85(1):38–43
13. Amalesh T, Lakshmi NN (2019) Cooling of a lithium ion battery
using phase change material with air/dielectric fluid media: a nu-
merical study[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy
0957650919859109
14. Rao Z, Huo Y, Liu X, Zhang G (2015) Experimental investigation
of battery thermal management system for electric vehicle based on
paraffin/copper foam[J]. J Energy Inst 88(3):241–246
15. Alipanah M, Li X (2016) Numerical studies of lithium-ion battery
thermal management systems using phase change materials and
metal foams. Int J Heat Mass Trandf 102:1159–1168
16. Jiang ZY, Qu ZG (2019) Lithium–ion battery thermal management
using heat pipe and phase change material during discharge–charge
cycle: a comprehensive numerical study. Appl Energ 242:378–392
17. Wang T, Tseng KJ, Zhao J, Wei Z (2014) Thermal investigation of
lithium-ion battery module with different cell arrangement struc-
tures and forced air-cooling strategies[J]. Appl Energy 134:229–
238
18. Mahamud R, Park C (2011) Reciprocating air flow for Li-ion bat-
tery thermal management to improve temperature uniformity[J]. J
Power Sources 196(13):5685–5696
19. Sun H, Dixon R (2014) Development of cooling strategy for an air
cooled lithium-ion battery pack[J]. J Power Sources 272:404–414
20. Saw LH, Ye Y, Tay AAO, Chong WT, Kuan SH, Yew MC (2016)
Computational fluid dynamic and thermal analysis of Lithium-ion
battery pack with air cooling[J]. Appl Energy 177:783–792
21. Qian X, Xuan D, Zhao X, Shi Z (2019) Heat dissipation optimiza-
tion of lithium-ion battery pack based on neural networks[J]. Appl
Therm Eng 162:114289
22. Chen K, Wang S, Song M, Chen L (2017) Configuration optimi-
zation of battery pack in parallel air-cooled battery thermal man-
agement system using an optimization strategy. Appl Therm Eng
123:177–186
23. Liu Z, Wang Y, Zhang J, Liu Z (2014) Shortcut computation for the
thermal management of a large air-cooled battery pack. Appl Therm
Eng 66(1–2):445–452
24. Chen K, Wang S, Song M, Chen L (2017) Structure optimization of
parallel air-cooled battery thermal management system. Int J Heat
Mass Transf 111:943–952
25. Chen, Kai, et al. “Construction of effective symmetrical air-cooled
system for battery thermal management.” Applied Thermal
Engineering 166 (2020): 114679
26. Li W, Peng X, Xiao M, Garg A, Gao L (2019) Multi-objective
design optimization for mini-channel cooling battery thermal man-
agement system in an electric vehicle. Int J Energy Res 43(8):3668–
3680
27. Chen K, Wu W, Yuan F, Chen L, Wang S (2019) Cooling efficien-
cy improvement of air-cooled battery thermal management system
through designing the flow pattern. Energy 167:781–790
28. Perry RH, Green DW (1997) Perry’s chemical engineers’ hand-
book, seventh edn. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York
29. Bassett MD, Winterbone DE, Pearson RJ (2001) Calculation of
steady flow pressure loss coefficients for pipe junctions. Proc Inst
Mech Eng Part C 215:861–881
30. Shi Y, Wang J, Yu G, Chen M (1996) Chemical engineering hand-
book, second edn. Chemical Industry Press, Beijing
31. Saw LH, Ye Y, Tay AAO (2013) Electrochemical–thermal analysis
of 18650 lithium iron phosphate cell. Energy Convers Manag 75:
162–174
32. Jeon DH, Baek SM (2011) Thermal modeling of cylindrical lithium
ion battery during discharge cycle. Energy Convers Manag 52:
2973–2981
1322
33. Deb K, Jain H (2014) An evolutionary many-objective optimization
algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting ap-
proach, part I: solving problems with box constraints[J]. IEEE
Trans Evol Comput 18(4):577–601
34. Zou D, Liu H, Gao L, Li S (2011) Brief paper: An improved dif-
ferential evolution algorithm for the task assignment problem[J].
Eng Appl Artif Intell 24(4):616–624
Ionics (2021) 27:1307–1322
35. Li M, Yao X (2019) Quality evaluation of solution sets in
multiobjective optimisation: a survey[J]. ACM Computing
Surveys (CSUR) 52(2):1–38
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.