Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Thermal performance predictions for an HFE-7000 direct flow boiling T

cooled battery thermal management system for electric vehicles
⁎
Yan-Feng Wang , Jiang-Tao Wu
MOE Key Laboratory of Thermo-Fluid Science and Engineering, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, PR China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, a novel battery thermal management system (BTMS) using the dielectric, non-flammable HFE-
Nucleate boiling heat transfer 7000 refrigerant is proposed for electric vehicles (EVs). Its thermal performance is studied both numerically and
Hydrofluoroether refrigerant experimentally. The refrigerant flows and boils on the battery wall surfaces, which lowers the thermal contact
Battery thermal management system resistance as well as enhances the heat transfer process. Therefore, the thermal performance of the battery
Cooling performance
module is improved. The results indicate that forced convection heat transfer of the liquid refrigerant is dom-
inating in the control of the temperature rise in the battery module. The maximum battery temperature drops to
35.10 °C at 0.3 m s−1 inlet velocity and a 5 C discharge rate. In contrast, the temperature uniformity between
individual battery cells primarily depends on the nucleate boiling heat absorption and local perturbation of the
two-phase turbulent flow. A temperature difference of no more than 3.71 °C can be observed at 5 C discharge rate
and 0.1 m s - 1 . In addition, good agreement was found between the numerical results and experimental data.

1. Introduction
Developing battery electric vehicles (BEVs) [1] is an important
strategy for energy conservation and environmental protection [2].
Electric vehicles based on lithium-ion batteries have outstanding ad-
vantages such as zero-emission, long-endurance, etc. [3,4]. These are
gradually becoming an important development of new vehicles, with an
annual growth rate of 35% in China.
In general, the lithium-ion battery is highly sensitive to temperature
fluctuations. Its optimal working temperature range is between 15.0 °C
and 35.0 °C [5], and the temperature difference of the battery pack
should be controlled within 5.0 °C [6]. Thermal, electric and mechanical
abuse can make the battery to undergo severe exothermic chain reac-
tions [7,8]. Accordingly, the so-called thermal runaway is likely to take
place in the form of smoking, burning, explosion, etc. [9], which ser-
iously affects the reliability and safety of EVs. Therefore, the develop-
ment of highly efficient battery thermal management systems (BTMSs)
is of great significance in practical applications [10]. The BTMS can
effectively protect lithium-ion batteries from thermal runaway as well
as improve the thermal performance of EVs.
At present, commercial BTMSs mainly utilize air cooling [11], liquid
cooling [12] and R134a indirect cooling [13] strategies. The effects of
the convective heat transfer coefficient of nanofluids [14] and the
channel structure [15–17] on the cooling efficiency of BTMSs have been
investigated in depth. Because the optimal working temperature range
of the lithium-ion battery is very close to the ambient temperature, the
temperature difference that can be achieved by convective heat transfer
is relatively small. Heat transfer primarily depends on the heat ex-
change area, which is not conducive for further improving the pack
energy density.
Jannesari et al. [18] first incorporated potassium polyacrylate hy-
drogel into the thermal management of a 500 Wh cylindrical LiFePO4
battery pack. The results demonstrated a significant advantage in
controlling the battery pack temperature. Zhang et al. [19] confirmed
that a battery pack equipped with a sodium polyacrylate hydrogel-
based BTMS exhibited a lower capacity fading rate, which dropped by
approximately 66% compared to that at ambient conditions.
A BTMS using phase change material (PCM) [20] is considered a
potential competitor to the air/liquid-based BTMSs due to its superior
temperature uniformity. When RT48 paraffin wax was incorporated
into a battery pack of an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV), the
temperature difference could be controlled within 3.40 °C [21]. In ad-
dition, the PCM [20]/nanosilica [22]/expanded graphite [23–25]/foam
metal [26]/heat pipe array [27] combinations can effectively com-
pensate for the low thermal conductivity of the pure paraffin wax.
HFE refrigerants are also gradually introduced into the field of
BTMS, and these are expected to remedy the shortcomings of paraffin
wax [28]. A novel BTMS using indirect R134a refrigerant flow boiling
heat transfer in mini-channels showed an inspiring temperature-con-
trolling effect during the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) test [29].

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yfw112@xjtu.edu.cn (Y.-F. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112569
Received 18 September 2019; Received in revised form 30 January 2020; Accepted 31 January 2020
Available online 07 February 2020
0196-8904/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

Nomenclature Subscripts

A Area (m2 ) amb Ambient

cp Specific heat at constant pressure (J kg - 1 K - 1) b Battery
d Diameter (m ) dr Drift
DH Hydraulic diameter (m ) eff Effective
E Total energy (J kg - 1) ext External
h Sensible enthalpy (J kg - 1), Convective heat transfer coef- in Inlet
ficient (W m - 2 K - 1) int Internal
I Current (A ), Turbulence intensity (dimensionless) k Phase index
I Unit tensor (dimensionless) l Liquid phase
k Thermal conductivity (W m - 1 K - 1), Turbulent kinetic en- m Two-phase mixture
ergy (m2 s - 2 ) o Ohmic resistance
L Length (m ), Characteristic length (m ) ocv Open-circuit voltage
p Pressure (Pa ) p Polarization resistance
Pr Prandtl number (dimensionless) ref Reference
q Heat flux (W m - 2 ) t Turbulence
qm Mass flow rate (kg s - 1) v Vapor phase
qV Volume flow rate (L min - 1) w Wall surface
R Radius (m ), Resistance (mΩ)
Re Reynolds number (dimensionless) Abbreviations
S Heat source (W m - 3 )
T Temperature (°C) ABS Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene
u, v, w Velocity component in the x , y, z direction, respectively AUV Autonomous underwater vehicle
(m s−1) BEV Battery electric vehicle
U Velocity (m s - 1) BTMS Battery thermal management system
U Voltage (V ) CHF Critical heat flux
V Volume (m3 ) DC Direct current
We Weber number (dimensionless) DCIR Direct current internal resistance
x , y, z Cartesian coordinates (m ) EV Electric vehicle
GWP Global warming potential
Greek letters HFE Hydrofluoroether
IAC Interfacial area concentration
α Volume fraction (dimensionless) NEDC New European Driving Cycle
χ Interfacial area concentration (m2 m−3 ) ODP Ozone depletion potential
ε Turbulent dissipation rate (m2 s−3 ), Emissivity (di- PC Polycarbonate
mensionless) PCB Printed circuit board
μ Dynamic viscosity (Pa s ) PCM Phase change material
ν Kinematic viscosity (m2 s−1) RC Random collision
ρ Density (kg m−3) RKE Realizable k − ε
σ Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.67 × 10−8 W m−2 K−4 ), RTD Resistance temperature detector
Turbulent Prandtl number (dimensionless) SOC State of charge
τ Time (s ) TI Turbulent impact
Γ Stress tensor (Pa ) UDF User-defined function
WE Wake entrainment

