International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

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

Review of thermal coupled battery models and parameter identification for

lithium-ion battery heat generation in EV battery thermal
management system
Jie Liu a, 1, Saurabh Yadav b, 1, Mohammad Salman a, Santosh Chavan c, *, Sung Chul Kim a, *
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongbuk 712-749, South Korea
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, VIT University, Chennai Campus, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600127, India
c
Department of Information and communication, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongbuk 712-749, South Korea

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

Keywords: With the increasing popularity of electric vehicles, there is a growing need for efficient and reliable thermal
Battery modeling management systems to regulate the temperatures of lithium-ion batteries. Heat generation, which can lead to
Electric vehicle decreased performance, reduced lifespan, and even safety hazards if not properly managed, is a major challenge
Battery thermal management system
for these batteries. This review provides an overview of the numerical modeling techniques used to simulate heat
Equivalent circuit model
Electrochemical model
generation and thermal management in lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles. Various approaches to
Parameter identification modeling the thermal behavior of batteries are reviewed with regard to thermal coupled battery models for the
thermal analysis of battery and battery thermal management system (BTMS). This review discusses various
modeling approaches, including simple battery models, electrical circuit models (ECMs), and physics-based
electrochemical models, focusing on the Newman P2D model. Thermal runaway model that is employed to
inform safety design for lithium-ion battery is also reviewed. In addition, the parameter identification methods
for these models are reviewed. The merits and drawbacks of each model are discussed in detail, and the com­
plexities involved in parameter identification are investigated. This comprehensive review aims to guide re­
searchers and engineers in selecting and utilizing appropriate tools for battery thermal management studies.

1. Introduction
Currently, almost 80 % of the global energy supply depends on fossil
fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas. Most large-scale production and
consumption of energy are believed to result in environmental pollution
and adverse effects on human health [1,2]. Owing to the world’s
increasing reliance on renewable energy sources, electric vehicles (EVs)
present the most promising solution for achieving a cleaner and more
sustainable environment because batteries provide a superior means of
storing consistent energy generated from these sources [3].
Batteries are devices that utilize an electrochemical reaction between
two or more cells to provide power to electrical devices and possess
several common features, such as auto-discharge rate, specific energy,
operational conditions, toxicity, charging time, and C-rate. Battery ca­
pacity, which is determined by the reversibility conditions of the elec­
trochemical process, is a crucial characteristic because it represents the
maximum amount of electricity that a battery can store and deliver; this
capacity reduces with the use of electrodes or electrolytes. C-rate refers
to the charging or discharging rate and is used to measure the discharge
of a battery relative to its maximum capacity [4]. The power perfor­
mance and driving range of electrical vehicles (EVs) and hybrid EVs are
significantly influenced by the type of battery used as their primary
power source. Several battery types, including lead-acid, nickel-based,
sodium-based, and lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), have been developed
[5]. Among these, LIBs are the most preferred energy storage device for
electric vehicles (EVs) because of their superior characteristics,
including higher energy density, specific power, recyclability, lighter
weight, longer cycle life, lower self-discharge rates, and shorter charging
time [5,6].
Despite technological advancements, thermal safety concerns related
to Li-ion batteries in EVs continue to pose significant challenges, making
them a crucial area of research and development. An effective battery

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: Santosh.chavan083@gmail.com (S. Chavan), sungkim@ynu.ac.kr (S.C. Kim).
1
These authors contributed equally to this work.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124748
Received 21 May 2023; Received in revised form 2 July 2023; Accepted 22 September 2023
Available online 3 October 2023
0017-9310/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Liu et al.
thermal management system (BTMS) for EV batteries is urgently needed
to ensure the safety of the vehicle, battery, and its occupants and
improve battery lifetime and operation under different environmental
conditions [7]. The correlation between the operating temperatures and
the performance and safety of lithium-ion batteries has been widely
recognized. Fig. 1 demonstrates that the ideal operating temperature for
these batteries falls between 15 and 35 ◦ C. If the temperature during the
charging or discharging process exceeds this acceptable range, the reg­
ular functioning of the batteries can be compromised. Additionally, the
temperature difference between connected LIB cells in the battery
module or pack should be less than 5 ◦ C [8–11]. The purpose of a BTMS
is to control temperature levels and distribution, which is essential for
extending the lifespan of lithium-ion cells and the overall battery sys­
tem. To achieve this goal, the system utilizes various techniques, such as
monitoring battery health to determine the state of charge (SOC) and
state of health (SOH) and providing relevant battery information to EV
users. Furthermore, the BTMS ensures safe and efficient battery opera­
tion by maintaining an appropriate operating temperature within the
required range [11]. However, studies on BTMS have focused on battery
cooling technologies to ensure battery performance and safety, and
relatively little attention has been paid to preheating [12]. Research on
BTMS can be categorized into two general approaches: direct mea­
surement and indirect calculation. Direct measurement methods involve
experimental analysis of heat production characteristics; however, they
are time-consuming, costly, and may not fully capture the comprehen­
sive thermal state and temperature distribution of batteries. By contrast,
indirect calculation methods rely on battery numerical models to
analyze the internal state of a battery, which may be challenging to
measure experimentally. Despite these limitations, indirect calculation
methods offer a more efficient and cost-effective approach to evaluating
the thermal characteristics of lithium-ion batteries [13]. The use of
numerical methods is crucial for predicting the safety and performance
of batteries in different end-use contexts. This is particularly important
in designing new batteries, where measurement data obtained from
previous experiments can be used to validate predictive models and
achieve accurate simulation data [14].
Numerous scholars have conducted review studies on BTMS for EVs,
focusing on various perspectives. Most of the reviews are comprehensive
discussions about the status and development potential of BTMS and a
comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of various BTMS
technologies at the technical level [1,3,6–8,12,15–17]. BTMS, particu­
larly for cooling technology, can be classified into three categories based
on the use of parasitic power: active, passive, and hybrid cooling. Active
cooling comprises cooling systems that use air or liquid and some
emerging approaches. Passive cooling, on the other hand, utilizes
techniques such as phase change materials (PCM), heat pipes, and nat­
ural convection to dissipate heat. Finally, hybrid cooling uses a combi­
nation of two or more cooling strategies and can be categorized as
air-PCM, air-heat pipe, heat pipe-PCM, and liquid-PCM systems.
Accordingly, review studies on different types of lithium battery cooling
technologies have also been presented, such as air cooling [9,11,18,9],
liquid cooling [19], immersion cooling [20], heat pipe [21,22],
Fig. 1. Relation between battery performance and operating temperature (reproduced from Ref. [8]).
2
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
phase-change material (PCM)-based cooling [23–25,10], and hybrid
cooling [26,27]. Although some numerical studies are included in the
abovementioned literature, a discussion of the numerical models and
methodologies used in these numerical investigations is not presented in
depth. However, numerical modeling of BTMS is a significant approach
in the development of battery technology [28]. It is necessary to conduct
a comprehensive review of numerical methods for BTMS. Therefore, this
study reviews various approaches for modeling the thermal behavior of
batteries with regard to thermal coupled battery models and parameter
identification for BTMS.
2. Overview of battery models and battery heat generation
Numerous battery models with varying complexities that offer utility
across a range of applications have been developed. According to the
level of physical insight, battery models are divided into three types:
white box, gray box, and black box models, which are represented by the
electrochemical model, equivalent circuit model (ECM), and neural
network model, respectively [29]. Fotouhi et al. summarized battery
models into mathematical models, ECMs, and electrochemical models
and investigated their uses within EV battery management systems [28].
In this study, the review approach for EV Li-ion battery models focuses
on commonly used modeling methods for the thermal performance of
Li-ion batteries. Therefore, the neural network model mostly used for
battery life prediction and the mathematical model that is no longer
used are not discussed. Generally, during the charging or discharging
process, heat generation can be estimated by the sum of irreversible and
reversible heat (entropic heat) and is given as [30]
qgen = qirr + qrev (1)
Both irreversible and reversible heat are generated by various
chemical and physical processes inside the battery. Irreversible heat is
often caused by the flow of current through the battery’s internal
resistance, resulting in Joule heating, polarization effect, etc.
Conversely, reversible heat is generated or absorbed during the charging
and discharging processes owing to the entropy changes of the active
materials. Therefore, based on the methodology for representing the
chemical and electrical features used to evaluate battery heat genera­
tion, the following three types of numerical models are discussed in this
study:
1. Simple battery model
2. Equivalent circuit model (ECM) model
3. Physics-based electrochemical model
Parameter identification is a key aspect for battery modeling.
Therefore, after introducing the battery models, parameter identifica­
tion using experimental methods is reviewed for the different models.
3. Simple battery model
Simple battery models require fewer computational resources and
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

less processing time than detailed electrochemical or multiphysics
models. This makes them suitable for battery management systems
(BMS), where rapid calculations are necessary to ensure optimal oper­
ation and safety. As simple battery models have fewer parameters and
equations, they are easier to implement and understand. This can be
beneficial to engineers and researchers who may not have extensive
expertise in electrochemistry. A simple battery model (or theoretical
resistance model), as shown in Fig. 2, consists of an internal resistance
(R0), an open-circuit voltage (UOC), and a final battery voltage (Ub) and
assumes that the heat generation rates inside the battery have a uniform
distribution. It is also known as the internal resistance model or Rint
model because the battery’s internal resistance is always denoted as
“Rint.”
The dynamics of a battery cannot be described using the simplified
model because the polarization effect is not included. Consequently, the
internal resistance equivalent model is commonly used in basic battery
simulation analyses. However, their practical applications are infre­
quent because of their inherent limitations. The terminal voltage of the
battery can be expressed as
Ub = UOC − Ib R0 (2)
In the simplified model, the heat transfer phenomena in the battery
can be simplified to thermal diffusion with a heat source, and the energy
balance equation inside the battery is as follows:
∂T ∂2 T ∂2 T ∂2 T
ρcp = λx 2 + λy 2 + λz 2 + qgen (3)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z
where ρ, cp, T, t, λ, and q are the battery density, specific heat, tem­
perature, time, thermal conductivities, and heat generation rate per unit
volume of the battery, respectively. Eq. (1) can be expressed as an en­
ergy balance equation as follows [31,32]:
[ ]
qgen =
Ib
(UOC − Ub ) − T
dUOC
(4)
Vb dT
where I, UOC, Ub, T, Vb, and d UOC /dT are the current passing through the
battery, battery open-circuit voltage, battery voltage, battery tempera­
ture, battery volume, and entropy thermal coefficient, respectively. The
1st and 2nd terms on the right side of Eq. (3) represent the generated
irreversible and reversible heat, respectively. Because the internal
resistance of the battery can be expressed as R0=(UOC-Ub)/I, Eq. (4) can
also be expressed as follows [32]:
1 2
[
dUOC
] temperature distribution of the battery and the BTMS system. However,
qgen = Ib R0 − Ib T (5)
Vb dT
Eq. (4) was developed by Bernardi and has been widely used as an
energy-governing equation in simplified battery thermal models.
Reversible heat, also called entropy heat, contributes significantly to the
total heat generation in LIBs. The entropy change of Li+ ions during
discharge or charge processes depends on the temperature variation of
the open-circuit voltage E0 and can be expressed as follows [33]:
dUOC
∇S = nF (6)
dT
where n and F are the number of electrons exchanged per mole and the
Faraday constant, respectively. Therefore, the Eq. (3) and (4) can be
expressed as [33]
[ ]
qgen =
Ib
(UOC − Ub ) − T
∇S
(7)
Vb nF
[ ]
1 2 ∇S
qgen = Ib R0 − Ib T (8)
Vb nF
The simple battery thermal models used in these studies do not
reflect the internal electrochemical characteristics of the battery, such as
the polarization effect. Instead, they rely on experiments to evaluate Ub,
R0, d UOC /dT, or ▽S/nF as functions of T or SOC, or both of them, and
the internal current I of the battery is set to be a constant value based on
the charging or discharging rate (C-rate). Here, the battery SOC as a
function of the internal current I, battery normal capacity, and time can
be calculated as [34]
I(t)
SOC(t) = SOC(t − 1) + Δt (9)
Capacity
Owing to the low computational resources required, the simple
battery model is commonly coupled with three-dimensional (3D)
computational thermal models to address complex geometric systems or
BTMS issues that require extensive calculations [34–61]. Models of
thermal management systems either contain more complex geometries,
such as cooling channels or cooling plates for liquid cooling, or more
complex computational models, such as phase change phenomena in
PCM or heat pipe cooling. Commercial computational fluid dynamic
(CFD) packages, such as ANSYS Fluent and COMSOL, are the best tools
for solving this coupling model. In these models, the electrical field and
chemical reactions are not included, and the battery cell or packed
module is defined as a solid body with a heat source, which is calculated
using Eq. (7) or (8). Jiahao Cao et al. [43] developed a thermal coupled
simple battery model for a liquid cooling with PCM hybrid BTMS by
using ANSYS Fluent. The model was validated by the experimental data.
From Fig. 3, it can be seen that the simulation results can visualize the
the electrical and chemical characteristic, such as current density,
electrode potential, of the battery cannot be represented in this nu­
merical study.
Table 1 lists some typical studies that utilized commercial CFD
solvers to solve battery thermal problems using simple battery models
coupled with 3D thermal models. Based on the conclusions of these
studies, most of them pay more attention to the design of thermal
management systems and the improvement of cooling performance,
disregarding the electrochemical performance. Most battery thermal
management systems, including air cooling, liquid cooling, PCM, HP,
and hybrid cooling, can be solved using this coupled model. These
models generally have the following common assumptions [32,34,35]:

