Three-Dimensional Thermal Simulations of 18650 Lithium-Ion Batteries Cooled by Different Schemes under High Rate Discharging and External Shorting Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, three-dimensional thermal simulations of single 18650 lithium-ion battery cell and 75 V lithium-ion battery pack composed of 21 18650 battery cells are performed based on a multi-scale multi-domain (MSMD) battery modeling approach. Different cooling approaches’ effects on 18650 lithium-ion battery and battery pack thermal management under fast discharging and external shorting conditions are investigated and compared. It is found that for the natural convection, forced air cooling, and/or mini-channel liquid cooling approaches, the temperature of battery cell easily exceeds 40 °C under 3C rate discharging condition. While under external shorting condition, the temperature of cell rises sharply and reaches the 80 °C in a short period of time, which can trigger thermal runaway and may even lead to catastrophic battery fire. On the other hand, when the cooling method is single-phase direct cooling with FC-72 as coolant or two-phase immersed cooling by HFE-7000, the cell temperature is effectively limited to a tolerable level under both high C rate discharging and external shorting conditions. In addition, two-phase immersed cooling scheme is found to lead to better temperature uniformity according to the 75 V battery pack simulations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".