Compared to the air/liquid-based cooling strategies, the indirect re-
frigerant cooling strategy exhibits higher substantial refrigeration cap-
ability, high cooling efficiency, and accurate temperature control.
When the battery pack is immersed into propane [30], liquid ammonia
[31], R1234yf [32], or HFE-7000 [33,34], the critical heat flux (CHF)
can be delayed by controlling the system pressure. Thus it is possible to
maintain relatively stable nucleate boiling heat transfer within the
battery pack. Compared to the air/liquid-based BTMSs, the indirect/
direct refrigerant-cooled BTMSs prove to exhibit higher heat transfer
efficiency and also achieve better temperature uniformity within the
battery pack [10]. Simultaneously, most refrigerants exhibit better
thermal safety and diffusion properties than the PCM model [28]. The
refrigerant-based BTMS is a potential alternative and can be integrated
with the existing air-conditioning subsystem of EVs. However, the in-
direct refrigerant flow boiling cooling technology needs more space for
the pipework, and the recirculation pressure is up to 0.5 MPa .
The above-mentioned literature pays more attention to the thermal
behavior at the battery scale and uses the definitions of constant
boundary conditions to study the heat transfer characteristics.
However, less attention has been paid to cooling strategies based on the
synergistic combination of phase change processes and forced convec-
tion. In this work, a novel HFE-7000 direct flow boiling cooling strategy
is proposed. Its novelty is mainly reflected in the integration of tem-
perature-dependent thermophysical data into numerical simulations,
and the interaction and optimization of module-scale two-phase tur-
bulent heat transfer.
Compared to pool boiling heat transfer, the flow boiling mechanism
is more complicated, but its heat transfer capability is higher. In ad-
dition, flow boiling heat transfer offers the possibility of integration
with the cabin thermal management, which is expected to improve the
overall efficiency of the battery pack. HFE-7000 is featured for its ex-
cellent dielectric properties, as well as being non-flammable and non-
corrosive, with zero ODP and low GWP, and especially its boiling point
(34.0 °C at 1 atmosphere), which perfectly matches with the optimal
working temperature range of lithium-ion batteries. There is no doubt
that it is the preferred working medium for solving this problem. In

2
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

addition, our previous work can provide first-hand thermophysical data Table 1
on lithium-ion batteries and the HFE-7000 refrigerant. This helps to Technical parameters of NCM811 lithium-ion battery.a
improve the accuracy of the numerical simulations. The organization of Parameter Unit Specification
this work is as follows. Simulations at different discharge rates, inlet
temperature, and inlet velocity or volume flow rate. Analysis of the Diameter mm 18.0
Height mm 65.0
temperature distribution and boiling characteristics in the battery
Weight g 45.0
module. In addition, the reliability of the numerical model is verified by Nominal capacity mAh 3200
comparison with experimental results. Nominal voltage V 3.6
Maximum discharge current A 15.0 (5 C b)
Internal resistance mΩ 29.0
2. Numerical model
Density kg m - 3 2720.6
Specific heat J kg -1 K -1 1108.0
In this section, the presentation is provided of the mathematical
Radial thermal conductivity W m -1 K -1 1.070
model developed for the HFE-7000 direct flow boiling cooled BTMS Axial thermal conductivity 19.030
W m -1 K -1
based on the multiphase mixture turbulence model, mainly including
governing equations, boundary conditions, and the solution strategy. a
Provided by the Shenzhen BAK Battery Co., Ltd.
b
In this work, 1 C discharge rate corresponds to 3.0 A discharge current.
2.1. Concept description
plates, and 1 PC/304 stainless steel box, as shown in Fig. 1. Table 1 lists
For the purpose of saving computational efforts and increasing some essential parameters of the NCM811 lithium-ion battery. It is
convergence speed, this work mainly focuses on the thermal perfor- assumed that these thermophysical properties of lithium-ion batteries
mance of the BTMS at the module scale. This system includes only one do not change with temperature.
expandable battery module, as shown in Fig. 1, in which 60 nickel-rich When convective heat transfer inside the lithium-ion battery is not
NCM811 lithium-ion batteries (N18650CK, BAK, China) were con- considered, the energy equation for the battery can be expressed as
nected into five parallel branches in a staggered arrangement, and each follows [35].
parallel branch included 12 serially connected batteries. ∂
Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) plastic plates were utilized as (ρ hb) = ∇ ·(kij, b ∇T ) + Sb
∂τ b (1)
a framework for the battery module to support all the batteries.
Concurrently, the battery module was packed using thermal insulation where τ is time, ρb is the battery density, hb is the sensible enthalpy of
materials in order to avoid a large temperature gradient due to external the battery, (kij, b )3 × 3 is an anisotropic thermal conductivity matrix for
convection heat transfer. The HFE-7000 refrigerant flows within the the battery and in kij, b i means row, j means column, T is the battery
battery module and is in contact with all the batteries directly. A high- temperature, and Sb represents heat source due to Joule heating, elec-
accuracy peristaltic pump supplied the cycle power for HFE-7000 trochemical reactions and active polarization, etc. In Eq. (1), the sen-
throughout the battery module, and its rotation speed is continuously sible enthalpy [36] is written as follows:
adjustable. Moreover, the inlet temperature of the HFE-7000 was con- Tb
trolled by a plate heat exchanger. The two-phase HFE-7000 turbulent
hb = ∫Tref
cp, b dT
(2)
flow within the battery module is compressible. The relevant operating
parameters of the proposed BTMS have significant effects on the tem- where Tb is the instantaneous battery temperature, Tref is the reference
perature distribution and boiling characteristics within the battery temperature, usually defined as 25.0 °C in the pressure-based solver, and
module. Performance optimization can be carried out by adjusting cp, b is the specific heat of the battery at constant pressure.
these parameters. In addition, the ANSYS Fluent 19.2 supplied the In addition, the heat generation during the discharge process of the
fundamental environment for running the user-defined functions battery can be determined by the following formula [37], which is
(UDFs) and the in-house solution algorithm. subsequently compiled as a C++ UDF to define the heat source term in
the numerical model.
2.2. Governing equations and boundary conditions Ib2 Ro + Ib2 Rp + Ib Tb
dUocv
Ib2 Rint + Ib Tb
dUocv
dT dT
Sb = =
πRb2 Lb πRb2 Lb (3)
In this subsection, the governing equations related to heat transfer,
multiphase turbulent flow, and mass transport within the HFE-7000 where Ib is the discharge current, Ro and Rp are the ohmic resistance
direct flow boiling cooled BTMS are presented. and the polarization resistance, respectively. Ib2 Ro and Ib2 Rp represent
the irreversible ohmic heat and the irreversible polarization heat, re-
2.2.1. Energy equation for lithium-ion battery spectively. Rint is the battery internal resistance, mainly including
The battery module is composed of 60 battery cells, 2 ABS holding contributions of the Joule effect and active polarization. Uocv is the

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the battery module.