(1) The material properties of the battery are assumed to be inde­

pendent of temperature and SOC owing to their significantly
small variations.
(2) The heat generated inside the battery is uniformly distributed.
(3) The charging or discharging rate is constant.
(4) The radiation heat transfer inside the battery is ignored.

Based on these assumptions, the transport phenomena inside the

battery can be simplified to thermal diffusion with heat generation, as
Fig. 2. Simple battery model.

3
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Fig. 3. Temperature distributions of battery with different 25wt % and 67wt % PCM [43].

described by Eq. (3). However, more complex models, such as the ∫t ( )

equivalent circuit model (ECM), single particle model (SPM), or pseudo- Ui (t) =
Ib
−
Ui
(24)
two-dimensional (P2D) model, which can capture a wider range of C i Ri C i
t0
battery behaviors, are needed for more accurate modeling of battery
behavior.
n ∫ ( )
t
∑ Ib Ui
Ub = UOC − Ib R0 − − (25)
4. Equivalent circuit model (ECM) coupled thermal model i=1
C i Ri C i
t0

Although electrochemical battery models based on physical science Because the polarization effect is considered in ECM, the battery heat
can accurately describe the dynamics of the particles within a battery, generation can be represented as [88]
one of their drawbacks is their complexity, necessitating the identifi­ qgen = qp + qj + qr + qs (26)
cation of numerous parameters, which is considered a challenging
process. Utilized extensively in battery modeling, simulation, and SOC where qgen, qp, qj, qr, and qs are the polarization, Joule, reaction, and side-
estimation, ECMs achieve an optimal balance between precision and reaction heats, respectively. qs is the heat generated during the self-
complexity. The physical variables within ECMs are not only readily discharge process and can be ignored owing to its significantly small
interpretable but also comprehensible. value during the charging or discharging of the battery [88]. Therefore,
ECM is also a simplified representation of a battery using electrical Eq. (4) can be represented as
components such as resistors, capacitors, and voltage sources. Fig. 4 ⎡ ⎤
presents four commonly used ECM models: 1st-order Thevenin model, n ∫ ( )
t
Ib ⎣ ∑ Ib Ui dUOC ⎦
2nd-order Thevenin model, the partnership for a new generation of qgen = Ib R0 + − − T (27)
Vb Ci Ri Ci dT
vehicle (PNGV) model, and the general nonlinear (GNL) model [62].
i=1
t0

Unlike the simple model, ECM does not only consist of a simple
voltage source and internal resistance. As shown in Fig. 4, the Thevenin
models are composed of one (1st order) or two (2nd order) RC network
structures to consider the polarization effects of the internal chemical
reaction of the battery [63]. The 1st-order Thevenin model is obtained
by adding one RC network to the simple internal resistance model to
represent the polarization effect and better describe the charging or
discharging process. The 2nd-order Thevenin model, also called the
dual-polarization (DP) model, is obtained by adding two parallel RC
networks to the Rint model. Lastly, the PNGV and GNL models can be
obtained by adding a series equivalent capacitance C0 to the 1st-order
Thevenin and DP models, respectively. The equivalent capacitance C0
in the PNGV and GNL models is used to describe the changes in the
open-circuit voltage (OCV) caused by time accumulation. The governing
equations for the battery behaviors of the four models are summarized in
Table 2.
Generally, the PNGV and GNL models are more accurate than the
Thevenin models in representing the electrical and chemical behaviors
of the battery. However, the latter is mostly used for modeling and
evaluating battery heat generation. Some studies have presented bat­
teries with more than two RC networks [84–87]. Therefore, the gov­
erning equations for the Thevenin models can be summarized as follows
[74,84]:
∑
n model, the Rint model merely serves as an auxiliary tool for determining
Ub = UOC − Ib R0 − Ui (22)
i=1
Yubai Li et al. [82] focused on the three-dimensional (3D) thermal
modeling of a single Lithum-ion battery cell and a 50 V Lithum-ion
battery pack comprising 14 prismatic batteries. The electrochemical
modeling was conducted at a subscale using an equivalent circuit model.
From the simulation results, it is observed that, unlike simplified models,
the thermal model based on the equivalent circuit model (ECM) not only
accurately captures the temperature distribution (Fig. 5a) of the battery
but also captures the electrochemical characteristics such as electrode
potential (Fig. 5b) and battery voltage (Fig. 5c).
More related studies on thermal coupled modeling using ECM are
summarized in Table 3. In these studies, the Thevenin and DP models are
mostly used, whereas the PNGV and GNL models have never been
adopted because the changes in the open-circuit voltage caused by time
accumulation, which is described by the equivalent capacitance C0, are
almost not considered in the battery thermal analysis. The Thevenin
model is predominantly used to evaluate the thermal characteristics of
the batteries. Therefore, it can be observed that most of the studies [64,
66–68,73] using this model are usually only coupled with the lumped
thermal model and do not involve complex battery thermal management
systems. Regarding the strategies for the design, development, and
enhancement of BTMS, the most commonly used numerical method
involves coupling a DP battery model with a CFD model [74,77,79,80,
82,85]. As previously discussed, in the coupling of the Rint coupled CFD
battery heat generation. In contrast, ECM, with its complexity, provides
a more comprehensive representation of battery behavior, incorporating

dUi Ui Ib multiple resistive and capacitive elements to better capture dynamic

=− + (23) behavior. The Rint model simplifies this with a single resistance
dt Ri C i C i

4
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Table 1 Table 1 (continued )

Studies on thermal coupled modeling using simple battery model. Author Battery Cooling Software Conclusion
Author Battery Cooling Software Conclusion type method
type method
the EV dynamics
Wang et al. [32] Module (10 Air/PCM Fluent Five thermal is developed to
pouch management investigate the
cells) methods are thermal
numerically behaviors of Li-
investigated and ion battery
compared. A fin operating under
structure can dynamic battery
enhance the loads.
cooling effect, E et al. [42] Module (20 Air Fluent The cooling
and the PCM can cylindrical performance of
greatly improve cells) inlet and outlet
the temperature located on the
uniformity of different sides is
the battery cell. better than on
Akbarzadeh Module (12 Air/Liquid Fluent The liquid type the same side
et al. [34,37] prismatic BTMS results in and the use of
cells) a lower module the baffle plate
temperature and can highly
better improve the
temperature thermal
uniformity. performance of
Chen et al. [35] 1 pouch Liquid Fluent The optimized air cooling
cell design cooling strategies with
plate can much the lateral inlet
reduce the cell and outlet.
temperature and Cao et al. [43] Module (20 Hybrid Fluent A numerical
control the cylindrical (Liquid+PCM) model has been
temperature cells) created to
deviation within analyze the
a small range. hybrid thermal
Behi et al. [36] Module (24 Hybrid COMSOL The cooling management
cylindrical (Air+HP) strategy using system, and has
cells) heat pipe with a been verified
copper presents through a
the best cooling comparison
performance for with
both of experimental
temperature data. The model
reduction and will serve as a
temperature guide for
uniformity. enhancing the
Liu et al. [38] 2 prismatic Hybrid Fluent The designed structure,
cells (Liquid+PCM) hybrid cooling control mode,
system presents and overall
more than 30 K performance of
temperature the hybrid
reduction than BTMS.
the nature Kausthubharam Module (9 Air COMSOL Replacing the
convection. et al. [46] cylindrical air inlet-outlet
Wang et al. [39] Module (20 Liquid Fluent Increasing the cells) boundaries to a
cylindrical coolant mass central location
cells) flow rate can improved the
greatly reduce temperature
the battery uniformity in
temperature and the battery
improve the module.
temperature Tan et al. [47] Module (64 Liquid Fluent The direct liquid
uniformity of cylindrical cooling with a
the module. cells) full-size channel
Lee et al. [40] Module (8 Hybrid Fluent The proposed design and high
pouch (Liquid+PCM) BTMS is not only flow velocity
cells) effective in control has a
terms of its redundant
cooling cooling
performance but performance
also sufficiently with the
usable in the problems of low
continuous energy density
cycle. and high power
Han et al. [41] Module (10 – Fluent The dynamic consumption,
prismatic battery thermal which can be
cells) model resolved
integrated with through
optimization
(continued on next page)

