Mathematical Heat Transfer Modeling and Experimental Validation of Lithium-Ion Battery Considering: Tab and Surface Temperature, Separator, Electrolyte Resistance, Anode-Cathode Irreversible and Reversible Heat
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The temperature and heat produced by lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries in electric and hybrid vehicles is an important field of investigation as it determines the power, performance, and cycle life of the battery pack. This paper presented both laboratory data and simulation results at C-rates of 1C, 2C, 3C, and 4C at an ambient temperature of approximately 23 °C. During experiment thermocouples were placed on the surface of the battery. The thermal model assumed constant current discharge and was experimentally validated. It was observed that temperature increased with C-rates at both the surface and the tabs. We note that at 4C the battery temperature increased from 22 °C to 47.40 °C and the tab temperature increased from 22 °C to 52.94 °C. Overall, the simulation results showed that more heat was produced in the cathode than the anode, the primary source of heat was the electrolyte resistance, and the battery temperature was the highest near the tabs and in the internal space of the battery. Simulation of the lithium concentration within the battery showed that the lithium concentration was more uniform in the anode than in the cathode. These results can help the accurate thermal design and thermal management of Li-ion batteries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it