3
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

open-circuit voltage, dUocv dT is the temperature coefficient, and μm = ∑ (αk μk )

Ib Tb (dUocv dT ) is the reversible electrochemical reaction heat. Rb is the k = l, v (9)
battery radius, and Lb is the battery height. In general, the internal
k2
resistance can be determined by a direct current internal resistance μt , m = ρm Cμ
ε (10)
(DCIR) analysis [38]. The temperature coefficient is often obtained by
measuring the variations of the open-circuit voltage with respect to Sk ⎞
battery temperature at a given SOC. Therefore, the battery heat pro- C1 = max ⎛0.43,
⎝ Sk + 5ε ⎠ (11)
duction can be calculated based on Eq. (3).
w
C3ε = tanh
2.2.2. Continuity equation of two-phase HFE-7000 flow u (12)
The HFE-7000 engineered fluid (Novec™ 7000, 3M, USA) was se- where μk is the dynamic viscosity of phase k , Cμ is a function of the
lected as a working medium for the proposed cooling strategy. Its mean strain and rotation rates, the angular velocity, etc., and u and w
thermal properties are summarized in Table 2. Our previous work are two-phase flow velocities in the x and z directions, respectively.
provides some experimental data.
In this study, the mixture model based on the two-phase Euler-Euler 2.2.4. Energy equation of two-phase HFE-7000 flow
approach [43,44] is established to describe the HFE-7000 gas-liquid The turbulent heat transfer of the HFE-7000 two-phase flow is nu-
flows in the battery module. This model mainly includes the continuity merically calculated. The energy equation is written as follows [48].
equation, the momentum equation, and the energy equation for the
two-phase mixture, the volume fraction equation for the vapor HFE- ∂
∂τ
∑ (αk ρk Ek ) + ∇ · ∑ [αk Uk (ρk Ek + p)] = ∇ ·(keff , m ∇T + UmΓeff , m)
7000, and the transport equation for the interfacial area concentration. k = l, v k = l, v
First, the continuity equation for the two-phase HFE-7000 mixture is (13)
written as follows [16].
where Ek is the total energy of phase k , p is the vapor pressure, and
∂ρm keff , m is the effective thermal conductivity of the two-phase mixture.
+ ∇ ·(ρm Um) = 0
∂τ (4) The second term on the right side of Eq. (13) represents the dissipative
term. The effective stress tensor Γeff , m includes both viscous and tur-
where ρm is the mixture density, and Um is the mixture velocity. These
bulent stresses [44].
are written as follows [45].
p |U |2
ρm = ∑ (αk ρk ) Ek = hk − + k
ρk 2 (14)
k = l, v (5)
Tk
∑ (αk ρk Uk ) hk = href , k + ∫T ref
cp, k dT
(15)
k = l, v
Um =
ρm (6)
keff , m = ∑ ⎛⎜k + cp, k μt , k ⎞⎟
k
where αk , ρk , and Uk are the volume fraction, density and velocity of k = l, v ⎝ Prt , k ⎠ (16)
phase k , and subscripts l and v indicate liquid and vapor HFE-7000,
respectively. 2
Γeff , m = μeff , m ⎡ (∇Um + ∇UmT ) − ∇ ·UmI⎤
⎣ 3 ⎦ (17)
2.2.3. Momentum equation of two-phase HFE-7000 flow where hk , Tk , cp, k , kk , and μt , k are the sensible enthalpy, instantaneous
The realizable k − ε (RKE) mixture turbulence model [46] is ap- temperature, specific heat, thermal conductivity, and eddy viscosity of
plicable for the HFE-7000 two-phase flow in this problem. The trans- phase k , respectively. href , k is the enthalpy of phase k at the reference
port equations for k and ε are written as follows. temperature Tref , Prt , k is the turbulent Prandtl number for energy, de-
∂ fined as 0.85 in the RKE model, μeff , m is the effective dynamic viscosity
(ρ k ) + ∇ ·(ρm Umk )
∂τ m of the two-phase mixture, and I is a unit tensor.
μt , m
= ∇·⎡ ⎛μm +⎜
⎞ ∇k⎤ + Gk, m + Gb, m − ρ ε − YM
⎟
m Table 2
⎢⎝ σk ⎠ ⎥ (7)
⎣ ⎦ Thermal properties of HFE-7000 at − 20.0~100. 0°C and 101325 Pa .
∂ Parameter Unit Value
(ρ ε ) + ∇ ·(ρm Umε )
∂τ m
Boiling pointa °C 34.0
μt , m ε2 ε
= ∇ ·⎡ ⎛μm +
⎜
⎞ ∇ε⎤ + C1 Sρ ε − C2 ρ
⎟
m m + C1ε C3ε Gb, m Liquid density [39] kg m - 3 1472.6 − 2.88T
⎢⎝ σε ⎠ ⎦ ⎥ k + vm ε k Vapor density [39]
⎣ kg m - 3 exp( −5.823 × 10−5T2 + 0.03884T + 0.7909)
(8) Liquid specific heat J kg -1 K -1 1223.2 + 3.0803T
[40]
where k and ε are the turbulent kinetic energy and the turbulent dis- Vapor specific heata J kg -1 K -1 1005.0
sipation rate, respectively. μm and μt , m are the dynamic viscosity and Liquid thermal Wm -1 K -1 0.0798 − 1.96 × 10 4T
the turbulent dynamic viscosity of the two-phase mixture, respectively. conductivitya
vm is the kinematic viscosity of the two-phase mixture while σk and σε Vapor thermal W m -1 K -1 0.026
conductivitya
are the turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and ε , defined as 1.0 and 1.2 in Liquid dynamic Ns m -2 −
(9.873 × 10−10T + 4.015 × 10−7)(2.88T − 1473.0)
the RKE model, respectively. Gk, m and Gb, m are the production of tur- viscosity [41] 5.417 × 10−5T2 + 0.01469T + 1.0
bulent kinetic energy due to the mean velocity gradients and buoyancy, Vapor dynamic Ns m -2 exp( −9.021 × 10−7T2 + 0.00344T − 11.43)
respectively, YM represents the contribution of the fluctuating dilatation viscosity [39]
Latent heat of -1 142.0
in the compressible HFE-7000 two-phase flow to the overall dissipation kJ kg
vaporization [42]
rate. Finally, S is the modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor, and the Vapor pressure [42] Pa exp(22.98 − 3549.0 T )
constants C2 and C1ε are defined as 1.9 and 1.44 in the RKE model, Surface tension [42] mN m - 1 12.4
respectively. In Eqs. (7) and (8), the viscosity of the two-phase flow
a
[46,47] is determined by: Provided by the 3M Company.