5
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Table 1 (continued ) electrochemical processes and transport phenomena that occur in bat­
Author Battery Cooling Software Conclusion teries during charge and discharge cycles. These models are particularly
type method useful for studying battery performance. Electrochemical-thermal
Liang et al. [49] Module (5 Liquid COMSOL Three important
coupled battery models offer an efficient and robust approach for
cylindrical system exploring the properties of lithium-ion batteries. These models typically
cells) parameters focus on a single battery unit that includes current collectors, positive
required electrodes, separators, and negative electrodes. By providing precise and
determining
reliable numerical outcomes, they eliminate the need for complex
moderately for
balancing the experimental analysis [89]. As the basis of other battery models, they
system cooling can better reflect the inconsistency inside a single battery cell [90].
performance, There are several physics-based electrochemical models for battery
power simulations, each providing different levels of detail and complexity,
consumption,
and lightweight.
such as the single particle model (SPM), Newman
Jang et al. [52] Module (10 Hybrid CFX The maximum pseudo-two-dimensional (P2D) model, and Doyle-Fuller-Newman (DFN)
prismatic (Liquid+HP) temperatures of model. SPM simplifies the battery representation by assuming that each
cells) the battery electrode can be described by a single representative particle. The model
module in the
focuses on the transport of lithium ions within the solid electrode par­
liquid cooling
with B-type heat ticles and the reaction kinetics at the electrode/electrolyte interface.
pipes decrease This omits the transport phenomena in the electrolyte and assumes a
by 6.1 ◦ C and uniform concentration of lithium ions in the electrolyte [91]. Because
9.4 ◦ C under the the potential drop caused by the electrolyte dynamics is significant and
basic and
optimized
cannot be ignored, SPM is rarely used to evaluate battery heat genera­
conditions tion, although some studies have improved the model by using ECM [91,
relative to those
in the only
liquid cooling,
respectively.
Table 2
Kang et al. [53] 1 pouch – COMSOL The acquired Governing equations for ECMs.
cell regional Models Equations References
resistance
integrates 1st order Thevenin Ub = Uoc − Ib R0 − U1 (10)
[64–73]
electrical
dU1 U1 Ib (11)
resistance and = − +
dt R1 C1 C1
effect of entropy
2nd order Thevenin Ub = Uoc − Ib R0 − U1e − U1c (12)
changes [74–82]
dU1e U1e Ib (13)
corresponding = − +
dt R1e C1e C1e
to the SOC. dU1c U1c Ib (14)
= − +
dt R1c C1c C1c
PNGV Ub = Uoc − Ib R0 − U1 − UC0 (15)
element. This complexity typically lends the ECM coupled with CFD a [83]
dU1 U1 Ib (16)
higher accuracy in predicting battery behavior under various operating
= − +
dt R1 C1 C1
conditions. Even in terms of thermal predictions, a detailed represen­ dUC0 Ib (17)
=
dt C0
tation of the internal battery processes by ECM might yield more accu­ GNL model Ub = Uoc − Ib R0 − U1e − U1c − UC0 (18) /
rate results. dU1e U1e Ib (19)
= − +
dt R1e C1e C1e
dU1c U1c Ib (20)
5. Physics-based electrochemical-thermal model dt
= − +
R1c C1c C1c
dUC0 Ib (21)
Physics-based electrochemical models for battery simulations are
=
dt C0
designed to provide a detailed understanding of the underlying

Fig. 4. Schematics of battery equivalent circuit models (ECMs): (a) 1st-order Thevenin model; (b) 2nd-order Thevenin model (DP model); (c) PNGV model; (d) GNL
model [62].

6
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Fig. 5. Simulation results by the thermal model based on the equivalent circuit model (ECM). (a): battery temperature distribution under 5C discharging at 660 s
with different coolant velocities; (b): distributions of φ+ and φ− under 0.5C discharging. (c): ECM model parameters adjustment and comparison with experimental
data under various discharging rates [82].

Table 3
Studies on thermal coupled modeling using ECM.
Author Battery type ECM Thermal Cooling methods Conclusion
model model

Hariharan. Cylindrical cell Thevenin 1D Lumped – The suggested model, with a universal set of parameters, is proficient in representing
[64] cell voltage and temperature across a broad spectrum of power levels.
Calearo et al. 40 kW Pack Thevenin 1D Lumped Active cooling The model forecasts the electro-thermal behavior of the battery pack with a margin of
[66] error that stays under 5 %.
Wang et al. Pouch cell Thevenin 1D Lumped – The suggested hybrid modeling approach presents a universal framework that can
[67] accommodate additional influences like the health state and current within battery
models.
Estevez et al. Pouch cell Thevenin 3D Lumped – The proposed model can serve as an instrumental resource for establishing new
[68] module architectures and aiding in the design of battery cooling systems.
Liu et al. [72] Module (25 Thevenin 1D Lumped Liquid cooling The study discusses the impact of various factors on the thermal performance of the
cylindrical cells) battery module. These include two types of tube layouts, fluid velocity, tube
diameter, gradient ratio of flow velocity, and gradient increase in tube diameter.
Xu et al. [73] Module (20 Thevenin 1D Lumped – Simulation and experimental findings demonstrate that the prototype simulation
cylindrical cells) system is capable of not just delineating the electrical and thermal characteristics of
the battery, but also estimating the state of the battery with high precision.
He et al. [74] Module (12 DP 1D Hybrid cooling The introduced model is computationally effective and can be readily applied to
prismatic cells) Lumped/ (Liquid-Air-PCM) enhance algorithms for optimal temperature control during the operation of battery
CFD modules.
Hou et al. Module (3 DP 1D Lumped Hybrid cooling The model has potential for real-time forecasting of electrical and thermal signals in
[75] prismatic cells) (Liquid-PCM) large battery packs, along with its utility in analyzing and optimizing thermal
management systems.
Wang et al. Cylindrical cell DP 1D Lumped – The introduced model is capable of providing online estimations of both internal and
[76] external temperatures, and it does so with a high degree of accuracy.
Kirad et al. Module (30 DP CFD Air cooling The study reveals that the transverse spacing between the batteries significantly
[77] cylindrical cells) influences the cooling efficiency factor, while the longitudinal spacing impacts the
temperature uniformity.
Saqli et al. Module (3 DP CFD – Achieving real-time updates on the battery’s operating temperatures, capacity, and
[79] cylindrical cells) state of charge (SOC) has proven successful in enhancing the accuracy of estimations.
Behi et al. Module (30 DP CFD Evaporative The results indicate that the implementation of the evaporative cooling method
[80] prismatic cells) cooling/HP results in a significant temperature reduction in both the cell and module, with
decreases of 35.8 % and 23.8 % respectively.
Li et al. [82] Module (14 DP CFD Liquid cooling The developed model offers in-depth, 3D and time-resolved understanding of thermal
prismatic cells) dynamics and battery behavior under rapid discharge and harsh conditions, and is
broadly applicable to the design of individual Li-ion batteries as well as entire Li-ion
battery packs.
Lin et al. [84] Cylindrical cell Multi-RC 1D Lumped – The suggested scheme for parameterization enables individual identification of
electrical and thermal sub-models, substantially simplifying the complexity involved
in the process of parameterization.
Saw et al. Pack (24 × 28 Multi-RC 1D – The simulation results of the battery model align well with the experimental data, and
[85] pouch cells) Lumped/ show that an active thermal management system is necessary to enhance the
CFD longevity and ensure the safety of the battery pack

92]. The DFN model is an extension of the P2D model and accounts for
the detailed transport of lithium ions in the electrolyte using the
Nernst-Planck equation, including the concentration-dependent diffu­
sion and migration effects. This model provides a more comprehensive
representation of the electrochemical processes in the battery. However,
it is quite complex and computationally expensive [93]. The Newman
P2D model, as a simplified approach to the DFN model, is widely used
for physics-based electrochemical-thermal modeling. Therefore, in this
study, the review approach for physics-based electrochemical-thermal
models focuses only on the Newman P2D model.
The Newman P2D model is a physics-based model that uses porous
electrodes and concentrated solution theories developed by Newman
et al. [94]. The model is termed "pseudo" because its second dimension
follows the electrode’s radius, rather than being a true second dimen­
sion. This model functions similarly to the 1D model but also in­
corporates the impact of diffusion in both electrolyte and solid
(electrode) phases and the Butler-Volmer kinetics for simulating elec­
trode kinetics [95–97]. Therefore, in some literature [98–103], the
Newman P2D model is also expressed as a physically based 1D elec­
trochemical model. It should be emphasized that, despite some studies

