MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226322849 · doi:10.4271/2022-01-0711

3D FEA Thermal Modeling with Experimentally Measured Loss Gradient of Large Format Ultra-Fast Charging Battery Module Used for EVs

2022· article· en· W4226322849 on OpenAlexaff
Ziyu Zhao, Satyam Panchal, Phillip J. Kollmeyer, Ali Emadi, Oliver Groß, David Dronzkowski, Vishal Mahajan, Lamuel David

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Finite element methodTemperature gradientThermalComputer scienceElectrical engineeringElectronic engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large amount of heat is generated in electric vehicle battery packs during high rate charging, resulting in the need for effective cooling methods. In this paper, a prototype liquid cooled large format Lithium-ion battery module is modeled and tested. Experiments are conducted on the module, which includes 31Ah NMC/Graphite pouch battery cells sandwiched by a foam thermal pad and heat sinks on both sides. The module is instrumented with twenty T-type thermocouples to measure thermal characteristics including the cell and foam surface temperature, heat flux distribution, and the heat generation from batteries under up to 5C rate ultra-fast charging. Constant power loss tests are also performed in which battery loss can be directly measured. A method for measuring the loss distribution across the surface is demonstrated, and the loss gradient is applied in FEA thermal models. 3D steady-state and transient-state FEA models are developed using ANSYS and validated against the experimental data. It is observed that for a 5C charging test with 20°C coolant temperature, the measured temperature on the cell surface is 24.3°C while the model predicts 23.8°C, an error of just 0.5°C. The loss is also found to vary about 30% across the surface of the cell, and this loss variation is included in the FEA modeling. The presented measurements, modeling, and validation give understanding into the design and optimization of lithium ion battery packs and thermal management strategies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207