4
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

2.2.5. Volume fraction equation for vapor HFE-7000 flow. It is assumed that the liquid HFE-7000 is fully-developed turbu-
The volume fraction equation for vapor HFE-7000 can be obtained lent in the direction perpendicular to the inlet boundary surface.
from the continuity equation of the two-phase mixture mentioned Therefore, a specific method based on turbulence intensity and hy-
above [49]. draulic diameter is preferred to estimate the inlet turbulence level ac-
qm, lv − qm, vl cording to an empirical correlation for pipe flows [54].
∂
(α v ρv ) + ∇ ·(α v ρv Um) = −∇ ·(α v ρv Udr , v) +
∂τ Vv (18) It = 0.16Re DH −0.125 (23)
where α v , ρv , and Udr , v are the volume fraction, the density, and the drift DH = L (24)
velocity of vapor HFE-7000, respectively. qm, lv and qm, vl characterize the
interphase mass transfer due to evaporation and condensation, re- where It is the turbulence intensity at the core of the liquid HFE-7000,
spectively. Vv is the volume of vapor HFE-7000. Re DH is the Reynolds number, DH is the hydraulic diameter of the flow
inlet, and L is the characteristic length of the flow inlet. In addition, a
2.2.6. Interfacial area concentration of two-phase HFE-7000 mixture combined external radiation and convective heat transfer boundary
In addition, interfacial area concentration (IAC), which is defined as condition is imposed on the outer wall surfaces of the battery module
the interfacial area between the gas-liquid phases per unit mixture [55].
volume, is an essential parameter for predicting bubble growth, coa- qext = hext (Tamb − Tw ) + εext σ [(Tamb + 273.15) 4 − (Tw + 273.15) 4] (25)
lescence and breaking up of two-phase HFE-7000 flow. For the bubble
coalescence, the random collision (RC) driven by turbulence and the where qext is heat flux to external wall surfaces of the battery module,
wake entrainment (WE) effect of bubbles are generally considered to be hext is the external convective heat transfer coefficient defined as
the major mechanisms. In contrast, the turbulent impact (TI) accounts 20.0 W m - 2 K - 1 in this problem, and Tamb is the ambient temperature
for bubble breakup. In this situation, the transport equation computing defined as 25.0 oC. Tw is the wall surface temperature of the battery
the IAC can be written as follows [49]. module, εext is the emissivity of the external wall surface of the battery
∂ module, and σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
(ρ χ ) + ∇·(ρv Uv χp ) Table 3 provides detailed definitions with respect to the inlet
∂τ v p
boundary conditions for the mass equation, momentum equation, and
1 Dρv 2 qm, lv − qm, vl
= χp + χp + ρv (SRC + SWE + STI ) energy equation, related to the HFE-7000 direct flow boiling cooled
3 Dτ 3 α v Vv (19)
BTMS under various inflow velocities of the liquid HFE-7000. In the
where χp is the interfacial area concentration, and Uv is the velocity of numerical simulation, the flow velocity at the inlet can be defined ex-
vapor HFE-7000. The first two terms on the right side of Eq. (19) in- plicitly, while for experimental tests, the volume flow rate of the HFE-
dicate the HFE-7000 bubble expansion due to compressibility and phase 7000 corresponding to the inlet velocity is precisely controlled using a
transition. SRC and SWE are the coalescence sink terms due to random high-accuracy peristaltic pump (AIPump600-KK25D, Kamoer, China).
collision and wake entrainment, respectively. STI is the breakup source The pump can supply flows up to 12.0 L min - 1, which fully satisfy the
term due to a turbulent impact. experimental requirements of the current work.
In this problem, the Yao-Morel model [50] for nucleate boiling heat
transfer is introduced to describe coalescence and breakup of HFE-7000 2.3. Numerical solution strategies
bubbles. Accordingly, SRC , SWE and STI terms [51] in Eq. (19) are ex-
pressed by: In the present work, heat and mass transfer for the two-phase tur-
SRC + SWE bulent flow was numerically simulated using a combination of the in-
2 house source code and the ANSYS Fluent 19.2 package. In general, si-
1 ⎛ αv ⎞ ε1 3α 2 1 mulations involving turbulence usually require more computational
=− ⎜ ⎟ ·2.86 11 v3 ·
3φ χp db αv 1 3
⎝ ⎠ 1− ( )
0.52
+ 1.922α v We
1.24
efforts to reach convergence due to the highly coupled heat and mass
transfer. In this situation, the appropriate mesh topology and con-
We ⎞ vergence criteria contribute to improving convergence speed and
exp ⎜⎛1.017 ⎟

⎝ 1.24 ⎠ (20) computational accuracy. Considering the RKE turbulence model for
two-phase flows, it is noted that the viscous sublayer in the immediate
2
1 ⎛ αv ⎞ ε1 3α v (1 − α v ) 1 We ⎞ vicinity of the internal wall surfaces of the battery module should
STI = ·1.6 ·exp ⎜⎛−
3φ ⎜ χp ⎟
⎟
db11 3 We 1.24 ⎠ contain at least 10 layer grid cells. Otherwise, the model performance
⎝ ⎠ 1 + 0.42(1 − α v ) ⎝
1.24 will degrade significantly. In this problem, the mesh generation was
(21) carried out based on hexahedron-dominant grid cells, and the near-wall
where φ is the shape factor defined as 1 (36π ) for spherical bubbles, db grids were locally refined using prism cells. Before the formal simula-
is the average size of HFE-7000 bubbles, calculated as 6α v χp , and We is tions, grid independence was first verified by comparing maximum
the Weber number [52]. temperatures of the battery module corresponding to different mesh

2.2.7. Boundary conditions Table 3

Definitions of inlet boundary conditions.
When a velocity inlet boundary condition defines the liquid HFE-
7000 entering the computational domain, the volume flow rate corre- Case Tin uin qV , in a Rein b It , in c DH , in Tamb
sponding to the velocity inlet boundary can be computed as follows
1 31.0 0.03 0.566 1875 6.24% 0.02 25.0
[53].
2 31.0 0.05 0.943 3125 5.85% 0.02 25.0
3 31.0 0.07 1.320 4375 5.61% 0.02 25.0
qV , in = ∫ uin dA (22) 4 31.0 0.09 1.697 5625 5.44% 0.02 25.0
5 31.0 0.1 1.885 6250 5.37% 0.02 25.0
where qV , in , ρl , and uin are inlet volume flow rate, density, and inlet 6 31.0 0.3 5.655 18,750 4.68% 0.02 25.0
velocity of liquid HFE-7000, respectively. In addition, the two-phase
RKE turbulence model is involved in this work. Therefore, the boundary a
Determined by Eq. (22).
b
conditions for k and ε must be specified concurrently at the inlet. In Determined by Rein=ρl uin Lin μl .
c
general, the inlet turbulence can significantly affect the downstream Determined by Eq. (23).