7
J. Liu et al.
[104] claiming to employ a 3D electrochemical model by providing the
governing equations in form of three dimensions, they actually simplify
the model during the solution process. Many variables, such as elec­
trolyte concentration and current density, are only solved in
one-dimensional form. As a result, there are few examples of truly
coupling a 3D electrochemical model with a 3D thermal model. There­
fore, this study focuses exclusively on the discussion of the widely used
P2D model.
Fig. 6. Schematically illustrates an electrode plate pair in a Li-ion
battery [97]. The composite electrode is composed of active materials
and an electrolyte solution. This electrolyte phase consistently flows
through the negative electrode, separator, and positive electrode,
whereas the solid phase is only present in the negative and positive
electrodes. The solid active material is depicted as an array of uniformly
sized spherical particles. The separator, which is a porous polymer
membrane, serves as a physical barrier that prevents the movement of
active material particles between the two electrodes. During the dis­
charging process, lithium migrates to the surface of the negative elec­
trode particles, where it undergoes an electrochemical reaction. This
reaction emits an electron and transfers lithium into the electrolyte
phase. The lithium ions then traverse the electrolyte solution and move
from the negative electrode to the positive electrode. At the positive
electrode, a corresponding reaction incorporates lithium into the posi­
tive solid phase. Lithium remains stored within the positive electrode
particles until the battery is recharged at a later time. The Li-ion trans­
port phenomena in the porous electrode and electrolyte can be described
by charge and mass conservation laws. Charge conservation governs
phase potentials, φ+ and φ-, whereas mass conservation governs the
phase concentrations, ce and cs, where the subscripts e and s denote the
electrolyte and solid (particle) phases, respectively. The conservation
equations for the electrolyte and solid phases are listed in Table 4. In the
electrode area, the lithium conservation diffusion equation must be
addressed for all discretized spatial zones. The lithium conservation
equation is computed within the radial dimension of the spherical par­
ticles, constituting the pseudo-second dimension. Consequently, this
model is frequently referred to in the literature as the Newman P2D
model. The Butler-Volmer equation is used to couple the charge and
species governing equations by describing the current flux at the active
material pore-wall surface due to lithium intercalation reaction jth as a
function of over potential η [95]. Compared with the two types of
models previously introduced, the complexity inherent in solving
physics-based electrochemical models, such as the Newman P2D model,
arises from the intricate interplay of multiple factors. This model is
based on partial differential equations (PDEs), which encapsulate the
nonlinear and interdependent nature of various physical and chemical
phenomena, such as diffusion and reaction kinetics. This necessitates a
Fig. 6. Electrode and particle domains in the Newman model [97].
8
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
broad knowledge of parameters, some of which are elusive or arduous to
measure with precision, thereby increasing complexity. Moreover, the
computational burden is substantial because of the spatial and temporal
resolutions of the models and the pseudo-second dimension for radial
diffusion within particles. In addition, accurately defining initial and
boundary conditions, particularly for complex battery geometries and
operating conditions, presents another layer of complexity.
Owing to the complexity of the P2D model, independently compiling
and solving it can be challenging. As a result, commercially available
CFD packages that integrate P2D models, such as COMSOL Multiphysics
[98–116,13,117–119], are widely used for the construction of
physics-based electrochemical battery models. The mechanism of
coupling between the 1D (P2D) electrochemical model and the 3D
thermal model is shown in Fig. 7. The heat generation rate calculated
using the 1D model is utilized as the heat source within the 3D thermal
model to ascertain the internal temperature distribution of the battery.
Consequently, the average temperature derived from the 3D model in­
fluences the 1D electrochemical model, forming a feedback loop. This is
because the heat generation rate in the 1D model is sensitive to varia­
tions in temperature-dependent electrochemical parameters, which, in
turn, are affected by increasing temperatures [102,103,118,111].
Although the P2D thermal coupled battery model boasts high compu­
tational accuracy, it involves several variables (Table 5), and the
simulation process requires solving several partial differential equations
(PDEs) as shown in Table 4. Thus, as observed from the reviewed
literature, only a few studies focus on the battery module with multi-cell
[109,115,119]. Most studies have focused on the thermal performances
of individual battery cells. In ANSYS FLUENT, the P2D model can be
coupled with a 3D thermal model using the multiscale multidimensional
(MSMD) solution method. This method is beneficial because it can
capture battery behavior at various scales, leading to a more accurate
and detailed understanding of battery performance. For example, it can
account for interactions between electrode particles, the effects of
temperature on battery performance, and the influence of various
operating conditions. However, few studies have used the P2D model for
the thermal analysis of lithium batteries in FLUENT [97,111,90]. This
may be because FLUENT is more suitable for solving fluid and heat
transfer models than COMSOL, whereas COMSOL is more adept at
solving multiphysics problems related to battery electrochemical
models.
6. Modeling of thermal runaway
The emphasis on safety in the context of battery design has signifi­
cantly grown. In conditions of misuse, batteries can experience a state
known as thermal runaway. This state can be triggered by a rise in
temperature. In such scenarios, the excess release of heat could harm the
battery cell, potentially leading to fires or even explosions. It’s crucial to
understand that thermal runaway reactions are highly complex and
differ greatly based on the materials involved. The processes that trigger
thermal runaway involve mechanical, electrical, and thermal abuse
mechanisms [121]. Mitigation tactics can be implemented at different
stages - from the materials used, to the individual cell, and the system as
a whole - to ensure the comprehensive safety of energy storage systems
using LIBs. These strategies can be rooted in chemical, mechanical,
electrical, or thermal techniques, provided they accomplish any of the
following steps aimed at mitigating failure [122]:
(1) Lower the likelihood of hazardous conditions occurring;
(2) Remove hazardous conditions once they’ve manifested;
(3) Improve the battery cell’s thermal stability in the face of haz­
ardous conditions;
(4) Lessen the energy discharged in the event of Thermal Runaway;
(5) Detect potential TR and issue early warnings;
(6) Control the risk of propagation and confine damage to a minimal
area;
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Table 4
Governing equations of thermal coupled Newman P2D model [95,97].
Electrochemical model Governing equations
( )
Lithium conservation in the solid phase: ∂cs 1 ∂ ∂c s
= Ds r2 (28)
∂t r2 ∂r ∂r
( )
Lithium conservation in the electrolyte phase: ∂(εe ce ) ∂ ∂ c e
0
as (1 − t+ ) int ∑ side
= Deff + (j + j ) (29)
∂t ∂x e ∂ x F
( )
Charge conservation in solid phase: ∂ ∂φ ∑
σeff s − as (jint + jside ) = 0 (30)
∂x ∂x
( ) ( )
Charge conservation in the electrolyte phase: ∂ ∂φ ∂ eff ∂lnce ∑
κeff e + κ + as (jint + jside ) = 0 (31)
∂x ∂x ∂x D ∂ x
The Butler-Volmer equation: The current flux at the active material pore-wall surface due to lithium intercalation reaction as a function of over-potential η:
) )}
{ ( αa F (α F
jint = i0 exp η − c η (32)
RT RT
Where η is defined by:
∑
η = φs − φe − U − Rfilm (jint + jside ) (33)
And i0 is the exchange current density defined by:
i0 = Fkm (ce )αa (cs,max − cs,e )αa (cs,e )αc (34)
Effective properties: eff
De = De εβe (35)
eff
κ = κεβe (36)
2RTκeff 0 ( dlnf )
κeff (t+ − 1) 1 + (37)
±
D =
F dlnce
σeff = σεβs (38)
αs = 3εs /rs (39)
[ ]
Ed
Ds = Ds,ref exp − (1 ) (40)
1
R −
T Tref
[ ]
Ed
km = km,ref exp − ( ) (41)
1 1
R −
T Tref
Thermal model Governing equations
The energy conservation equation ∂T
ρCp = ∇(λ∇T) + q (42)
∂t
q = qre + qohm + qact + qex (43)
∂U
qre = jint T (44)
∂T
2RTκeff 0 ( dlnf )
qohm = σeff (∇φs )2 + κeff (∇φe )2 + (t+ − 1) 1 + ⋅∇(lnce )⋅∇φe (45)
±
F dlnce
int
qact = j (φs − φe − U) (46)
2h
qex = (Tamb − T) (47)
Th

Fig. 7. Coupling between electrochemical model and thermal model using average values for the temperature and generated heat [118].

Traditional safety tests are often costly and offer limited reproduc­
ibility. There is an immediate need for numerical methods to lower the
expenses related to these safety tests, especially crucial for safety
designing at a system-wide level. A dependable model can virtually
create a safety envelope, defining a protective limit for battery systems.
At present, Thermal runaway models are employed to inform safety
design for LIBs at both cell and system stages [122]. A so called
Four-Equation Model is widely used for modeling thermal runaway re­
actions and simulating a battery thermal behavior under thermal abuses.
This model does not take into account reactions involving lithium metal
and combustion processes. However, the methodology introduced here
could be easily adapted to include such reactions. In the model, thermal

9
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Table 5 ⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒
∑ ⃒dci ⃒ ⃒dSoc⃒
Battery parameters used in Newman P2D model [96,120]. q̇abuse = Hi Wi ⃒⃒ ⃒⃒ + Hec ⃒⃒ ⃒ (53)
dt dt ⃒
Parameters Negative Separator Positive Unit
electrode electrode
where Hi and Wi are the heat of reaction (J/kg) and density of reactants
Thickness ln ls lp µm (kg/m3) in the medium i(sei, ne, pe, e), respectively. The physical and
Particle radius Rsn Rsp
kinetic parameters used in the above equations are listed in Table 6.
– µm
Maximum solid Li+ cs,n,max – cs,p,max mol/m3
Concentration for
electrode 7. Parameter identification for thermal coupled battery
Initial solid Li+ cs,n,0 – cs,n,0 mol/m3 modeling
concentration for
electrode
Initial electrolyte Li+ ce,0 ce,0 ce,0 mol/m3 To evaluate the battery heat generation using the simple model and
concentration ECM, determination of the parameters, such as R0, Ri, Ci, and dUOC/dT,
Volume fraction for εn – εp – or ▽S/nF, is a key step. Various methods have been developed to
electrode
determine the internal impedance of LIBs. The parameter identification
Volume fraction for – εs – –
separator for simple models and ECMs can be discussed through the following two
Filler fraction for εf,n – εf,p – aspects: the identification of entropy coefficient and that of internal
electrode resistance and RC, respectively. For physics-based electrochemical
Reference diffusivity Ds,n – Ds,p m2/s models, parameter identification is a critical step in the development of
for electrode
thermal coupled battery models for predicting battery heat generation.
Stoi. at 0 % SOC for Stoin,0 – Stoip,0 –
electrode This process involves determining the values of various model param­
Stoi. at 100 % SOC for Stoin,100 – Stoip,100 – eters, such as diffusion coefficients, reaction rates, and thermal prop­
electrode erties, which are crucial for accurately capturing the physical and
Conductivity for S/m
σn – σp
chemical processes occurring within the battery. Given the diverse
electrode
Reference rate constant kn – kp mol/m2 s/
methods for battery model parameter identification, this study provides
for electrode (mol/m3) a simple review and illustrative examples of commonly used parameter
1.5 identification methods for battery thermal models.
Electrolyte diffusivity De m2/s
for electrode
Conductivity for σe S/m 7.1. Parameter identification of entropy coefficient
electrolyte
t+ factor for electrode t+ –
Nominal capacity of C Ah
The entropy coefficient of a battery cell can be evaluated using two
cell primary methods: potentiometric and calorimetric methods [120]. The
Minimum stop voltage Vmin V
Maximum stop voltage Vmax V
Table 6
Reference temperature T ref ◦
C
Universal gas constant R kJ/kg mole
Physical and kinetic parameters used for thermal abuse model [123–125].
K Parameters Description Unit
Faraday’s constant F Columb/ 1
mole Asei Decomposition frequency factor of the SEI film. s−
1
Ane Frequency factor of the reaction between negative electrode s−
and electrolyte.
1
Ape Frequency factor of the reaction between positive electrode s−
runaway reactions are put into four categories: solid electrolyte inter­
and electrolyte.
face (SEI) decomposition reactions, negative electrode-electrolyte re­ Ae Frequency factor of electrolytic decomposition. s− 1
actions, positive electrode-electrolyte reactions, and electrolyte Ace Frequency factor of short-circuit electrochemical reaction. s− 1
decomposition reactions [123]. To monitor the progression of each kind Esei SEI-decomposition activation energy. J/
of reactions, a collective Arrhenius kinetics rate is employed [95,123]: mol
Ene Activation energy of the reaction between negative electrode J/
[ ] and electrolyte. mol
dcsei Esei msei
= − Asei exp − c (48) Epe Activation energy of the reaction between positive electrode J/
dt RT sei
and electrolyte. mol
[ ] [ ] Ee Activation energy of electrolytic decomposition. J/
dcne tsei Ene mne mol
= − Ane exp − exp − c (49)
dt tsei,ref RT ne Ece Activation energy of short-circuit electrochemical reaction. J/
mol
[ ] csei Dimensionless amount of lithium-containing meta-stable –
dα Epe mpe,1
= Ape exp − α (1 − α)mpe,2 (50) species in the SEI.
dt RT cne Dimensionless amount of lithium intercalated within the –
[ ] carbon.
dce E e me α Conversion degree of the positive electrode material. –
= − Ae exp − c (51) ce Proportion of the remaining electrolyte.
dt RT e –
msei Reaction order for csei –
In addition, in this four equation framework, the abuse reaction due mne Reaction order for cne –
to the internal short circuit can be added and governed by the lowing mpe,1 Reaction order for α –
mpe,2 Reaction order for (1- α)
kinetics rate equation [95,124]:
–
me Reaction order for ce –
[ ] tsei Dimensionless thickness of the SEI film. –
dSoc Eec
= − ISCcond ⋅Soc⋅Aec exp − (52) tsei,ref Reference SEI layer thickness. –
dt RT ISCcond The factor used to make sure that the reaction is activated –
only after the specified trigger temperature
Then the total heat generation due to the thermal runaway can be
Hi Heat of reaction. J/kg
evaluated by: Wi Density of reactants in the medium. kg/
m3

