Digital Twin-Based Thermo-Electric Modeling and Analysis of Lithium-Ion Battery Packs for E-Mobility Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electric Vehicles (EVs) are becoming more popular, which means that battery systems need to be efficient, reliable, and safe at high temperatures. Even though lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have a high energy density, they are very sensitive to changes in temperature, which can hurt their performance, safety, and lifespan. To deal with these problems, this study presents a digital twin-based thermo-electric modeling framework for thermo-electric modelling cylinder-shaped lithium-ion battery packs. The main goal is to improve thermal management, safety, hotspot formation in battery pack and operating efficiency in e-mobility applications. A very accurate 3D model of the battery pack is made using OpenFOAM, a free Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tool, to show how the temperature changes in real-life situations. The model accurately represents how the battery works in real life, allowing for a thorough study of temperature spread, heat production, and thermal hotspots. The shape of the battery module is standardised, and different air-cooling methods are tested to see which ones work best for keeping the temperature stable. The simulations show big differences in temperature, with the warmest spots being found near the centre of the module. The results of the temperature profile of the battery pack have been verified, which has been monitored by a smart BMS-based real-time temperature distribution in the battery pack with the help of temperature sensors and simulated results with OpenFOAM software, the maximum heat in the middle of the battery, and the hot spot in the middle row and last row of the battery pack. The study shows that digital twin based Smart Battery Management Systems (BMS) can help Battery Thermal Management Systems (BTMS) work better, which can make EV battery packs safer, last longer, and be more efficient.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".