5
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu
topology.
As shown in Fig. 2, six different mesh configurations were estab-
lished, and the numerical simulations were carried out at 5 C discharge
rate, 31.0 oC inlet temperature, and 0.1 m s - 1 inlet velocity. When the
computational domain was divided into at least 3.46 million structured
meshes, the mesh topology had no significant influence on the max-
imum temperature of the battery module. As the total number of grid
elements further increased to 17.7 million, the relative deviation of
maximum temperature compared to 3.46 million grid elements re-
mained within 0.60\% . As the grid elements are continuously increased
to 48.4 million, an increase of 0.72\% in the accuracy of the numerical
solution can be obtained compared to 17.7 million, while the compu-
tational time rapidly increased up to 13.15 times. Thus, the mesh to-
pology with a total of 3.46 million elements was best suited for this
problem. The following calculations were carried out based on this
model. Furthermore, the influence of time-step on the numerical si-
mulations was also inspected, with 10 s , 5 s , 1 s , 0.5 s , 0.1 s , 0.05 s , 0.01 s ,
0.005 s , 0.001 s , 0.0005 s , 0.0001 s intervals being considered. An analo-
gous computational process confirmed that when the time-step was less
than 1 s , its influence can be ignored without any significant loss of
accuracy.
In addition, convergence criteria at each time-step have a sub-
stantial impact on both the convergence speed and the computational
cost. According to the numerical inspections of grid independence and
time-step, it was appropriate to define the residual convergence cri-
terion of the energy equation as 1.0 × 10−8 , at which the energy equa-
tion of the two-phase turbulent flow converged within 5~10 iterations at
each time-step. A universal criterion for the other governing equations
was defined as 1.0 × 10−6 . It is noted that only when all the in-
stantaneous residuals corresponding to the conservation equations sa-
tisfied the predefined convergence criteria, the current numerical so-
lution could converge. The number of iterations at each time-step can
further be reduced by at most 40\% through an effective combination
of under-relaxation factors and the Courant number. In this situation, a
good balance between the convergence accuracy and the computational
cost is achieved.
3. Experimental verification
An experimental system was first designed, as shown in Fig. 3. Ex-
perimental tests were carried out to validate the numerical model.
Before the experimental tests, the battery module was placed in a
temperature test chamber (LRHS-504B-LJS, LINPIN, China) with tem-
perature fluctuations less than ± 0.5 oC , and the temperature was set as
25.0 oC . The subcooled HFE-7000 refrigerant (Novec™ 7000, 3 M, USA)
was pumped into the battery module at a volume flow rate of
1.885 L min - 1, and then the batteries (4.15 V , SOC = 1.0 ) were dis-
charged in a constant current mode, i.e., 1 C, 2 C , 3 C, 4 C , and 5 C, until
the cut-off voltage (3.05 ± 0.03 V , SOC = 0.0625) was reached. In order
to ensure safety of the experiments, about 93.75% of the total battery
capacity was utilized in this work. It is not possible to discharge the
battery from SOC = 1.0 to SOC = 0 , as the manufacturers add a button-
top or a printed circuit board (PCB) for power-type batteries to protect
them from over-charge, over-discharge, short-circuiting, and so on.
In addition, it is noted that, in contrast to a traditional discharge
method, this research utilized a state-of-the-art bidirectional program-
mable DC power supply (IT6005C-80-120, ITECH, China) to conduct
the discharge and charge cycle tests. The bidirectional power supply
combines the functionality of a power source and an electronic load
with energy recovery. The discharged energy of the batteries was rec-
tified by the power supply and then returned to the grid again instead of
directly being dissipated in form of heat, saving costs from energy
consumption and cooling.
When absorbing sufficient heat released by the batteries, forced
convection heat transfer of liquid HFE-7000 was liable to transition to
flow boiling heat transfer of the vapor-liquid mixture. The two-phase
6
Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569
HFE-7000 mixture was subsequently cooled to inlet temperature again
in a plate heat exchanger. A refrigerated and heated circulator (DC-
4006, Shanghai HengPing Instrument, China) with an accuracy of
± 0.02 oC was connected with another channel of the plate heat ex-
changer for rapid heat removal. Four high-accuracy piezoresistive
pressure transducers (PX409-030GI-XL, OMEGA, USA) and RTD tem-
perature transmitters (M12TXSS-PT100-13MM-G1/8, OMEGA, USA)
were utilized to measure fluid gauge pressure and temperature at the
inlet and the outlet, respectively. The circulator was able to dynami-
cally adjust the water temperature through an electrical heater or an
R134a-based compressor according to the real-time measurement re-
sults from the T1 temperature transmitter, and thus maintains constant
inlet temperature of the liquid HFE-7000.
In addition, the battery wall temperatures were monitored by
thermistor sensors (SA1-TH-44006-80-T, OMEGA, USA) with an accu-
racy of ± 0.2 oC . Fig. 4a shows the thermistor locations in the battery
module where they were evenly distributed along the flow direction as
well as adhered to the battery wall surfaces, as shown in Fig. 4d. It is
noted that the sensors were closer to the top of the batteries, as the
numerical results indicated that the temperature at the top of the bat-
tery was slightly higher than that at the bottom due to the two-phase
flow. A total of 22 temperature channels and 2 pressure channels were
measured using a data logger (34970A, Keysight, USA) with a scanning
rate of 60 channels per second. To validate the numerical model, the
time-dependent maximum temperature of the battery wall surfaces was
chosen as the criterion.
Fig. 5a confirms the excellent coincidence between the numerical
results and experimental data when the battery module was discharged
at 1 C, 2 C , 3 C, 4 C , and 5 C. In addition, the relative deviation between
them was less than ± 2.0% as shown in Fig. 5b.
In addition, the vapor fraction corresponding to the two-phase flow
has also been validated against the experimental data. The average
volume fraction of bubbles on the front side of the battery module in
the experiments could be obtained through the image processing
technology. It indicates that the relative deviation between the nu-
merical results and experimental data is less than 5.0%, as shown in
Fig. 6.
4. Results and discussion
In this section, the computational results from the multiphase tur-
bulence heat transfer model are discussed in detail. The effects of the
discharge rate and inlet velocity on the temperature distribution and
boiling characteristics within the battery module are also analyzed.
4.1. Temperature distribution
In general, the operating parameters, mainly including the battery
Fig. 2. Grid independence check for the numerical simulations.
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu
Fig. 3. The proposed battery thermal management system: (a) layout photo, (b)
schematic diagram.
discharge rate, HFE-7000 inlet velocity, temperature, and so on, have a
significant influence on the cooling performance of the HFE-7000 direct
flow boiling cooled BTMS. The performance optimization can be car-
ried out through controlling inlet velocity or volume flow rate and inlet
temperature of HFE-7000.
The temperature distribution of the battery module at different inlet
temperatures, i.e., 25.0 oC , 27.0 oC , 29.0 oC , 31.0 oC and 33.0 oC, were
studied numerically. When the inlet temperature is lower than 29.0 oC
the maximum temperature is moderate, as shown in Fig. 7a, but the
Fig. 4. Thermistor locations in the battery module: (a) schematic of the monitored module, (b) schematic of the monitored battery, (c) structure of the battery
module, (d) position on the battery wall surface.
7
Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569
temperature uniformity is poor, as can be seen in Fig. 7b. At this mo-
ment, the sensible heat of the refrigerant is dominating in the battery
cooling process. When the inlet temperature is 29.0 oC , the temperature
uniformity is slightly impaired, as shown in Fig. 7b, due to weak boiling
intensity corresponding to the early stages of nucleate boiling. When
the inlet temperature is set as 33.0 oC, the maximum temperature un-
expectedly exceeds the optimal working temperature range of the li-
thium-ion battery, according to Fig. 7a, which will accelerate the bat-
tery aging in practical applications. In summary, approximately 3.0 oC
of undercooling at the inlet is best for the implementation of flow
boiling cooling.
Next, the effects of inlet velocity on the temperature distribution
within the battery module are discussed in detail.
Fig. 8 shows the influence of inlet velocity on the maximum tem-
perature and temperature uniformity across the battery module at a
discharge rate of 5 C, an inlet temperature of 31.0 oC and an ambient
temperature of 25.0 oC.
A negative correlation between the inlet velocity of subcooled liquid
HFE-7000 and the maximum temperature of the battery module is
presented, as shown in Fig. 8a. The maximum temperature increases
from 31.43 oC to 41.57 oC with increasing vapor phase volume fraction
at an inlet velocity of 0.03 m s - 1. Also, the maximum temperature is
between 31.12 oC and 35.12 oC at 0.3 m s - 1. This indicates that the
maximum temperature in the battery module is mainly affected by
forced convection heat transfer and subcooled boiling heat transfer in
comparison to the temperature uniformity. Considering the maximum
temperature and the temperature uniformity of the battery module
concurrently, 0.1 m s - 1 is appropriate for improving the cooling per-
formance of the HFE-7000 direct flow boiling cooled BTMS, at which
point, saturated boiling heat transfer is dominating according to the
volume-averaged volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000. In this situation,
the maximum temperature and the temperature difference were
37.20 oC and 3.71 oC , respectively.
In contrast, a positive correlation between HFE-7000 inlet velocity
and the temperature difference across the battery module can be ob-
served, as shown in Fig. 8b. When the inlet velocity of liquid HFE-7000
was 0.03 m s - 1, the temperature difference across the battery module
increased from 0.33 oC to 5.21 oC with increasing volume-averaged
volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000. However, the temperature differ-
ence was between 0.03 oC and 3.17 oC when the inlet velocity was
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