10
J. Liu et al.
potentiometric method is widely used for determining the entropy co­
efficient of a battery. It involves measuring the OCV of a battery at
various temperatures while maintaining a constant SOC. To conduct a
potentiometric measurement, the battery is initially charged or dis­
charged to a certain SOC and subsequently left to rest until it reaches
thermal equilibrium. The OCV is then measured at various tempera­
tures. From these measurements, the change in OCV with temperature
(dUOC/dT) can be calculated, providing the entropy coefficient. This
method provides a direct and relatively simple way to measure the en­
tropy coefficient and can be applied to various types of batteries.
Conversely, the calorimetric method is another technique used to
determine the entropy coefficient of a battery. It involves directly
measuring the heat produced or absorbed by the battery during its
operation, which is related to the entropy change in the battery. Clearly,
this method cannot be used for numerical analysis of battery heat gen­
eration. Therefore, the potentiometric method is commonly used to
identify the entropy coefficient for modeling battery thermal models,
even with its highly time-consuming process [126]. Based on the liter­
ature reviewed in this study, not all studies provide an illustration of the
detailed experimental procedures for the potentiometric method. Jia­
qiang et al. [42] conducted an experiment to determine the entropy
coefficient. The experimental procedure illustrated in Fig. 8 involves six
identical 18,650 cells each at a SOC: 0 %, 20 %, 40 %, 60 %, 80 %, and
100 %. These cells are initially placed in a temperature chamber
maintained at 40 ◦ C. After a rest period of 2 h, the cell voltages (V1) are
measured and logged. Subsequently, the temperature in the chamber is
adjusted to 10 ◦ C, and after another 2 h of resting period, the voltages
(V2) of the cells are recorded again. The parameter dE/dT, specific to
each SOC, is computed from these voltage measurements using Eq. The
dUoc/dT can then be fitted as a function of the SOC using a nonlinear
polynomial method.
dUoc V1 − V2
= (54)
dT T1 − T2
7.2. Parameter identification of internal resistance
Several experimental methods can be employed to identify the in­
ternal resistance and capacitance of a battery, such as current pulse test,
hybrid pulse power characterization (HPPC) test, electrochemical
impedance spectroscopy (EIS), galvanostatic intermittent titration
technique (GITT). Two predominant methods exist in this field: elec­
trochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and current-pulse-based
characterization [71]. EIS, as a group of nondestructive techniques,
measures the reaction rate of an electrochemical system by applying a
sinusoidal current or voltage across a range of frequencies. However, it
typically requires high-fidelity, expensive galvanostats or potentiostats
Fig. 8. Test process for the identification of entropy coefficient [42].
11
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
compared to other laboratory equipment. Consequently, the time and
cost associated with EIS present significant drawbacks, making this
approach less practical for rapid, cost-effective, and large-scale param­
eter identification. Current-pulse-based characterization techniques,
which employ constant current pulses of a fixed duration to examine the
transient response of a cell, can yield satisfactory results in a shorter
time and at a lower cost than EIS. Consequently, the simplicity of
pulse-based characterization has gained widespread popularity [71]. In
a study by Jiaqiang et al. [42], the detailed process of an HPPC test for
the identification of battery internal resistance was presented. In this
study, the HPPC test begins with a charged device up to 4.2 V of the cell
voltage. Following a one-hour rest, an HPPC profile with a 30-second
discharge pulse, 40-second rest, and 10-second regenerate pulse is per­
formed. Subsequently, it is followed by a discharge to the next 10 %
increment of the capacity at the C/3 discharge rate. Finally, it undergoes
another one-hour rest. This sequence is repeated until the final profile
near 10 % SOC is achieved. The test should terminate at a cell voltage of
2.75 V, which is recommended by the manufacturer. Fig. 9(a) shows the
test process, and Fig. 9(b) shows one section of discharge pulses of the
HPPC test at the SOC of 100 % under 0 ◦ C. The instant voltage decrease
from V1 to V2 is a result of the ohmic resistance, whereas the decrease
from V2 to V3 is caused by the cell polarization resistance. Therefore, R0
at an SOC of 100 % and 0 ◦ C can be acquired using Eq. (49). Finally, the
internal resistance can be obtained using a nonlinear curve-fitting
method with multiple variables as functions of the battery SOC and
temperature.
V1 − V2 V2 − V3 V1 − V3
R0 = + = (55)
I I I
7.3. Parameter identification of RC network
Similar to the parameter identification method for the internal
resistance, the experimental data required for the parameter identifi­
cation of the RC network can also be obtained using the HPPC and GITT
methods. The difference lies in the adaptation of the two parameters in
the RC network, Ri and Ci, which typically require the use of an iterative
parameter identification algorithm (IPIA). GITT is performed in the
study of Felix-A. LeBel [71]. The process employs a constant current
titration of 1C (3.5 A) for 30 s, inducing an SOC change of 0.8 %. This is
followed by a 600-second rest period to allow the electrochemical
properties to regain equilibrium. If the cell voltage is greater than or
equal to 2.4 V at the end of the rest period, further titrations are per­
formed, thus conducting GITT across the entire SOC spectrum. If the
voltage drops below 1.4 V during titration, the process is halted to
prevent potential damage to the cell. The GITT sequence was performed
at constant temperatures at − 20 ◦ C, 0 ◦ C, 20 ◦ C, 40 ◦ C, and 60 ◦ C. In the
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Fig. 9. HPPC test for the identification of R0 [42].

study, the IPIA is introduced. The transient forms of Eq. (24) for the DP
model can be represented as
∑
n
Ub (t) = UOC (t) − Ib (t)R0 (SOC, T) − Ui (t) (56)
i=1,2

Ui (t) = Ri (SOC, T)I(t)e− t/Ri (SOC,T)Ci (SOC,T)

(57)

∑
n
Up (t) = c + ai e− t/τi
(58)
i=1,2

The time constant τi=RiCi of each RC network can then be rewritten

as Eq. (52), where constant values are regrouped in constant c. Subse­
quently, the identification of the parameters can be obtained by the
nonlinear least square method curve-fitting on the voltage Up with the
objective function given in Eq. (52), where ai is a fitting coefficient. Once
Fig. 10. Representation of the iterative parameter identification algorithm
the coefficients are fitted, the values of Ri and Ci are obtained using Eq.
(IPIA) [71].
(53) as [89]:

Ri =
ai
; Ci =
1
(59) were performed by Shi et al. [78] and Saqli et al. [79]. The detailed
Ip ai parameter identification methods used in the reviewed studies utilizing
simple models and ECMs are summarized in Table 7.
Fig. 10 illustrates the basic concept of the IPIA. Initially, the algo­
rithm executes a first-order parameter identification, and the results a1*
and t1* are then employed as the initial values for a1 and t1 in the first- 7.4. Parameter identification of physics-based electrochemical model
order terms of a second-order equation. The second-order parameters a2
and t2 are assigned starting values that align with the magnitude order The reliability of the Newman P2D model is significantly influenced
where the solution is expected to converge relative to a1 and t1. The by the accuracy of its parameters, which are tailored to the unique
parameter identification results are presented in Fig. 11. Similar studies design and chemistry of each cell. Hence, the parameters from the one-
cell design are not universally applicable. This makes the process of

12
J. Liu et al.
Fig. 11. Identified 1st-order and 2nd-order RC (DP) model parameters [71].
finding an appropriate set of parameters for a specific battery one of the
primary challenges in battery modeling. Some researchers may attempt
to fit the model for alignment with the experimentally measured voltage
[114]. However, because of the complexity of the model and the
extensive number of parameters, this method is often not viable without
a well-informed initial estimate of the parameters. Using parameters
sourced from the literature is another option; however, inconsistencies
can occur if the parameters are collected from various sources, poten­
tially leading to inaccurate predictions. Therefore, the experimental
measurement of these parameters could offer a more robust method,
potentially leading to more accurate model predictions [127]. The
Newman P2D model requires more than 30 parameters to accurately
depict the physical, chemical, and electrochemical properties of a cell,
enabling the simulation of its behavior. The precise value depends on the
definition of the model. Determining these parameter values is a com­
plex and time-consuming task, necessitating various characterization
and analytical techniques. This task is even more demanding in com­
mercial cell chemistry because manufacturers do not typically disclose
the parameter, composition, or component information in their
13
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
specification sheets. As a common practice within the modeling com­
munity, parameter sets are often sourced from literature, albeit without
necessarily tracing their origins [127]. Similarly, it can be observed in
this study that almost all the reviewed work did not explicitly state their
methods for parameter identification.
In this case, owing to the complexity of the parameter identification
method for the P2D model, a detailed explanation is not provided. In a
study by Chen et al. [127], OCV, lithium stoichiometry, activation en­
ergy, and exchange current coefficient were obtained using GITT and
EIS measurements. The apparent diffusion coefficients were determined
by applying the Sand equation to the voltage transient that occurs
during the current pulse test. Li et al. [128] identified the diffusion co­
efficient, surface reaction rate, and exchange current density using
analytical solutions from potentiostatic intermittent titration technique
(PITT) measurements. The aforementioned studies can provide a refer­
ence for the estimation and identification of parameters in P2D models.
To obtain more accurate model parameters, a profound understanding
of the electrochemical principles of batteries and more precise experi­
mental equipment and rational experimental methods, are required.
J. Liu et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748

Table 7
Parameter identification methods used in the studies utilizing simple models and ECMs.
Author Test Capacity Amplitude Pulse duration Rest duration ΔSOC Temperature [ ◦ C] No. of Thermal model
method [Ah] [s] [s] RC

Han et al. [41] – 94 0.33C – 3h 5% 25 0 3D CFD

E et al. [42] HPPC 2.6 0.33C 30s 40s 10 % 0, 15, 30, 45 0 3D CFD
Tan et al. [47] Pulse test 3.2 0.3C 600 7200s – 20, 30, 40 0 3D CFD
Shen et al. [48] HPPC 8 3C, 5C, 7C, 9C – – – 30 0 3D CFD
Kang et al. [53] Pulse test 3.3 1C 180 3600 5% 26 0 3D CFD
Wang et al. [63] HPPC 35 1C 10 40 5% 25 2 –
Estevez et al. Pulse test 59.3 1C 30 – 10 % 0, 25, 40 1 3d Lumped
[68]
Zhu et al. [69] Pulse test 2.5 1C ~ 10C 30 7200 – − 20 ~ 45 1 1D-Lumped
He et al. [74] HPPC 43 – – 3600 5% 0, 10, 25, 45 2 1D-Lumped/
CFD
Hou et al. [75] HPPC 22 0.5C 20 40 10 % 20 2 1D-Lumped
Wang et al. [76] Pulse test 2.5 1C, 2C – 7200 – 0 ~ 45 2 1D-Lumped
Saqli et al. [79] HPPC 12 1C 10 40 10 % − 10, 0, 15, 25, 35, 2 3D CFD
45
Behi et al. [80] HPPC 23 8C 10 10 – 25 2 3D CFD
Shi et al. [78,88] HPPC 22 0.5C, 1C, 2C, – 30 5% 5, 25, 45 2 1D-Lumped
3C
Damay et al. GITT – 0.2C ~ 2C – 1800 2.50 % 5 ~ 45 1 1D-Lumped
[87]

