<p>Efficient thermal management is crucial for lithium-ion battery safety and longevity in Electric Vehicles (EVs). This study presents a numerical investigation and experimental validation of liquid cooling strategies for NMC lithium-ion battery modules, comparing serpentine (Configuration 1), parallel (Configuration 2), and parallel/counter-flow hybrid (Configuration 3) layouts. A custom-built 4-cell test rig validated against CFD simulations showed close agreement, with relative deviations below 0.6%, confirming model reliability. Under regulated flow conditions, clear differences in thermal and hydraulic behavior were observed. Configuration 1 exhibited the highest thermal stress, with peak temperatures reaching 75.7 <InlineEquation ID="IEq1"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\:^\circ\:C\)</EquationSource> </InlineEquation> (cell 7) and 74.1<InlineEquation ID="IEq2"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\:\:^\circ\:C\)</EquationSource> </InlineEquation> (cell 18) due to downstream heat accumulation and limited contact area, alongside the largest temperature difference (ΔT = 11.0&#xa0;K) and highest pressure drop (27.3&#xa0;Pa). Configuration 2 reduced peak pack temperature to 70.6 <InlineEquation ID="IEq3"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\:^\circ\:C\)</EquationSource> </InlineEquation> at cell 18 (6.7% lower vs. Configuration 1) and 64.7 <InlineEquation ID="IEq4"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\:^\circ\:C\)</EquationSource> </InlineEquation> at cell 7 (14.8% lower), achieving the best intra-cell uniformity (σ = 0.47&#xa0;K, CV = 5.6%) and lowest pressure drop (9.1&#xa0;Pa). Configuration 3 offered the most balanced cooling, lowering maximum cell temperature by 7.6% compared to Configuration 1 and 0.9% compared to Configuration 2, while the maximum temperature of cell 18 decreased by 11.8%. It achieved the narrowest inter-cell ΔT (4.1&#xa0;K), a 62.5% and 11% reduction versus Configurations 1 and 2, respectively, with the lowest σ = 1.0&#xa0;K (CV = 0.32%). Overall, serpentine cooling is simple but thermally inefficient, parallel flow is the most energy-efficient, and the hybrid parallel/counter-flow design delivers the best overall thermal balance while lowering the required pumping power by about 89%, making it the most suitable layout for safe and reliable EV battery operation.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Numerical investigation of liquid-Cooled battery thermal management system configurations for a lithium-ion battery pack with experimental validation

  • Abdelrahman O. Ali,
  • Osama Abdelrehim,
  • Mahmoud M. Saafan,
  • Mohamed R. Elmarghany,
  • Ahmed M. Hamed

摘要

Efficient thermal management is crucial for lithium-ion battery safety and longevity in Electric Vehicles (EVs). This study presents a numerical investigation and experimental validation of liquid cooling strategies for NMC lithium-ion battery modules, comparing serpentine (Configuration 1), parallel (Configuration 2), and parallel/counter-flow hybrid (Configuration 3) layouts. A custom-built 4-cell test rig validated against CFD simulations showed close agreement, with relative deviations below 0.6%, confirming model reliability. Under regulated flow conditions, clear differences in thermal and hydraulic behavior were observed. Configuration 1 exhibited the highest thermal stress, with peak temperatures reaching 75.7 \(\:^\circ\:C\) (cell 7) and 74.1 \(\:\:^\circ\:C\) (cell 18) due to downstream heat accumulation and limited contact area, alongside the largest temperature difference (ΔT = 11.0 K) and highest pressure drop (27.3 Pa). Configuration 2 reduced peak pack temperature to 70.6 \(\:^\circ\:C\) at cell 18 (6.7% lower vs. Configuration 1) and 64.7 \(\:^\circ\:C\) at cell 7 (14.8% lower), achieving the best intra-cell uniformity (σ = 0.47 K, CV = 5.6%) and lowest pressure drop (9.1 Pa). Configuration 3 offered the most balanced cooling, lowering maximum cell temperature by 7.6% compared to Configuration 1 and 0.9% compared to Configuration 2, while the maximum temperature of cell 18 decreased by 11.8%. It achieved the narrowest inter-cell ΔT (4.1 K), a 62.5% and 11% reduction versus Configurations 1 and 2, respectively, with the lowest σ = 1.0 K (CV = 0.32%). Overall, serpentine cooling is simple but thermally inefficient, parallel flow is the most energy-efficient, and the hybrid parallel/counter-flow design delivers the best overall thermal balance while lowering the required pumping power by about 89%, making it the most suitable layout for safe and reliable EV battery operation.