Fig. 5. Comparison between the numerical results and experimental data: (a) maximum wall temperature, (b) relative deviation.

Fig. 6. Validation of two-phase flow between numerical results and experi-

mental data.

0.3 m s - 1. This indicates that bubble formation and coalescence are

more likely to occur at low inlet velocities, and the temperature dif-
ference within the battery module is primarily dominated by saturated
boiling heat transfer. At the given inlet velocity, the temperature dif-
ference of the battery module exhibits a complicated relationship with
increasing volume-averaged vapor fraction. When the average vapor
fraction was less than 0.01, isolated bubbles gradually formed and
broke up with increasing battery wall temperature. When the average
vapor fraction exceeded 0.01, abundant bubble formation and detach-
ment enhanced the near-wall perturbations, thereby lowering the bat-
tery wall temperature. When the average vapor fraction exceeded 0.02,
the increased thickness of the near-wall gas film prevented heat dis-
sipation, resulting in a significant increase in the battery wall tem-
perature. Fig. 7. Effects of inlet temperature on temperature distribution within the
Fig. 9 shows the influence of the discharge rate on the instantaneous battery module: (a) maximum temperature, (b) temperature difference.
temperature field across the battery module at an inlet velocity of
0.1 m s - 1, inlet temperature of 31.0 oC and ambient temperature of 7000 is constant, flow boiling heat transfer depends mainly on wall heat
25.0 oC . Both the maximum temperature and the temperature difference flux or the battery discharge rate.
within the battery module correlate positively with the battery dis- Fig. 10 shows the effects of the discharge rate on the temperature
charge rate. When the lithium-ion batteries discharge at 1 C, the max- distribution of the batteries and the volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000
imum temperature and the temperature difference within the battery on the wall surfaces of the batteries at an inlet velocity of 0.1 m s - 1, an
module rise to 31.63 oC and 0.46 oC , respectively. In contrast, the inlet temperature of 31.0 oC and an ambient temperature of 25.0 oC.
maximum temperature and the temperature difference at 3 Care According to Fig. 10b, the amount of heat generated by the batteries is
33.94 oC and 1.84 oC, respectively. If the inlet velocity of liquid HFE- not sufficient to induce nucleate boiling heat transfer of HFE-7000

8
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu
Fig. 8. Temperature distribution within the battery module at different inlet
velocities: (a) maximum temperature, (b) temperature difference.
within the battery module. In this situation, the temperature field inside
the battery module is determined by forced convection heat transfer of
single-phase liquid HFE-7000, especially in the inlet region, as can be
seen in Fig. 10a, where the liquid HFE-7000 is subcooled, and forced
convection is evident. From Fig. 10d, when the batteries discharge at
3 C, the volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000 adjacent to the outlet (left
side) reaches 0.28 at the end of discharge. Accordingly, nucleate boiling
heat transfer gradually begins to occur, and the temperature difference
within the battery module is controlled to less than 1.84 °C at the end of
discharge, as shown in Fig. 10c. Compared to flow boiling heat transfer
at 1 C and 3 C, when the batteries discharge at 5 C, the volume fraction
of vapor HFE-7000 reaches 0.62 at the end of discharge, as can be seen
in Fig. 10f. Correspondingly, the temperature difference inside the
battery module reaches 3.71 oC, as shown in Fig. 10e, due to saturated
nucleate boiling heat transfer.
4.2. Boiling characteristics
The characteristics of flow boiling heat transfer of two-phase HFE-
7000 have a significant influence on the temperature field of the battery
module.
Fig. 11 shows the boiling curve of HFE-7000 within the battery
module at an inlet velocity of 0.3 m s - 1, inlet temperature of 31.0 °C and
ambient temperature of 25.0 °C, indicating that the average wall heat
flux of the batteries increases with the rise in the average wall tem-
perature difference of the batteries but does not reach CHF. When the
batteries discharge at more than 3 C, the battery module undergoes
nucleate boiling heat transfer. Consequently, the average wall heat flux
of the batteries and the volume-averaged volume fraction of the vapor
phase reach 2440.06 W m - 2 and 0.045, respectively. In contrast, when
the batteries discharge at less than 3 C, bubbles do not form on the wall
9
Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569
Fig. 9. Variations of temperature distribution with time at different discharge
rates: (a) maximum temperature, (b) temperature difference.
surfaces of the batteries, and the flow motion in this situation is
dominated by forced convection of single-phase liquid HFE-7000.
There are two main reasons to explain the change in the slope of the
vapor volume fraction. On the one hand, flow pattern transitions caused
this phenomenon, especially at 5C discharge rate. The boiling medium
has undergone single liquid-phase forced convection, subcooled
boiling, saturated nucleate boiling, and even partial transition boiling.
Therefore, the averaged vapor volume fraction changes dis-
continuously, as shown in Fig. 11. On the other hand, the curves were
matched in terms of the numerical results at 1C, 2C, 3C, 4C, 5C. If the
working conditions are further increased, the matching curve will be-
come relatively smooth.
Fig. 12 shows the influence of HFE-7000 inlet velocity on the boiling
characteristics of the cooling strategy at a discharge rate of 5 C , inlet
temperature of 31.0 °C and ambient temperature of 25.0 °C . A nonlinear
correlation between the average wall temperature difference of the
batteries and the volume-averaged volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000
can be obtained. When the inlet velocity of subcooled HFE-7000 liquid
is 0.03 m s−1, boiling heat transfer along the flow direction is relatively
developed. In this situation, the volume-averaged volume fraction of
vapor HFE-7000 within the battery module reaches 0.75, while the
average wall temperature difference of all batteries is around 2.36 °C
due to the subcooled inflow. When the HFE-7000 inlet velocity in-
creases to 0.07 m s−1, the volume fraction of vapor HFE-7000 reduces to
0.44 at the end of discharge, and concurrently the average wall tem-
perature difference of all the batteries reduces to 0.27 °C . In contrast, the
wall temperature difference of the batteries and the volume fraction of
vapor HFE-7000 reduce to − 0.51 °C and 0.28, respectively, at an inlet
velocity of 0.1 m s−1. In summary, when the discharge rate of the bat-
teries is constant, the high inlet velocity of liquid HFE-7000 can reduce
the intensity of boiling heat transfer.
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569

Fig. 10. Flow boiling heat transfer characteristics of the HFE-7000-based BTMS at different discharge rates: (a) temperature distribution at 1 C , (b) vapor volume
fraction at 1 C , (c) temperature distribution at 3 C , (d) vapor volume fraction at 3 C , (e) temperature distribution at 5 C , (f) vapor volume fraction at 5 C .