8. Conclusions methodology introduced here could be easily adapted to include

The thermal management and the accurate prediction of heat gen­
eration in Lithium-ion batteries remain to be significant challenges in
battery technology, thereby impacting the safety, performance, and
lifespan of batteries in applications such as electric vehicles and energy
storage systems. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of
various thermal coupled battery models, including simple battery
models, ECM, and physics-based electrochemical models. Moreover,
parameter identification methods for these models have been discussed.
The general conclusions of this review are as follows:
(1) Simple battery models cannot fully reflect the dynamic and
electrochemical characteristics of a battery and are typically
coupled with three-dimensional CFD thermal models to design,
evaluate, optimize, and improve battery thermal management
systems. These studies are often not particularly sensitive to the
inherent properties of batteries.
(2) ECM, owing to its intricate structure, offers a broader depiction of
battery performance, integrating numerous resistive and capaci­
tive elements to better portray the dynamic behavior. The Rint
model simplifies this process by employing a singular resistance
element. This complexity generally enhances the precision of
ECM when coupled with a CFD model to forecast the battery’s
response under diverse operating conditions. Even with regard to
thermal predictions, the elaborate portrayal of internal battery
procedures using ECM could lead to more precise outcomes.
(3) The Newman P2D model is widely used in various physics-based
electrochemical methods. Although this model has high compu­
tational accuracy, its complexity and numerous parameters and
variables make it computationally intensive to solve. Hence, this
model is typically used only to analyze the performance of indi­
vidual battery units. Simplifying the model while ensuring
computational accuracy and applying it to the simulation of
large-scale battery pack thermal management systems is a chal­
lenging task.
(4) In addition, a so called Four-equation thermal abuse model is also
reviewed. . In the model, thermal runaway reactions are put into
four categories: solid electrolyte interface (SEI) decomposition
reactions, negative electrode-electrolyte reactions, positive
electrode-electrolyte reactions, and electrolyte decomposition
reactions. The model does not take into account reactions
involving lithium metal and combustion processes. However, the
such reactions.
(5) The key parameters for thermally coupled battery modeling were
identified. Considering the wide range of methodologies for
identifying parameters in battery models, this paper offers an
overview and example-based explanation of several frequently
employed techniques for parameter identification within the
thermal models of batteries.
(6) This study presents some limitations that should be addressed.
For example, thermal models within coupled models have not
been extensively elaborated. Additionally, less commonly used
battery thermal models, such as the NTGK model [129–134],
were not considered.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the 2020 Yeungnam University
Research Grant.
References
[1] J. Jaguemont, J.V. Mierlo, A comprehensive review of future thermal
management systems for battery-electrified vehicles, J. Energy Storage 31
(2020), 101551.
[2] E. Alptekin, Emission, injection and combustion characteristics of biodiesel and
oxygenated fuel blends in a common rail diesel engine, Energy 119 (2017) 44–52.
[3] P.R. Tete, M.M. Gupta, S.S. Joshi, Developments in battery thermal management
systems for electric vehicles: a technical review, J. Energy Storage 35 (2021),
102255.
[4] A.K. Thakur, R. Prabakaran, M.R. Elkadeem, S.W. Sharshir, M. Arıcı, C. Wang,
W. Zhao, J.Y. Hwang, R. Saidur, A state of art review and future viewpoint on
advance cooling techniques for Lithium–ion battery system of electric vehicles,
J. Energy Storage 32 (2020), 101771.
[5] Z. Shen, S. Chen, X. Liu, B. Chen, A review on thermal management performance
enhancement of phase change materials for vehicle lithium-ion batteries, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 148 (2021), 111301.

