Experimental and parametric analysis of a novel hybrid thermal management strategy for cylindrical lithium‐ion cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper reports on a novel hybrid thermal management strategy. It uses secondary coolants (air and liquid) to withdraw heat simultaneously from the composite phase change material, resulting in increased heat extraction capability of the composite phase change material and improved thermal environment of the battery module. The significance of this strategy is that the fluid used in the liquid cooling stays stationary. Comprehensive experimental and numerical studies are performed, and parametric studies are conducted to reduce the volume of the phase change material, size of the air duct, and airflow Reynolds number. The numerical results showed that the maximum temperature was limited to 27.8°C, and a high‐temperature uniformity of 0.4°C was obtained. Furthermore, the required volume of the composite phase change material is reduced by ~50%. Additionally, beyond a 6 mm height of the air duct, the reduction in maximum pressure drop is not significant enough, and it is considered the optimal height, and a Reynolds number of 1950 is considered the optimal airflow Reynolds number. Therefore, the proposed thermal management concept for the battery module can sustain the thermal environment needed for the effective operation of Lithium‐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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".