Fig. 11. Boiling curve of HFE-7000 within the battery module at 0.3 m s - 1.

Fig. 12. Boiling characteristics of the HFE-7000 direct flow boiling cooled
5. Conclusions BTMS at different inlet velocities.

In this study, the cooling performance of a BTMS based on HFE-

discharge rate are 3.0 °C~5.0 °C, 3 C~5 C, and 0.07 m s−1~0.1 m s−1, re-
7000 direct flow boiling under different operating conditions was stu-
spectively, nucleate boiling heat transfer plays a leading role in im-
died in detail. To this end, a three-dimensional numerical model of the
proving temperature uniformity. The formation, coalescence and
battery module was established and verified with experimental data.
breakup of bubbles, and local perturbations can enhance the heat
On the one hand, when the degree of subcooling, inlet velocity and

10
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu
transfer efficiency. At this time, the maximum temperature and the
temperature difference in the battery module do not exceed 38.37 °C,
3.71 °C , respectively.
On the other hand, in the above-mentioned saturated nucleate
boiling stage, the average heat flux on the battery wall surface is as high
as 2440.06 W m−2 , which is about five times that in the case of convec-
tion heat transfer. At this time, the average superheat of the battery
wall surface is about 4.84 °C.
In short, nucleate boiling heat transfer of the two-phase HFE-7000
turbulent flow is more effective for improving the temperature uni-
formity of the battery module. In contrast, the forced convection heat
transfer of the single-phase liquid HFE-7000 has more advantages in
terms of reducing the maximum temperature of the battery module. In
addition, good agreement can be observed between the numerical re-
sults and experimental data.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yan-Feng Wang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software,
Validation, Resources, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing -
review & editing. Jiang-Tao Wu: Supervision, Project administration,
Funding acquisition.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science
Foundation (Grant Number 2019M653618) and the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant Numbers 51761135116 and
51976164). The relevant computations have been performed using the
resources supported by the HPC Platform of Xi’an Jiaotong University.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112569.
References
[1] Mahmoudzadeh Andwari A, Pesiridis A, Rajoo S, Martinez-Botas R, Esfahanian V. A
review of Battery Electric Vehicle technology and readiness levels. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2017;78:414–30.
[2] Qiao Q, Zhao F, Liu Z, He X, Hao H. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Electric
Vehicles in China: combining the vehicle cycle and fuel cycle. Energy
2019;177:222–33.
[3] Gandoman FH, Jaguemont J, Goutam S, Gopalakrishnan R, Firouz Y, Kalogiannis T,
et al. Concept of reliability and safety assessment of lithium-ion batteries in electric
vehicles: basics, progress, and challenges. Appl Energy 2019;251:113343.
[4] Wang Q, Jiang B, Li B, Yan Y. A critical review of thermal management models and
solutions of lithium-ion batteries for the development of pure electric vehicles.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;64:106–28.
[5] Pesaran A, Santhanagopalan S, Kim GH. Addressing the impact of temperature
extremes on large format Li-ion batteries for vehicle. Applications (Presentation)
2013.
[6] Pesaran AA. Battery thermal models for hybrid vehicle simulations. J Power Sources
2002;110:377–82.
[7] Ren D, Liu X, Feng X, Lu L, Ouyang M, Li J, et al. Model-based thermal runaway
prediction of lithium-ion batteries from kinetics analysis of cell components. Appl
Energy 2018;228:633–44.
[8] Zheng S, Li W, Feng X, He X. Probing the heat sources during thermal runaway
process by thermal analysis of different battery chemistries. J Power Sources
2018;378:527–36.
[9] Liao Z, Zhang S, Li K, Zhang G, Habetler TG. A survey of methods for monitoring
and detecting thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries. J Power Sources
2019;436:226879.
[10] Kim J, Oh J, Lee H. Review on battery thermal management system for electric
vehicles. Appl Therm Eng 2019;149:192–212.
11
Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569
[11] Chen K, Song MX, Wei W, Wang SF. Design of the structure of battery pack in
parallel air-cooled battery thermal management system for cooling efficiency im-
provement. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2019;132:309–21.
[12] Wu W, Wang S, Wu W, Chen K, Hong S, Lai Y. A critical review of battery thermal
performance and liquid based battery thermal management. Energy Convers
Manage 2019;182:262–81.
[13] Jung J, Jeon Y, Lee H, Kim Y. Numerical study of the effects of injection-port design
on the heating performance of an R134a heat pump with vapor injection used in
electric vehicles. Appl Therm Eng 2017;127:800–11.
[14] Wu F, Rao Z. The lattice Boltzmann investigation of natural convection for nano-
fluid based battery thermal management. Appl Therm Eng 2017;115:659–69.
[15] Li K, Yan J, Chen H, Wang Q. Water cooling based strategy for lithium ion battery
pack dynamic cycling for thermal management system. Appl Therm Eng
2018;132:575–85.
[16] Zhao C, Cao W, Dong T, Jiang F. Thermal behavior study of discharging/charging
cylindrical lithium-ion battery module cooled by channeled liquid flow. Int J Heat
Mass Transf 2018;120:751–62.
[17] Li Y, Zhou Z, Wu WT. Three-dimensional thermal modeling of Li-ion battery cell
and 50 V Li-ion battery pack cooled by mini-channel cold plate. Appl Therm Eng
2019;147:829–40.
[18] Jannesari H, Khalafi V, Mehryan SAM. Experimental and numerical study of em-
ploying Potassium poly acrylate hydrogel for thermal management of 500 Wh cy-
lindrical LiFePO4 battery pack. Energy Convers Manage 2019;196:581–90.
[19] Zhang S, Zhao R, Liu J, Gu J. Investigation on a hydrogel based passive thermal
management system for lithium ion batteries. Energy 2014;68:854–61.
[20] Ianniciello L, Biwole PH, Achard P. Electric vehicles batteries thermal management
systems employing phase change materials. J Power Sources 2018;378:383–403.
[21] Wang Y-F, Wu J-T. Performance improvement of thermal management system of
lithium-ion battery module on purely electric AUVs. Appl Therm Eng
2019;146:74–84.
[22] Lv Y, Situ W, Yang X, Zhang G, Wang Z. A novel nanosilica-enhanced phase change