14
J. Liu et al.
[6] J. Kim, J. Oh, H. Lee, Review on battery thermal management system for electric
vehicles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 149 (2019) 192–212.
[7] V. Mali, R. Saxena, K. Kumar, A. Kalam, B. Tripathi, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
151 (2021), 111611.
[8] Q.L. Yue a, C.X. He, M.C. Wu, T.S. Zhao, Advances in thermal management
systems for next-generation power batteries, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 181 (2021),
121853.
[9] D.K. Sharma, A. Prabhakar, A review on air cooled and air centric hybrid thermal
management techniques for Li-ion battery packs in electric vehicles, J. Energy
Storage 41 (2021), 102885.
[10] L. Yang, F. Zhou, L. Sun, S. Wang, Thermal management of lithium-ion batteries
with nanofluids and nano-phase change materials: a review, J. Power Sources 539
(2022), 231605.
[11] A.A. Hakeem Akinlabi, D. Solyali, Configuration, design, and optimization of air-
cooled battery thermal management system for electric vehicles: a review,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 125 (2020), 109815.
[12] Wang Zichen, Du Changqing, A comprehensive review on thermal management
systems for power lithium-ion batteries, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 139 (2021),
110685.
[13] Z. Chen, Y. Qin, Z. Dong, J. Zheng, Y. Liu, Numerical study on the heat generation
and thermal control of lithium-ion battery, Appl. Therm. Eng. 221 (2023),
119852.
[14] S. Abada, G. Marlair, A. Lecocq, M. Petit, V. Sauvant-Moynot, F. Huet, Safety
focused modeling of lithium-ion batteries: a review, J. Power Sources 306 (2016)
178–192.
[15] V.G. Choudharia, A.S. Dhoblea, T.M. Sathe, A review on effect of heat generation
and various thermal management systems for lithium ion battery used for electric
vehicle, J. Energy Storage 32 (2020), 101729.
[16] X. Zhang, Z. Li, L. Luo, Y. Fan, Z. Du, A review on thermal management of
lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles, Energy 238 (2022), 121652.
[17] Y. Zeng, D. Chalise, S.D. Lubner, S. Kaur, R.S. Prasher, A review of thermal
physics and management inside lithium-ion batteries for high energy density and
fast charging, Energy Storage Mater 41 (2021) 264–288.
[18] G. Zhao, X. Wang, M. Negnevitsky, H. Zhang, A review of air-cooling battery
thermal management systems for electric and hybrid electric vehicles, J. Power
Sources 501 (2021), 230001.
[19] Y. Denga, C. Feng, J. E, H. Zhua, J. Chen, M. Wen, H. Yin, Effects of different
coolants and cooling strategies on the cooling performance of the power lithium
ion battery system: a review, Appl. Therm. Eng. 142 (2018) 10–29.
[20] C. Roe, X. Feng, G. White, R. Li, H. Wang, X. Rui, C. Li, F. Zhang, V.r Null,
M. Parkes, Y. Patel, Y. Wang, H. Wang, M. Ouyang, G. Offer, B. Wu, Immersion
cooling for lithium-ion batteries – A review, J. Power Sources 525 (2022),
231094.
[21] M. Bernagozzi, A. Georgoulas, N. Mich´e, M. Marengo, Heat pipes in battery
thermal management systems for electric vehicles: a critical review, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 219 (2023), 119495.
[22] D.M. Weragoda, G. Tian, A. Burkitbayev, K. Lo, T. Zhang, A comprehensive
review on heat pipe based battery thermal management systems, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 224 (2023), 120070.
[23] G. Murali, G.S.N. Sravya, J. Jaya, V.N. Vamsi, A review on hybrid thermal
management of battery packs and it’s cooling performance by enhanced PCM,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 150 (2021), 111513.
[24] J. Luo, D. Zou, Y. Wang, S. Wang, L. Huang, Battery thermal management systems
(BTMs) based on phase change material (PCM): a comprehensive review, Chem.
Eng. J. 430 (2022), 132741.
[25] A. Wazeer, A. Das, C. Abeykoon, A. Sinha, A. Karmakar, Phase change materials
for battery thermal management of electric and hybrid vehicles: a review, Energy
Nexus 7 (2022), 100131.
[26] Z. Yu, J. Zhang, W. Pan, A review of battery thermal management systems about
heat pipe and phase change materials, J. Energy Storage 62 (2023), 106827.
[27] J.R. Patel, M.K. Rathod, Recent developments in the passive and hybrid thermal
management techniques of lithium-ion batteries, J. Power Sources 480 (2020),
228820.
[28] A. Fotouhi, D.J. Auger, K. Propp, S. Longo, M. Wild, A review on electric vehicle
battery modelling: from Lithium-ion toward Lithium-Sulphur, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 56 (2016) 1008–1021.
[29] C. Zhang, K. Li, S. Mcloone, Z. Yang, Battery Modelling Methods for Electric
Vehicles - A Review, in: Proceedings of the European Control Conference (ECC),
Strasbourg, France, 2014, pp. 2673–2678.
[30] B. Lamrani, B...E. Lebrouhi, Y. Khattari, T. Kousksou, A simplified thermal model
for a lithium-ion battery pack with phase change material thermal management
system, J. Energy Storage 44 (2021), 103377.
[31] D. Bernardi, E. Pawlikowski, J. Newman, A general energy balance for battery
systems, J. Electrochem. Soc. 132 (1985) 5–12.
[32] S. Wang, S. Ji, Y. Zhu, A comparative study of cooling schemes for laminated
lithium-ion batteries, Appl. Therm. Eng. 182 (2021), 116040.
[33] W. Shi, J. Zheng, J. Xiao, X. Chen, B.J. Polzin, J. Zhang, The effect of entropy and
enthalpy changes on the thermal behavior of li-mn-rich layered composite
cathode materials, J. Electrochem. Soc. (163–3) (2016) A571–A577.
[34] M. Akbarzadeh, J. Jaguemont, T. Kalogiannis, D. Karimi, J. He, L. Jin, P. Xie, J.
V. Mierlo, M. Berecibar, A novel liquid cooling plate concept for thermal
management of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles, Energy Conv. Manag.
231 (2021), 113862.
[35] S. Chen, X. Peng, N. Bao, A. Garg, A comprehensive analysis and optimization
process for an integrated liquid cooling plate for a prismatic lithium-ion battery
module, Appl. Therm. Eng. 156 (2019) 324–339.
15
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
[36] H. Behia, D. Karimi, M. Behi, M. Ghanbarpour, J. Jaguemont, M.A. Sokkeha, F.
H. Gandoman, M. Berecibar, J.V. Mierlo, 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.
[37] M. Akbarzadeh, T. Kalogiannis, J. Jaguemont, L. Jin, H. Behi, D. Karimi,
H. Beheshti, J.V. Mierlo, M. Berecibar, A comparative study between air cooling
and liquid cooling thermal management systems for a high-energy lithium-ion
battery module, Appl. Therm. Eng. 198 (2021), 117503.
[38] H. Liu, S. Ahmad, Y. Shi, J. Zhao, A parametric study of a hybrid battery thermal
management system that couples PCM/copper foam composite with helical liquid
channel cooling, Energy 231 (2021), 120869.
[39] H. Wang, T. Tao, J. Xu, X. Mei, X. Liu, P. Gou, Cooling capacity of a novel
modular liquid-cooled battery thermal management system for cylindrical
lithium ion batteries, Appl. Therm. Eng. 178 (2020), 115591.
[40] S. Lee, U. Han, H. Lee, Development of a hybrid battery thermal management
system coupled with phase change material under fast charging conditions,
Energy Conv. Manag. 268 (2022), 116015.
[41] U. Han, H. Kang, J. Song, J. Oh, H. Lee, Development of dynamic battery thermal
model integrated with driving cycles for EV applications, Energy Conv. Manag.
250 (2021), 114882.
[42] J. E, M. Yue, J. Chen, H. Zhu, Y. Deng, Y. Zhu, F. Zhang, M. Wen, B. Zhang,
S. Kang, Effects of the different air cooling strategies on cooling performance of a
lithium-ion battery module with baffle, Appl. Therm. Eng. 144 (2018) 231–241.
[43] J. Cao, M. Luo, X. Fang, Z. Ling, Z. Zhang, Liquid cooling with phase change
materials for cylindrical Li-ion batteries: an experimental and numerical study,
Energy 191 (2020), 116565.
[44] L.H. Sawa, H.M. Poona, H.S. Thiama, Z. Cai, W.T. Chong, N.A. Pambudi, Y.
J. King, Novel thermal management system using mist cooling for lithium-ion
battery packs, Appl. Energy 223 (2018) 146–158.
[45] Z. Tang, S. Wang, Z. Liu, J. Cheng, Numerical analysis of temperature uniformity
of a liquid cooling battery module composed of heat-conducting blocks with
gradient contact surface angles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 178 (2020), 115509.
[46] Kausthubharam, P.K. Koorata, N. Chandrasekaran, Numerical investigation of
cooling performance of a novel air-cooled thermal management system for
cylindrical Li-ion battery module, Appl. Therm. Eng. 193 (2021), 116961.
[47] X. Tan, P. Lyu, Y. Fan, J. Rao, K. Ouyang, Numerical investigation of the direct
liquid cooling of a fast-charging lithium-ion battery pack in hydrofluoroether,
Appl. Therm. Eng. 196 (2021), 117279.
[48] L. Sheng, L. Su, H. Zhang, K. Li, Y. Fang, W. Ye, Y. Fang, Numerical investigation
on a lithium ion battery thermal management utilizing a serpentine-channel
liquid cooling plate exchanger, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 141 (2019) 658–668.
[49] G. Lian, J. Li, J. He, J. Tian, X. Chen, L. Chen, Numerical investigation on a
unitization-based thermal management for cylindrical lithium-ion batteries,
Energy Rep 8 (2022) 4608–4621.
[50] Z. An, X. Chen, L. Zhao, Z. Gao, Numerical investigation on integrated thermal
management for a lithiumion battery module with a composite phase change
material and liquid cooling, Appl. Therm. Eng. 163 (2019), 114345.
[51] P. Saechan, I. Dhuchakallay, Numerical study on the air-cooled thermal
management of Lithium-ion battery pack for electrical vehicles, Energy Rep 8
(2022) 1264–1270.
[52] D.S. Jang, S. Yun, S.H. Hong, W. Cho, Y. Kim, Performance characteristics of a
novel heat pipe-assisted liquid cooling system for the thermal management of
lithium-ion batteries, Energy Conv. Manag. 251 (2022), 115001.
[53] T. Kang, P.Yeon. Lee, S. Kwon, K. Yoo, J. Kim, Regional resistance-based spatial
thermal model for checking non-uniformed temperature distribution and
evolution of pouch type lithium-ion batteries, Appl. Therm. Eng. 192 (2021),
116936.
[54] M. Shen, Q. Gao, Structure design and effect analysis on refrigerant cooling
enhancement of battery thermal management system for electric vehicles,
J. Energy Storage 32 (2020), 101940.
[55] Y. Huang, S. Wang, Y. Lua, R. Huang, X. Yu, Study on a liquid cooled battery
thermal management system pertaining to the transient regime, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 180 (2020), 115793.
[56] Y. Chung, M.Soo. Kim, Thermal analysis and pack level design of battery thermal
management system with liquid cooling for electric vehicles, Energy Conv.
Manag. 196 (2019) 105–116.
[57] W. Yanga, F. Zhou, H. Zhoua, Q. Wang, J. Kong, Thermal performance of
cylindrical lithium-ion battery thermal management system integrated with mini-
channel liquid cooling and air cooling, Appl. Therm. Eng. 175 (2020), 115331.
[58] S.Ho. Hong, D.S. Jang, S. Park, S. Yun, Y. Kim, Thermal performance of direct
two-phase refrigerant cooling for lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 173 (2020), 115213.
[59] Y. Wang, Y. Yu, Z. Jing, C. Wang, G. Zhou, W. Zhao, Thermal performance of
lithium-ion batteries applying forced air cooling with an improved aluminum
foam heat sink design, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 167 (2021), 120827.
[60] A.R. Sharma, C.S. Sai, A. Kumar, R.V.J. Reddy, D. Danyharsha, R. Jilte, Three-
dimensional CFD study on heat dissipation in cylindrical lithium-ion battery
module, Mater. Today 46 (2021) 10964–10968.
[61] F. Li, F. Lan, J. Chen, Dynamic thermal characteristics of heat pipe via segmented
thermal resistance model for electric vehicle battery cooling, J. Power Sources
321 (2016) 57–70.
[62] M. Baši, D. Vukadinović, V. Višnjić, I. Rakić, Dynamic equivalent circuit models of
lead-acid batteries - a performance comparison, IFAC PapersOnLine 55-4 (2022)
189–194.
J. Liu et al.
[63] Q. Wang, J. Wang, P. Zhao, J. Kang, F. Yan, C. Du, Correlation between the model
accuracy and model-based SOC estimation, Electrochim. Acta 228 (2017)
146–159.
[64] K.S. Hariharan, A coupled nonlinear equivalent circuit - Thermal model for
lithium ion cells, J. Power Sources 227 (2013) 171–176.
[65] W. Cao, Y. Qiu, P. Peng, F. Jiang, A full-scale electrical-thermal-fluidic coupling
model for li-ion battery energy storage systems, Appl. Therm. Eng. 185 (2021),
116360.
[66] L. Calearo, A. Thingvad, C. Ziras, M. Marinelli, A methodology to model and
validate electro-thermal-aging dynamics of electric vehicle battery packs,
J. Energy Storage 55 (2022), 105538.
[67] Q. Wang, Y. He, J. Shen, Z. Ma, G. Zhong, A unified modeling framework for
lithium-ion batteries: an artificial neural network based thermal coupled
equivalent circuit model approach, Energy 138 (2017) 118–132.
[68] M.A.P. Estevez, S. Calligaro, O. Bottesi, C. Caligiuri, M. Renzi, An electro-thermal
model and its electrical parameters estimation procedure in a lithium-ion battery
cell, Energy 234 (2021), 121296.
[69] J. Zhua, M. Knapp, M.S.D. Darma, Q. Fang, X. Wang, H. Dai, X. Wei,
H. Ehrenberg, An improved electro-thermal battery model complemented by
current dependent parameters for vehicular low temperature application, Appl.
Energy 248 (2019) 149–161.
[70] M. Seo, Y. Song, J. Kim, S.W. Paek, G. Kim, S.W. Kim, Innovative lumped-battery
model for state of charge estimation of lithium-ion batteries under various
ambient temperatures, Energy 226 (2021), 120301.
[71] F. LeBel, P. Messier, A. Sari, J.P.F. Troṽao, Lithium-ion cell equivalent circuit
