Study of different thermal management systems for traction batteries to obtain vehicle lightweighting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays environmental sustainability is a hot topic, especially with regards to the transportation sector. In fact, political strategies are oriented to the transition towards the cleaner technologies to reduce polluting and climate-altering emissions. However, even fully electric vehicles are not characterized by zero global emissions, due to the production of electricity from sources that are not always renewable. Moreover, this type of vehicle is afflicted by the limited range provided by the battery pack and its long recharging time. So, it is useful to reduce the energy consumption through appropriate strategies, for example by means of the vehicle lightweighting. In this paper we focus on the battery pack lightweighting by considering different passive battery cooling systems as a replacement for the standard active one. The passive systems considered are air and PCM-based (Phase Change Material) cooling systems. In addition to the primary lightweighting given by the replacement of the cooling system, the secondary lightweighting obtained by reducing the capacity of the battery pack to return to the range of the starting reference vehicle has been also considered. Three tools were used for the study: VI-CarRealTime and another consolidate vehicle model to obtain the power demand on a standard driving cycle; and an ad-hoc battery system model, configurable according to the cooling system. The simulations showed that the air-cooled system leads to greater lightweighting, but it makes the battery cells work far from 20 °C (optimal operating temperature) and therefore it could lead to greater battery cell degradation and its field of application must be limited to vehicles operating in fleets, with predictable mission; this can be overcome by using an appropriate PCM-based cooling system, stearyl alcohol. Furthermore, using a PCM, glycerol, with a melting point close to the optimal operating temperature of the batteries, allows to reduce the cell degradation.
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".