material with anti-leakage and anti-volume-changes properties for battery thermal
management. Energy Convers Manage 2018;163:250–9.
[23] Wu W, Wu W, Wang S. Thermal management optimization of a prismatic battery
with shape-stabilized phase change material. Int J Heat Mass Transf
2018;121:967–77.
[24] Ling Z, Wen X, Zhang Z, Fang X, Gao X. Thermal management performance of phase
change materials with different thermal conductivities for Li-ion battery packs
operated at low temperatures. Energy 2018;144:977–83.
[25] Luo X, Guo Q, Li X, Tao Z, Lei S, Liu J, et al. Experimental investigation on a novel
phase change material composites coupled with graphite film used for thermal
management of lithium-ion batteries. Renewable Energy 2020;145:2046–55.
[26] Zou D, Liu X, He R, Zhu S, Bao J, Guo J, et al. Preparation of a novel composite
phase change material (PCM) and its locally enhanced heat transfer for power
battery module. Energy Convers Manage 2019;180:1196–202.
[27] Huang Q, Li X, Zhang G, Zhang J, He F, Yang L. Experimental investigation of the
thermal performance of heat pipe assisted phase change material for battery
thermal management system. Appl Therm Eng 2018;141:1092–100.
[28] Park S, Jang DS, Lee D, Hong SH, Kim Y. Simulation on cooling performance
characteristics of a refrigerant-cooled active thermal management system for li-
thium ion batteries. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2019;135:131–41.
[29] Cen J, Li Z, Jiang F. Experimental investigation on using the electric vehicle air
conditioning system for lithium-ion battery thermal management. Energy for
Sustainable Development. 2018;45:88–95.
[30] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. A novel phase change based cooling system for
prismatic lithium ion batteries. Int J Refrig 2018;86:203–17.
[31] Maan AZ, Ibrahim D, Rosen MA. Development and evaluation of a new ammonia
boiling based battery thermal management system. Electrochim Acta
2018;280:340–52.
[32] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Heat and mass transfer modeling and assessment
of a new battery cooling system. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2018;126:765–78.
[33] Deng Y, Feng C, Jiaqiang E, Hao Z, Chen J, Ming W, et al. Effects of different
coolants and cooling strategies on the cooling performance of the power lithium ion
battery system: a review. Appl Therm Eng 2018;142:10–29.
[34] Liang G, Mudawar I. Review of pool boiling enhancement by surface modification.
Int J Heat Mass Transf 2019;128:892–933.
[35] Xie Y, Shi S, Tang J, Wu H, Yu J. Experimental and analytical study on heat gen-
eration characteristics of a lithium-ion power battery. Int J Heat Mass Transf
2018;122:884–94.
[36] Chen XY, Zhang D, Wang Y, Ling X, Jin XG. The role of sensible heat in a con-
centrated solar power plant with thermochemical energy storage. Energy Convers
Manage 2019;190:42–53.
[37] Li J, Cheng Y, Jia M, Tang Y, Lin Y, Zhang Z, et al. An electrochemical–thermal
model based on dynamic responses for lithium iron phosphate battery. J Power
Sources 2014;255:130–43.
[38] Noelle DJ, Wang M, Le AV, Shi Y, Qiao Y. Internal resistance and polarization
dynamics of lithium-ion batteries upon internal shorting. Appl Energy
2018;212:796–808.
[39] Rausch MH, Kretschmer L, Will S, Leipertz A, Fröba AP. Density, surface tension,
and kinematic viscosity of hydrofluoroethers HFE-7000, HFE-7100, HFE-7200,
HFE-7300, and HFE-7500. J Chem Eng Data 2015;60:3759–65.
[40] Zheng YX, Wei ZH, Song XL. Measurements of isobaric heat capacities for HFE-7000
and HFE-7100 at different temperatures and pressures. Fluid Phase Equilibr
2016;425:335–41.
[41] Hu X, Meng X, Wei K, Li W, Wu J. Compressed Liquid Viscosity Measurements of
HFE-7000, HFE-7100, HFE-7200, and HFE-7500 at Temperatures from (253 to 373)
Y.-F. Wang and J.-T. Wu
K and Pressures up to 30 MPa. J Chem Eng Data 2015;60:3562–70.
[42] Jakubowska B, Mikielewicz D, Klugmann M. Experimental study and comparison
with predictive methods for flow boiling heat transfer coefficient of HFE7000. Int J
Heat Mass Transf 2019;142:118307.
[43] Mer S, Praud O, Neau H, Merigoux N, Magnaudet J, Roig V. The emptying of a
bottle as a test case for assessing interfacial momentum exchange models for Euler-
Euler simulations of multi-scale gas-liquid flows. Int J Multiph Flow
2018;106:109–24.
[44] Parekh J, Rzehak R. Euler-Euler multiphase CFD-simulation with full Reynolds
stress model and anisotropic bubble-induced turbulence. Int J Multiph Flow
2018;99:231–45.
[45] Franců J, Mikyška J. An alternative model of multicomponent diffusion based on a
combination of the Maxwell-Stefan theory and continuum mechanics. J Comput
Phys 2020;400:108962.
[46] Zamani M, Seddighi S, Nazif HR. Erosion of natural gas elbows due to rotating
particles in turbulent gas-solid flow. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2017;40:91–113.
[47] Eghorieta RA, Afolabi TA, Panacharoensawad E. Drift flux modeling of transient
high-viscosity-liquid and gas two-phase flow in horizontal pipes. J Petrol Sci Eng
2018;171:605–17.
12
Energy Conversion and Management 207 (2020) 112569
[48] Yang X, He ZH, Niu QL, Dong SK, Tan HP. Numerical analysis of turbulence ra-
diation interaction effect on radiative heat transfer in a swirling oxyfuel furnace. Int
J Heat Mass Transf 2019;141:1227–37.
[49] Wang GY, Zhu QZ, Dang ZR, Yang XH, Ishii M. Prediction of interfacial area con-
centration in a small diameter round pipe. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2019;130:252–65.
[50] Yao W, Morel C. Volumetric interfacial area prediction in upward bubbly two-phase
flow. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2004;47:307–28.
[51] Shen XZ, Hibiki T. Bubble coalescence and breakup model evaluation and devel-
opment for two-phase bubbly flows. Int J Multiph Flow 2018;109:131–49.
[52] Leong KC, Ho JY, Wong KK. A critical review of pool and flow boiling heat transfer
of dielectric fluids on enhanced surfaces. Appl Therm Eng 2017;112:999–1019.
[53] Sundén B. Chapter Two – advanced heat transfer topics in complex duct flows. In: E.
M. Sparrow, J.P. Abraham, J.M. Gorman, (Eds.), Advances in Heat Transfer.
Elsevier2017. pp. 37–89.
[54] Katopodes ND. Chapter 8 – Turbulent flow. In: N.D. Katopodes, (Ed.). Free-Surface
Flow. Butterworth-Heinemann2019. pp. 566–650.
[55] Serth RW, Lestina TG. 2 – Convective and radiative heat transfer. In: Serth RW,
Lestina TG, editors. Process heat transfer. second ed.Boston: Academic Press; 2014.
p. 31–65.