model identification by galvanostatic intermittent titration technique, J. Energy
Storage 54 (2022), 105303.
[72] Z. Liu, X. Liu, H. Meng, L. Guo, Z. Zhang, Numerical analysis of the thermal
performance of a liquid cooling battery module based on the gradient ratio flow
velocity and gradient increment tube diameter, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 175
(2021), 121338.
[73] Z. Xu, C. Zhang, B. Sun, S. Liu, The electric-thermal coupling simulation and state
estimation of lithium-ion battery, J. Energy Storage 58 (2023), 106431.
[74] J. He, M.S. Hosen, R. Youssef, T. Kalogiannis, J.V. Mierlo, M. Berecibar, A lumped
electro-thermal model for a battery module with a novel hybrid cooling system,
Appl. Therm. Eng. 221 (2023), 119874.
[75] G. Hou, X. Liu, W. He, C. Wang, J. Zhang, X. Zeng, Z. Li, D. Shao, An equivalent
circuit model for battery thermal management system using phase change
material and liquid cooling coupling, J. Energy Storage 55 (2022), 105834.
[76] N. Wang, A. Chen, W. Zhao, R. Zhu, B. Duan, An online temperature estimation
for cylindrical lithium-ion batteries based on simplified distribution electrical-
thermal model, J. Energy Storage 55 (2022), 105326.
[77] K. Kirad, M. Chaudhari, Design of cell spacing in lithium-ion battery module for
improvement in cooling performance of the battery thermal management system,
J. Power Sources 481 (2021), 229016.
[78] H. Shi, S. Wang, C. Fernandez, C. Yu, W. Xu, B.E. Dablu, L. Wang, Improved
multi-time scale lumped thermoelectric coupling modeling and parameter
dispersion evaluation of lithium-ion batteries, Appl. Energy 324 (2022), 119789.
[79] K. Saqli, H. Bouchareb, N.K. M’sirdi, M.O. Bentaie, Lithium-ion battery electro-
thermal modelling and internal states co-estimation for electric vehicles,
J. Energy Storage 63 (2023), 107072.
[80] H. Behi, D. Karimi, J. Jaguemont, F.H. Gandoman, T. Kalogiannis, M. Berecibar,
J.V. Mierlo, Novel thermal management methods to improve the performance of
the Li-ion batteries in high discharge current applications, Energy 224 (2021),
120165.
[81] C. Zhang, W. Allafi, Q. Dinh, P. Ascencio, J. Marco, Online estimation of battery
equivalent circuit model parameters and state of charge using decoupled least
squares technique, Energy 142 (2018) 678–688.
[82] Y. Li, Z. Zhou, W.T. Wu, Three-dimensional thermal modeling of Li-ion battery
cell and 50V Li-ion battery pack cooled by mini-channel cold plate, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 147 (2019) 829–840.
[83] C. Liu, W. Liu, L. Wang, G. Hu, L. Ma, B. Ren, A new method of modeling and state
of charge estimation of the battery, J. Power Sources 320 (2016) 1–12.
[84] X. Lin, H.E. Perez, S. Mohan, J.B. Siegel, A.G. Stefanopoulou, Y. Ding, M.
P. Castanier, A lumped-parameter electro-thermal model for cylindrical batteries,
J. Power Sources 257 (2014) 1–11.
[85] L.H. Saw, Y. Ye, A.A.O. Tay, Electro-thermal characterization of Lithium Iron
Phosphate cell with equivalent circuit modeling, Energy Conv. Manag. 87 (2014)
367–377.
[86] L. Chen, M. Zhang, Y. Ding, S. Wu, Y. Li, G. Liang, H. Li, H. Pan, Estimation the
internal resistance of lithium-ion-battery using a multi-factor dynamic internal
resistance model with an error compensation strategy, Energy Rep 7 (2021)
3050–3059.
[87] N. Damay, C. Forgez, M.P. Bichat, G. Friedrich, Thermal modeling of large
prismatic LiFePO4/graphite battery. Coupled thermal and heat generation
models for characterization and simulation, J. Power Sources 283 (2015) 37–45.
[88] H. Shi, L. Wang, S. Wang, C. Fernandez, X. Xiong, B.E. Dablu, W. Xu, A novel
lumped thermal characteristic modeling strategy for the online adaptive
temperature and parameter co-estimation of vehicle lithium-ion batteries,
J. Energy Storage 50 (2022), 104309.
[89] C.X. He, Q.L. Yue, M.C. Wu, Q. Chen, T.S. Zhao, A 3D electrochemical-thermal
coupled model for electrochemical and thermal analysis of pouch-type lithium-
ion batteries, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 181 (2021), 121855.
[90] Y. Li, F. Qi, H. Guo, Z. Guo, M. Li, W. Wu, Characteristic investigation of an
electrochemical-thermal coupled model for a LiFePO4/Graphene hybrid cathode
lithium-ion battery, Case Stud, Therm. Eng. 13 (2019), 100387.
16
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
[91] C. Hong, H. Cho, D. Hong, S. Oh, Y. Kim, An improved thermal single particle
model and parameter estimation for high-capacity battery cell, Electrochim. Acta
439 (2023), 141638.
[92] N. Baba, H. Yoshida, M. Nagaoka, C. Okuda, S. Kawauchi, Numerical simulation
of thermal behavior of lithium-ion secondary batteries using the enhanced single
particle model, J. Power Sources 252 (2014) 214–228.
[93] F.B. Planella, M. Sheikh, W.D. Widanage, Systematic derivation and validation of
a re duce d thermal-electrochemical model for lithium-ion batteries using
asymptotic methods, Electrochim. Acta 388 (2021), 138524.
[94] M. Doyle, T.F. Fuller, J. Newman, Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge
of the lithium/polymer/insertion cell, J. Electrochem. Soc. 140-6 (1993)
1526–1533.
[95] Ansys Fluent Theory Guide.
[96] B. Balagopal, M. Chow, Effect of anode conductivity degradation on the thevenin
circuit model of lithium ion batteries, in: Proceedings of the IECON - 42nd Annual
Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Florence, Italy, 2016,
pp. 2028–2033.
[97] S. Panchal, M. Mathew, R. Fraser, M. Fowler, Electrochemical thermal modeling
and experimental measurements of 18650 cylindrical lithium-ion battery during
discharge cycle for an EV, Appl. Therm. Eng. 135 (2018) 123–132.
[98] M. Al-Zareer, I. Dincer, M.A. Rosen, A novel approach for performance
improvement of liquid to vapor based battery cooling systems, Energy Conv.
Manag 187 (2019) 191–204.
[99] F. Bahiraei, M. Ghalkhani, A. Fartaj, G. Nazri, A pseudo 3D electrochemical-
thermal modeling and analysis of a lithium-ion battery for electric vehicle
thermal management applications, Appl. Therm. Eng. 125 (2017) 904–918.
[100] M. Xu, Z. Zhang, X. Wang, L. Jia, L. Yang, A pseudo three-dimensional
electrochemicalethermal model of a prismatic LiFePO4 battery during discharge
process, Energy 80 (2015) 303–317.
[101] E. Hosseinzadeh, R. Genieser, D. Worwood, A. Barai, J. Marco, P. Jennings,
A systematic approach for electrochemical-thermal modelling of a large format
lithium-ion battery for electric vehicle application, J. Power Sources 382 (2018)
77–94.
[102] S.D. Chitta, C. Akkaldevi, J. Jaidi, S. Panchal, M. Fowler, R. Fraser, Comparison of
lumped and 1D electrochemical models for prismatic 20Ah LiFePO4 battery
sandwiched between minichannel cold-plates, Appl. Therm. Eng. 199 (2021),
117586.
[103] H. Li, C. Liu, A. Saini, Y. Wang, H. Jiang, T. Yang, L. Chen, C. Pan, H. Shen,
Coupling multi-physics simulation and response surface methodology for the
thermal optimization of ternary prismatic lithium-ion battery, J. Power Sources
438 (2019), 226974.
[104] H. Li, A. Saini, C. Liu, J. Yang, Y. Wang, T. Yang, C. Pan, L. Chen, H. Jiang,
Electrochemical and thermal characteristics of prismatic lithium-ion battery
based on a three-dimensional electrochemical-thermal coupled model, J. Energy
Storage 42 (2021), 102976.
[105] M. Mastalia, E. Foreman, A. Modjtahedi, E. Samadani, A. Amirfazli, S. Farhad, R.
A. Fraser, M. Fowler, Electrochemical-thermal modeling and experimental
validation of commercial graphite/LiFePO4 pouch lithium-ion batteries, Int. J.
Therm. Sci. 129 (2018) 218–230.
[106] X. Zhang, P. Li, B. Huang, H. Zhang, Numerical investigation on the thermal
behavior of cylindrical lithium-ion batteries based on the electrochemical-thermal
coupling model, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 199 (2022), 123449.
[107] A. Greco, X. Jiang, A coupled thermal and electrochemical study of lithium-ion
battery cooled by paraffin/porous-graphite-matrix composite, J. Power Sources
315 (2016) 127–139.
[108] J. Chiew, C.S. Chinb, W.D. Toh, Z. Gao, J. Jia, C.Z. Zhang, A pseudo three-
dimensional electrochemical-thermal model of a cylindrical LiFePO4/graphite
battery, 147 (2019) 450–463.
[109] M. Guo, G. Kim, R.E. White, A three-dimensional multi-physics model for a Li-ion
battery, J. Power Sources 240 (2013) 80–94.
[110] Y. Jiang, L. Zhang, G. Offer, H. Wang, A user-friendly lithium battery simulator
based on open-source CFD, Digital Chem. Eng. 5 (2022), 100055.
[111] P.G. Zadeh, E. Gholamalizadeh, Y. Wang, J.D. Chung, Electrochemical modeling
of a thermal management system for cylindrical lithium-ion battery pack
considering battery capacity fade, Case Stud, Therm. Eng. 32 (2022), 101878.
[112] S. Panchala, M. Mathew, R. Fraser, M. Fowler, Electrochemical thermal modeling
and experimental measurements of 18650 cylindrical lithium-ion battery during
discharge cycle for an EV, Appl. Therm. Eng. 135 (2018) 123–132.
[113] P. Nie, S. Zhang, A. Ran, C. Yang, S. Chen, Z. Li, X. Zhang, W. Deng, T. Liu,
F. Kang, G. Wei, Full-cycle electrochemical-thermal coupling analysis for
commercial lithium-ion batteries, Appl. Therm. Eng. 184 (2021), 116258.
[114] A.J. Crawford, D. Choi, P.J. Balducci, V.R. Subramanian, V.V. Viswanathan,
Lithium-ion battery physics and statistics-based state of health model, J. Power
Sources 501 (2021), 230032.
[115] M.W. Tahir, C. Merten, Multi-scale thermal modeling, experimental validation,
and thermal characterization of a high-power lithium-ion cell for automobile
application, Energy Conv. Manag. 258 (2022), 115490.
[116] Y. Yang, L. Chen, L. Yang, X. Du, Numerical study of combined air and phase
change cooling for lithium-ion battery during dynamic cycles, Int. J. Therm. Sci.
165 (2021), 106968.
[117] Y. Liu, S. Tang, L. Li, F. Liu, L. Jiang, M. Jia, Y. Ai, C. Yao, H. Gu, Simulation and
parameter identification based on electrochemical-thermal coupling model of
power lithium ion-battery, J. Alloy. Compd. 844 (2020), 156003.
[118] Z. Liu, H. Wang, C. Yang, J. Zhao, Simulation study of lithium-ion battery thermal
management system based on a variable flow velocity method with liquid metal,
Appl. Therm. Eng. 179 (2020), 115578.
J. Liu et al.
[119] F. Chen, W. Zhu, X. Kong, Y. Huang, Y. Wang, Y. Zheng, D. Ren, Study on the
Homogeneity of Large-Size Blade Lithium-Ion Batteries Based on Thermoelectric
Coupling Model Simulation, Energies 15-24 (2022) 9556.
[120] Z. Geng, J. Groot, T. Thiringer, A time and cost effective method for entropic
coefficient determination of a large commercial battery cell, IEEE Trans. Trans.
Electrif. 6 (2020) 257–266.
[121] S. Shahid, M.A. Chaab, A review of thermal runaway prevention and mitigation
strategies for lithium-ion batteries, Energy Conv. Manag X. 16 (2022), 100310.
[122] X. Feng, D. Ren, X. He, M. Ouyang, Mitigating thermal runaway of lithium-ion
batteries, Joule 4 (2020) 743–770.
[123] G.H. Kim, A. Pesaran, R. Spotnitz, A three-dimensional thermal abuse model for
lithium-ion cells, J. Power Sources. 170 (2007) 476–489.
[124] P.T. Coman, E.C. Darcy, C.T. Veje, R.E. White, Modelling Li-ion cell thermal
runaway triggered by an internal short circuit device using an efficiency factor
and arrhenius formulations, J. Electrochem. Soc. 164-4 (2017) A587–A593.
[125] Y. Li, G. Liu, Z. Li, Numerical modeling of thermal runaway in high-energy
lithium-ion battery packs induced by multipoint heating, Case Study, Therm. Eng.
38 (2022), 102335.
[126] G.K. Mertin, D. Wycisk, M. Oldenburger, G. Stoye, A. Fill, K.P. Birke, A.D. Wieck,
Dynamic measurement of the entropy coefficient for battery cells, J. Energy
Storage 51 (2022), 104361.
17
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 218 (2024) 124748
[127] C.H. Chen, F.B. Planella, K. O’Regan, D. Gastol, W.D. Widanage, E. Kendrick,
Development of experimental techniques for parameterization of multi-scale
lithium-ion battery models, J. Electrochem. Soc. 167 (2020), 080534.
[128] J. Li, F. Yang, X. Xiao, M.W. Verbrugge, Y.T. Cheng, Potentiostatic intermittent
titration technique (PITT) for spherical particles with finite interfacial kinetics,
Electrochim. Acta 75 (2012) 56–61.
[129] M.S. Patil, J.H. Seo, M.Y. Lee, A novel dielectric fluid immersion cooling
technology for Li-ion battery thermal management, Energy Conv. Manag. 229
(2021), 113715.
[130] U. Morali, A numerical and statistical implementation of a thermal model for a
lithium-ion battery, Energy 240 (2022), 122486.
[131] O. Mypati, T. Anwaar, D. Mitra, S.K. Pal, P. Srirangam, Characterization and
modelling of Al and Cu busbar during charging and discharging of Li-ion battery
for electric vehicles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 218 (2023), 119239.
[132] T.F. Yang, P.Y. Lin, L.T. Teng, S. Rashidi, W.M. Yan, Numerical and experimental
study on thermal management of NCM-21700 Li-ion battery, J. Power Sources
548 (2022), 232068.
[133] X. Li, J. Zhao, J. Duan, S. Panchal, J. Yuan, R. Fraser, M. Fowler, M. Chen,
Simulation of cooling plate effect on a battery module with different channel
arrangement, J. Energy Storage 49 (2022), 104113.
[134] H. Zhang, C. Li, R. Zhang, Y. Lin, H. Fang, Thermal analysis of a 6s4p Lithium-ion
battery pack cooled by cold plates based on a multi-domain modeling framework,
Appl. Therm. Eng. 173 (2020), 115216.